parent involvement in homework

Does Parent Involvement Really Help Students? Here’s What the Research Says

• Share article

Parental involvement has been a top priority for school leaders for decades, and research shows that it can make a major difference in student outcomes.

But a parents’ rights movement that has captured headlines over the past few years and become a major political force has painted a particular picture of what parents’ involvement in their children’s education looks like.

Policies that have passed in a number of individual school districts, states, and the U.S. House have spelled out parents’ rights to inspect curriculum materials and withdraw their children from lessons they deem objectionable; restricted teaching about race, gender identity, and sexuality; and resulted in the removal of books from school libraries, including many with LGBTQ+ characters and protagonists of color.

The parents’ rights movement has been divisive and attracted the ire of some teachers who feel censored. But it has also opened up the conversation around parent involvement in school, said Vito Borrello, executive director of the National Association for Family, School, and Community Engagement.

And that’s a good thing, he said.

“The parents’ rights bills in and of themselves, I wouldn’t suggest are entirely focused on best practice family engagement,” said Borrello, whose group works to advance effective family, school, and community engagement policies and practices. “However, what the parents’ rights bills have done is elevated the important role that parents have in their child’s education.”

For decades, research from around the world has shown that parents’ involvement in and engagement with their child’s education—including through parent-teacher conferences, parent-teacher organizations, school events, and at-home discussions about school—can lead to higher student achievement and better social-emotional outcomes.

Here are five takeaways from the research.

1. Studies show more parental involvement leads to improved academic outcomes

When parents are involved in their children’s schooling, students show higher academic achievement, school engagement, and motivation, according to a 2019 American Psychological Association review of 448 independent studies on parent involvement.

A 2005 study from researchers at the Johns Hopkins University Center on School, Family and Community Partnerships , for example, showed that school practices encouraging families to support their child’s math learning at home led to higher percentages of students scoring at or above proficiency on standardized math tests.

And research shows that parent involvement with reading activities has a positive impact on reading achievement, language comprehension, and expressive language skills, as well as students’ interest in reading, attitudes toward reading, and level of attention in the classroom, according to a research summary by the National Literacy Trust.

“When parents become involved at school by, for example, attending events such as open houses or volunteering in the classroom, they build social networks that can provide useful information, connections to school personnel (e.g., teachers), or strategies for enhancing children’s achievement,” the APA research review said. “In turn, parents with heightened social capital are better equipped to support their children in succeeding in school as they are able to call on resources (e.g., asking a teacher to spend extra time helping their children) and utilize information they have gathered (e.g., knowing when and how their children should complete their homework).”

2. Parent involvement changes social-emotional outcomes, too

The APA study showed that not only does parental involvement lead to improved academic outcomes, but it also has a positive impact on students’ social and emotional skills and decreases instances of delinquency.

That finding also applies internationally.

A 2014 International Education Studies report on parental involvement among 9th and 10th graders in Jordan showed that parental involvement had a positive impact on students’ emotional engagement in school. That means students with more involved parents are more likely to have fun, enjoy school, have high self-esteem, and perceive school as a satisfying experience.

And when parents visit their children’s school, that contributes to a sense of safety among the students, ultimately improving school engagement, the study said. Although conducted in Jordan, the study provides insight into how parental involvement affects students’ social-emotional development in other countries, including the United States.

Parent involvement also gives teachers the tools to better support their students, Borrello said.

“When teachers understand what their students are going through personally and at home and any challenges they may have, then that improves their teaching,” he said. “They’re able to support their student in ways they wouldn’t be able to otherwise.”

3. Not all parental involvement is created equal

Different levels and types of parent involvement led to varying outcomes for students, according to the American Psychological Association study.

For example, school-based involvement, such as participation in parent-teacher conferences, open houses, and other school events, had a positive impact on academics in preschool, middle school, and high school, but the size of the impact was much lower in high school than in preschool. That may be because parents have fewer opportunities to be involved in the high school environment than in younger students’ classrooms where parents might volunteer.

At-home discussions and encouragement surrounding school also have a positive impact on students’ academic achievement at all developmental stages, with that type of parent involvement being most effective for high schoolers, according to the study. Reading with children and taking them to the library have a positive impact as well.

But one common form of parental involvement, helping kids with their homework, was shown to have little impact on students’ academic achievement.

In fact, homework help had a small negative impact on student achievement, but positive impacts on student motivation and engagement in school, according to the APA study.

The research shows the value of encouraging parents to be involved in their student’s learning at home, and not just attending school events, Borrello said.

“In the past, schools either had an event that wasn’t connected to learning or only measured the engagement of a family based on how often they came to the school,” he said. “What families are doing to create an environment of learning and supporting learning at home, is probably even more important than how many times they’re coming to school.”

4. Results of parent involvement don’t discriminate based on race or socioeconomics

Research has shown a consensus that family and parent involvement in schools leads to better outcomes regardless of a family’s ethnic background or socioeconomic status.

Parent involvement has led to higher academic outcomes both for children from low and higher socioeconomic status families.

When comparing the impact of parent involvement on students of different races and ethnicities, the APA found that school-based involvement had a positive impact on academics among Black, Asian, white, and Hispanic children, with a stronger impact on Black and white families than families from other demographics. The finding also extended internationally, with similar effects on children outside of the United States.

5. Schools can encourage parent involvement in person and at home

Parent involvement doesn’t have to end with parent-teacher conferences. There are many ways for schools to encourage parents to be more involved both in school and at home, Borrello said.

The best way to start, he said, is by creating a school culture that is welcoming to families.

“That starts with the principal, and that starts with school leadership that is welcoming to families, from how they’re engaging parents in the classroom to what policies they have in schools to welcome families,” Borrello said.

Parent gathering spaces or rooms in school buildings, scheduled parent engagement meetings and office hours, and at-school events held outside of the school day are all good places to start, Borrello said. From there, schools can work to include parents in more decision-making, give parents resources to support learning at home, and equip teachers with the tools to engage and connect with parents.

“If the school is not welcoming and families don’t feel welcome at the school, then you’re not going to get them to come to school no matter what you do,” Borrello said. “Then it’s really thinking about who you’re creating those relationships with families so that they can be heard.”

Coverage of strategies for advancing the opportunities for students most in need, including those from low-income families and communities, is supported by a grant from the Walton Family Foundation, at www.waltonk12.org . Education Week retains sole editorial control over the content of this coverage. A version of this article appeared in the August 16, 2023 edition of Education Week as Does Parent Involvement Really Help Students? 5 Key Takeaways Based on The Research

Sign Up for The Savvy Principal

Edweek top school jobs.

Sign Up & Sign In

Perceived parental involvement and student engagement with homework in secondary school: The mediating role of self-handicapping

• Published: 30 April 2021
• Volume 42 , pages 4350–4361, ( 2023 )

Cite this article

• José Carlos Núñez   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-9187-1201 1 ,
• Carlos Freire   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-6252-4016 2 ,
• María del Mar Ferradás   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-9716-8306 2 ,
• Antonio Valle   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-8160-9181 2 &
• Jianzhong Xu   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-0269-4590 3 , 4  

1615 Accesses

6 Citations

Explore all metrics

Research in the field of homework has confirmed the significant association between students’ perceptions of their parents’ involvement and their motivation and engagement with these tasks. In this study we analyzed the possible mediating role of self-handicapping strategies in the relationship between perceptions of parental support (content-oriented and autonomy-oriented support) when doing homework and the students’ behavioral engagement (time spent, effort made, amount of homework done, level of procrastination). The participants were 643 students in compulsory secondary education (between 7th and 10th grade). The results showed that the lower the perceptions of support from parents when doing homework, the greater the students’ use of self-handicapping strategies and the worse their behavioral engagement (less effort, less amount of homework done, more procrastination) and vice versa. These findings seem to indicate that self-handicapping is a motivational strategy that would partially explain students’ poor behavioral engagement with homework in the absence of parental support.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price includes VAT (Russian Federation)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Rent this article via DeepDyve

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Relationships between perceived parental involvement in homework, student homework behaviors, and academic achievement: differences among elementary, junior high, and high school students.

J. C. Núñez, N. Suárez, … J. L. Epstein

Predicting different types of parental involvement in children’s homework: the role of parent motivational beliefs and parent affect

Konstantina Falanga, Eleftheria Gonida & Dimitrios Stamovlasis

Perceived Parental Psychological Control and Learned Helplessness: The Role of School Self-efficacy

Pina Filippello, Luana Sorrenti, … Sebastiano Costa

Data Availability

The datasets generated during and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Akar, H., Dogan, Y. B., & Üstüner, M. (2018). The relationships between positive and negative perfectionisms, self-handicapping, self-efficacy and academic achievement European Journal of Contemporary Education, 7(1), 7-20. https://doi.org/10.13187/ejced.2018.1.7

Arkin, R. M., & Baumgardner, A. (1985). Self-handicapping. In J. H. Harvey y G. Weary (Eds.), Attribution: Basic issues and applications (pp. 169–202). Academic Press.

Barutçu Yıldırım, F., & Demir, A. (2020). Self-handicapping among university students: The role of procrastination, test anxiety, self-esteem, and self-compassion. Psychological Reports, 123 (3), 825–843. https://doi.org/10.1177/0033294118825099 .

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Bembenutty, H. (2011). Meaningful and maladaptive homework practices. Journal of Advanced Academics, 22 (3), 448–473. https://doi.org/10.1177/1932202X1102200304 .

Article   Google Scholar  

Boon, H. J. (2007). Low and high-achieving Australian secondary school students: Their parenting, motivations and academic achievement. Australian Psychologist, 42 (3), 212–225. https://doi.org/10.1080/00050060701405584 .

Cano, F., Martin, A. J., Ginns, P., & Berbén, A. B. G. (2018). Students’ self-worth protection and approaches to learning in higher education: Predictors and consequences. Higher Education, 76 (1), 163–181. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-017-0215-0 .

Clarke, I. E., & MacCann, C. (2016). Internal and external aspects of self-handicapping reflect the distinction between motivations and behaviors: Evidence from the self-handicapping scale. Personality and Individual Differences, 100 , 6–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2016.03.080 .

Covington, M. V. (1992). Making the grade: A self-worth perspective on motivation and school reform . Cambridge University Press.

De Castella, K., Byrne, D., & Covington, M. V. (2013). Unmotivated or motivated to fail? A cross-cultural study of achievement motivation, fear of failure, and student disengagement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105 (3), 861–880. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0032464 .

Dumont, H., Trautwein, U., Lüdtke, O., Neumann, M., Niggli, A., & Schnyder, I. (2012). Does parental homework involvement mediate the relationship between family background and educational outcomes? Contemporary Educational Psychology, 37 (1), 55–69. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2011.09.004 .

Elliot, A. J. (1999). Approach and avoidance motivation and achievement goals. Educational Psychologist, 34 (3), 169–189. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep3403_3 .

Fan, H., Xu, J., Cai, Z., He, J., & Fan, X. (2017). Homework and students' achievement in math and science: A 30-year meta-analysis, 1986-2015. Educational Research Review, 20 , 35–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2016.11.003 .

Froiland, J. M. (2014). Inspired childhood: Parents raising motivated, happy, and successful students from preschool to college. Amazon.

Froiland, J. M. (2018). The intrinsic learning goals of elementary school students, in their own words. Journal of Humanistic Psychology, 1-21 , 0022167818763923.

Google Scholar  

Froiland, J. M. (2020). A comprehensive model of preschool through high school parent involvement with emphasis on the psychological facets. School Psychology International., 42 , 103–131. https://doi.org/10.1177/0143034320981393 .

Froiland, J. M., & Davison, M. L. (2014). Parental expectations and school relationships as contributors to adolescents’ positive outcomes. Social Psychology of Education, 17 (1), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11218-013-9237-3 .

Gonida, E. N., & Cortina, K. S. (2014). Parental involvement in homework: Relations with parent and student achievement-related motivational beliefs and achievement. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 84 (3), 376–396. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjep.12039 .

Graham, S. (2020). An attributional theory of motivation. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 61 , 101861. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2020.101861 .

Greaven, S. H., Santor, D. A., Thompson, R., & Zuroff, D. C. (2000). Adolescent self-handicapping, depressive affect, and maternal parental styles. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 29 (6), 631–646. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1026499721533 .

Haimovitz, K., & Dweck, C. S. (2017). The origins of children’s growth and fixed mindsets: New research and a new proposal. Child Development, 88 , 1849–1859. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12955 .

Hayes, A. F. (2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation and conditional process analysis . A regression based approach: Guilford Press.

Hill, N. E., & Tyson, D. F. (2009). Parental involvement in middle school: A meta-analytic assessment of the strategies that promote achievement. Developmental Psychology, 45 (3), 740–763. https://doi.org/10.4300/JGME-D-12-00156.1 .

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

IBM Corp. (2013). IBM SPSS Statistics for windows, version 22.0 . IBM Corp.

Jensen, L. E., & Deemer, E. D. (2020). Attachment style and self-handicapping: The mediating role of the imposter phenomenon. Social Psychology of Education, 23 , 1259–1276. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11218-020-09580-0 .

Jiang, Y., & Kleitmen, S. (2015). Metacognition and motivation: Links between confidence, self-protection and self-enhancement. Learning and Individual Differences, 37 , 222–230. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2014.11.025 .

Jones, E., & Berglas, S. (1978). Control of attributions about the self through self-handicapping strategies: The appeal of alcohol and the role of underachievement. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 4 (2), 200–206. https://doi.org/10.1177/014616727800400205 .

Jungert, T., Levine, S., & Koestner, R. (2020). Examining how parent and teacher enthusiasm influences motivation and achievement in STEM. Journal of Educational Research, 113 (4), 275–282. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671.2020.1806015 .

Karbach, J., Gottschling, J., Spengler, M., Hegewald, K., & Spinath, F. M. (2013). Parental involvement and general cognitive ability as predictors of domain specific academic achievement in early adolescence. Learning and Instruction, 23 , 43–51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2012.09.004 .

Kenney-Benson, G. A., & Pomerantz, E. (2005). The role of mother's use of control in children's perfectionism: Implications for the development of children's depressive symptoms. Journal of Personality, 73 , 23–46. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.2004.00303.x .

Kowalski, M., & Froiland, J. M. (2020). Parent perceptions of elementary classroom management systems and their children’s motivational and emotional responses. Social Psychology of Education, 23 , 433–448. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11218-020-09543-5 .

Leary, M. R., & Shepperd, J. A. (1986). Behavioral self-handicapping vs. self-reported handicaps: A conceptual note. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51 (6), 1265–1268. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.51.6.1265 .

Leondari, A., & Gonida, E. (2007). Predicting academic self-handicapping in different age groups: The role of personal achievement goals and social goals. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 77 (3), 595–611. https://doi.org/10.1348/000709906X128396 .

Lyddon, W. J., Bradford, E., & Nelson, J. P. (1993). Assessing adolescent and adult attachment: A review of current self-report measures. Journal of Counselling & Development, 71 (4), 390–395. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1556-6676.1993.tb02654.x .

Marsh, H. W., & Craven, R. G. (2006). Reciprocal effects of self-concept and performance from a multidimensional perspective: Beyond seductive pleasure and unidimensional perspectives. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 1 (2), 133–163. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-6916.2006.00010.x .

Marsh, H. W., Pekrun, R., Lichtenfeld, S., Guo, J., Arens, A. K., & Murayama, K. (2016). Breaking the double-edged sword of effort/trying hard: Developmental equilibrium and longitudinal relations among effort, achievement, and academic self-concept. Developmental Psychology, 52 (8), 1273–1290. https://doi.org/10.1037/dev0000146 .

Martin, A. J. (2010). Building classroom success: Eliminating academic fear and failure . Bloomsbury Publishing.

Matteucci, M. C. (2017). Attributional retraining and achievement goals: An exploratory study on theoretical and empirical relationship. European Review of Applied Psychology, 67 (5), 279–289. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erap.2017.08.004 .

Moé, A., Katz, I., & Alesi, M. (2018). Scaffolding for motivation by parents, and child homework motivations and emotions: Effects of a training programme. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 88 (2), 323–344. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjep.12216 .

Moé, A., Katz, I., Cohen, R., & Alesi, M. (2020). Reducing homework stress by increasing adoption of need-supportive practices: Effects of an intervention with parents. Learning and Individual Differences, 82 , 101921. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2020.101921 .

Murray, C. B., & Warden, M. R. (1992). Implications of self-handicapping strategies for academic achievement: A reconceptualization. Journal of Social Psychology, 132 (1), 23–37. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224545.1992.9924685 .

Núñez, J. C., Suárez, N., Rosário, P., Vallejo, G., Valle, A., & Epstein, J. L. (2015). Relationships between perceived parental involvement in homework, student homework behaviors, and academic achievement: Differences among elementary, junior high, and high school students. Metacognition and Learning, 10 (3), 375–406. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-015-9135-5 .

Núñez, J. C., Pascual, S., Suárez, N., & Rosário, P. (2021). Perceived parental involvement and children’s homework engagement at the end of primary education: A cluster analysis. Journal of Psychology and Education, 16 (1), 88–103. https://doi.org/10.23923/rpye2021.01.204 .

Olivari, M. G., Cucci, G., Bonanomi, A., Tagliabue, S., & Confalonieri, E. (2018). Retrospective paternal and maternal parenting styles, regulatory self-efficacy and adolescent risk taking. Marriage & Family Review, 54 (3), 282–295. https://doi.org/10.1080/01494929.2017.1403990 .

Perry, R. P., Hall. N. C. & Ruthig, I C (2005) Perceived (academic) control and scholastic attainment in higher education. In J. Smart (Ed.). Higher education: Handbook of theory and research (Vol. 20, pp. 363–436). Springer.

Pinquart, M., & Gerke, D. C. (2019). Associations of parenting styles with self-esteem in children and adolescents: A meta-analysis. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 28 (8), 2017–2035. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10826-019-01417-5 .

Pintrich, P. R., & Schunk, D. L. (2006). Motivación en contextos educativos. Teoría, investigación y aplicaciones (2ª ed.) . Prentice-Hall.

Prakhov, I., Kotomina, O., & Sazhina, A. (2020). Parental involvement and the educational strategies of youth in Russia. International Journal of Educational Development, 78 , 102252. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedudev.2020.102252 .

Pychyl, T. A., Coplan, R. J., & Reid, P. A. M. (2002). Parenting and procrastination: Gender differences in the relations between procrastination, parenting style and self-worth in early adolescence. Personality and Individual Differences, 33 (2), 271–285. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0191-8869(01)00151-9 .

Ramdass, D., & Zimmerman, B. J. (2011). Developing self-regulation skills: The important role of homework. Journal of Advanced Academics, 22 (2), 194–218. https://doi.org/10.1177/1932202X1102200202 .

Regueiro, B., Valle, A., Núñez, J. C., Rosário, P., Rodríguez, S., & Suárez, N. (2017). Cambios en la implicación en los deberes escolares a lo largo de la Educación Secundaria Obligatoria [Changes involvement in homework throughout compulsory secondary education]. Cultura y Educación, 29 , 266–276. https://doi.org/10.1080/11356405.2017.1306988 .

Reis, I. G., & Peixoto, F. (2013). "My parents just criticize me" - relationship between parenting practices (perfectionism and critical) and self-esteem, academic self-concept, motivation and the use of self-handicapping strategies. Análise Psicológica, 31 (4), 343–358.

Ricard, N. C., & Pelletier, L. G. (2016). Dropping out of high school: The role of parent and teacher self-determination support, reciprocal friendships and academic motivation. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 44-45 , 32–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2015.12.003 .

Rothbaum, F., Morling, B., & Rusk, N. (2009). How goals and beliefs lead people into and out of depression. Review of General Psychology, 13 (4), 302–314. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0017140 .

Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2017). Self-determination theory: Basic psychological needs in motivation, development, and wellness . Guilford Publications.

Schwinger, M., Wirthwein, L., Lemmer, G., & Steinmayr, R. (2014). Academic self-handicapping and achievement: A meta-analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 106 (3), 744–761. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0035832 .

Song, J., Bong, M., Lee, K., & Kim, S.-i. (2015). Longitudinal investigation into the role of perceived social support in adolescents’ academic motivation and achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 107 (3), 821–841. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000016 .

Steinberg, L. (2001). We know some things: Parent – Adolescent relationships in retrospect and prospect. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 11 (1), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1111/1532-7795.00001 .

Thomas, V., Muls, J., De Backer, F., & Lombaerts, K. (2020). Middle school student and parent perceptions of parental involvement: Unravelling the associations with school achievement and wellbeing. Educational Studies, 46 (4), 404–421. https://doi.org/10.1080/03055698.2019.1590182 .

Thompson, T. (2004). Failure-avoidance: Parenting, the achievement environment of the home and strategies for reduction. Learning and Instruction, 14 (1), 3–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2003.10.005 .

Török, L., Szabó, Z. P., & Tóth, L. (2018). A critical review of the literature on academic self-handicapping: Theory, manifestations, prevention and measurement. Social Psychology of Education, 21 , 1175–1202. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11218-018-9460-z .

Trautwein, U., & Lüdtke, O. (2009). Predicting homework motivation and homework effort in six school subjects: The role of person and family characteristics, classroom factors, and school track. Learning and Instruction, 19 , 243–258. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2008.05.001 .

Trautwein, U., Lüdtke, O., Schnyder, I., & Niggli, A. (2006). Predicting homework effort: Support for a domain-specific, multilevel homework model. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98 , 438–456. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.98.2.438 .

Urdan, T., & Midgley, C. (2001). Academic self-handicapping: What we know, what more there is to learn. Educational Psychology Review, 13 (2), 115–138. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009061303214 .

Want, J., & Kleitman, S. (2006). Imposter phenomenon and self-handicapping: Links with parenting styles and self-confidence. Personality and Individual Differences, 40 (5), 961–971. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2005.10.005 .

Wigfield, A., & Cambria, J. (2010). Students’ achievement values, goal orientations, and interest: Definitions, development, and relations to achievement outcomes. Developmental Review, 30 (1), 1–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dr.2009.12.001 .

Xu, J. (2006). Gender and homework management reported by high school students. Educational Psychology, 26 , 73–91. https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410500341023 .

Xu, J. (2010). Predicting homework time management at the secondary school level: A multilevel analysis. Learning and Individual Differences, 20 (1), 34–39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2009.11.001 .

Xu, J. (2011). Homework completion at the secondary school level: A multilevel analysis. Journal of Educational Research, 104 , 171–182. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671003636752 .

Xu, J., Fan, X., Du, J., & He, M. (2017). A study of the validity and reliability of the parental homework support scale. Measurement, 95 , 93–98. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.measurement.2016.09.045 .

Xu, J., Du, J., Wu, S., Ripple, H., & Cosgriff, A. (2018). Reciprocal effects among parental homework support, effort, and achievement? An empirical investigation. Frontiers in Psychology, 9 , 2334. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02334 .

Yu, J., & McLellan, R. (2019). Beyond academic achievement goals: The importance of social achievement goals in explaining gender differences in self-handicapping. Learning and Individual Differences, 69 , 33–44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2018.11.010 .

Yu, J., & McLellan, R. (2020). Same mindset, different goals and motivational frameworks: Profiles of mindset-based meaning systems. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 62 , 101901. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2020.101901 .

Zuckerman, M., & Tsai, F. F. (2005). Costs of self-handicapping. Journal of Personality, 73 (2), 411–442. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.2005.00314.x .

Zuckerman, M., Kieffer, S. C., & Knee, C. R. (1998). Consequences of self-handicapping: Effects on coping, academic performance, and adjustment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74 (6), 1619–1628. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.74.6.1619 .

Download references

This work was partially funded by the European Regional Development Funds (European Union and Principality of Asturias) through the Science, Technology and Innovation Plan (FC-GRUPIN-IDI/2018/000199), and the research project EDU2017–82984-P (MEIC).

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

University of Oviedo, Oviedo, Asturias, Spain

José Carlos Núñez

Faculty of Educational Studies, University of A Coruña, Elviña Campus, 15071, A Coruña, Spain

Carlos Freire, María del Mar Ferradás & Antonio Valle

Mississippi State University, Starkville, USA

Jianzhong Xu

University of Macau, Macau, China

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to María del Mar Ferradás .

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest.

The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare that are relevant to the content of this article.

Consent to Participate

Written informed consent was obtained from the school authorities, parents, and students.

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Núñez, J.C., Freire, C., Ferradás, M.d.M. et al. Perceived parental involvement and student engagement with homework in secondary school: The mediating role of self-handicapping. Curr Psychol 42 , 4350–4361 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-021-01791-8

Download citation

Accepted : 21 April 2021

Published : 30 April 2021

Issue Date : February 2023

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-021-01791-8

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Perceived parental support
• Self-handicapping
• Personal worth
• Student behavioral engagement
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Front Psychol

Antecedents and Outcomes of Parental Homework Involvement: How Do Family-School Partnerships Affect Parental Homework Involvement and Student Outcomes?

Recent studies have demonstrated that parental homework involvement may not always foster students’ desired school outcomes. Such studies have also concluded that the quality of parental homework involvement matters, rather than the quantity. Most importantly, previous studies have shown that strong family-school partnerships (FSPs) may help to improve parental involvement. However, there is little research on how FSP is related to homework involvement. The aim of the present study is to examine the link between an effective family-school communication (EFSC) – as one aspect of FSP – and the quality of parental homework involvement in the German context. For this purpose, we developed a new measure of EFSC. Taking a self-determination theory perspective on parental need support, the quality of parental homework involvement was differentiated into two dimensions of parental supportive behavior: autonomy support and competence support. We analyzed the data of 309 parents (82% mothers) of school students (52% girls) who participated in an online survey. The structural equation model revealed a positive relation between EFSC and the quality of parental homework involvement, which in turn was positively associated with school performance and well-being. Moreover, we found that the quality of parental homework involvement mediated the relations of EFSC with achievement and well-being. The results of our study highlight the role of EFSC as a key performance factor that helps to improve the quality of parental homework involvement, thereby promoting student achievement and well-being.

Introduction

Across the globe, students are set homework assignments on a regular basis since homework is generally believed to improve achievement ( Paschal et al., 1984 ; Cooper, 1989 ). In their meta-analysis of school effectiveness studies, Scheerens and Bosker (1997) found a mean effect size across 13 studies of Zr = 0.06 (Fisher’s Z ) for homework, indicating that this variable might indeed enhance school effectiveness. However, recent studies have provided evidence that homework assignments are not per se performance-enhancing. For instance, the effectiveness of homework seems to depend on the quality of the tasks assigned. Homework assignments that are perceived to be well selected and cognitively challenging are positively associated with students’ achievement ( Dettmers et al., 2010 ).

A further potential predictor of the effectiveness of homework assignments is parental homework involvement. Parental involvement in homework completion is commonly expected by schools, teachers, and parents ( Patall et al., 2008 ), all of whom believe that parental homework involvement is vital for students’ school performance ( Epstein, 1986 ; Trautwein et al., 2009 ). Thus, numerous guidelines for parents exist, aiming to improve parents’ abilities to successfully support homework completion (e.g., U.S. Department of Education, 2005 ). In the US, more than 80% of parents believe that homework is important for learning. Even though 51% of parents reported that students should do their homework on their own, on average, 73% of parents reported helping their child with homework completion. However, at the same time, 29% of parents perceived a negative impact of homework on family life ( Markow et al., 2007 ). Given this high percentage of parents who become involved in their children’s homework completion and a substantial number of parents who complained about family stress due to homework, the question arises concerning whether and under which conditions parental homework involvement is beneficial. Parental homework involvement is one facet of parental involvement in schooling, which is believed to be one of the key promoters of students’ school-related outcomes such as achievement, motivation, and well-being (e.g., Fan and Chen, 2001 ; Epstein, 2005 ; Hill and Tyson, 2009 ; Ma et al., 2016 ). The importance attached to parental behavior in their children’s education becomes apparent in the development of significant educational policies [e.g., U.S. Department of Education, 2002 ] and projects fostering educational partnerships [e.g., teachers involve parents in schoolwork (TIPS, Van Voorhis, 2003 ), and teachers involving parents (TIP, Hoover-Dempsey et al., 2002 )], which stresses the role that parents play in their children’s education. Indeed, meta-analyses have provided evidence that regardless of their socioeconomic background and race, students’ school achievement can be improved if their parents become involved in their education (e.g., Fan and Chen, 2001 ; Hill and Tyson, 2009 ; Ma et al., 2016 ). However, parental involvement represents a multifaceted behavior that can take place in school (school-based involvement: e.g., community services at school) or at home (home-based involvement; Grolnick and Slowiaczek, 1994 , Hoover-Dempsey and Sandler, 1997 ). Previous studies analyzing the effectiveness of parental homework involvement have demonstrated mixed results about the link between this type of involvement and students’ school performance, with some studies having found a positive link (e.g., Van Voorhis, 2003 ; Xu, 2004 ; Silinskas and Kikas, 2011 ) while others have found a negative link (e.g., Xu et al., 2010 ; Dumont et al., 2012 ). These studies have suggested that one should consider how homework involvement is assessed. Most importantly, it is the quality (and not the amount) of homework involvement that is crucial for student outcomes (e.g., Knollmann and Wild, 2007a , b ; Dumont et al., 2014 ; Gonida and Cortina, 2014 ; Moroni et al., 2015 ).

The present study was built upon these previous studies, aiming to shed light on factors that might improve the quality of parental homework involvement and thereby student outcomes (achievement and students’ well-being). In recent years, the concept of FSP has become well known, as it is believed to foster parental abilities to help their children with learning. Studies have proven that a positive contact between schools and parents is related with higher parental school involvement ( Ames et al., 1993 ; Kohl et al., 2000 ; Patrikakou and Weissberg, 2000 ). The aim of the present study was threefold. Our first research question concerned the relationship between the quality of parental homework involvement and four student outcomes: achievement in mathematics and reading as well as well-being at home and school. Second, we analyzed the association between effective family-school communication (EFSC) on the one hand and parental homework involvement and the four student outcomes on the other hand. Third, we investigated the interplay between our variables, namely whether parental homework involvement mediates the association between EFSC and the four student outcomes.

Predictors and Outcomes of Parental Homework Involvement

Past research has suggested that parental homework involvement is a multidimensional construct including two distinct types of help: quantitative help (e.g., doing homework with the child, providing answers) and qualitative help (e.g., avoiding distractions, providing rules for homework completion, providing support for finding answers) (e.g., Gonida and Cortina, 2014 ). Although the general term of parental involvement is accepted to be one of the key promoters of learning, parental homework involvement is not always positively related with desired school outcomes such as achievement. For example, Xu et al. (2010) found the frequency of parental homework help to be negatively related with student reading achievement and raised the question of how parents should help with homework. The authors concluded that parents should provide a suitable learning environment for homework completion to foster self-regulated learning and children’s autonomy. Moroni et al. (2015) operationalized parental involvement as a multidimensional construct in terms of quantity and quality and examined how the quantity and different qualities of homework involvement were associated with student achievement. Controlling for prior achievement and parental socioeconomic background, they found the frequency of help to be negatively associated with the development of student achievement. However, in terms of homework quality, the authors found opposing effects depending on how homework quality was operationalized. While supportive homework help had positive effects on students’ achievement, intrusive homework help was negatively related with later achievement. Dumont et al. (2014) analyzed longitudinal data of 2,830 student-parent dyads (grades 5 and 7) who reported about the quality of parental homework involvement, their socioeconomic background, and desired student outcomes (e.g., reading achievement, reading effort). Adopting the perspective of self-determination theory (SDT, Deci and Ryan, 1987 , 2000 ), parental homework involvement was conceptualized by three dimensions: parental control, parental responsiveness, and parental provision of structure. The analyses revealed a reciprocal relationship between parental homework involvement and student outcomes. Low achievement in grade 5 predicted higher later parental homework control in grade 7, while high parental control in grade 5 was related with lower achievement in grade 7. A positive reciprocal relationship was found for parental involvement in terms of structure and responsiveness on the one hand and desired student outcomes – such as high achievement – on the other hand. Types of parental involvement did not depend on parental socioeconomic background.

Supportive parental homework involvement – such as the parental provision of autonomy support or structure – is not only positively associated with students’ academic performance, but it is also believed to be beneficial for students’ well-being (e.g., Hoover-Dempsey et al., 2002 ; Pekrun et al., 2002 ). It is assumed that supportive parental behavior fulfills students’ basic needs proposed by SDT, namely the need for autonomy, relatedness, and competence ( Grolnick, 2009 ). Basic needs satisfaction may result in an internalization of uninteresting and boring activities such as doing homework into personally important activities, thereby fostering performance and well-being ( Deci and Ryan, 2000 ). To date, few studies have provided evidence of this linkage. Knollmann and Wild (2007b) conducted a survey with 181 German students concerning their parents’ provision of autonomy support, emotional support, and support for competence during parental instruction at home. The authors found autonomy and emotional support to be positively associated with joy. By contrast, lower levels of autonomy and emotional support predicted higher rates of students’ anger. Moreover, according to Kenney-Benson and Pomerantz (2005) , greater autonomy-supportive homework help of mothers was found to be associated with less depressive symptoms compared to controlling mothers.

To sum up, the quality of parental homework help seems to be related with differences in students’ well-being and academic achievement. In line with the assumptions of SDT, numerous studies suggest that autonomy- and competence-supportive parental homework involvement may increase students’ experiences of autonomous and competent learning experiences, which in turn fosters desired (learning) outcomes. Hence, the question arises about factors that may influence the quality of parental homework involvement. Gonida and Cortina (2014) investigated predictors and consequences of parental homework involvement. The authors asked Greek parents to rate different types of parental homework involvement (autonomy-supportive homework involvement, controlling homework involvement, and interference). Moreover, parents and their children provided information on achievement goals, academic efficacy, and school grades. Structural equation models revealed that autonomy-supportive homework involvement was predicted by parent mastery goals while parent performance goals predicted controlling homework involvement. Moreover, the authors provided evidence that parental beliefs for children’s self-efficacy were negatively associated with parent control and interference, but positively related with parent encouragement for cognitive engagement as supplementary to homework. Furthermore, this study demonstrated that low parent beliefs in their children’s abilities to complete homework successfully may result in an inappropriate way of homework involvement in terms of control and interference.

However, to our knowledge, little is known about further factors that might promote the quality of parental homework involvement. Given the important role of parents in their children’s education, the present study addressed this research deficit and aims to shed light on potential predictors of parental homework involvement. Students and their parents spend a lot of time with homework, although parents report barriers to their homework involvement in the sense that – for instance – they sometimes feel unable to provide appropriate help and they tend to require recommendations from teachers about how to help with homework ( Kay et al., 1994 ). In the present study, we assume EFSC to be a potential predictor of the quality of parental homework involvement. A welcoming school climate and recommendations for homework involvement might act as an invitation to involve as they indicate that parental involvement is desired and important ( Becker and Epstein, 1982 ; Epstein, 1986 ; Epstein and Van Voorhis, 2001 ). In the next section, we present a theoretical model of parental involvement in schooling and corresponding empirical studies.

Defining Parental Involvement in Schooling

Parental involvement in schooling is seen as a key strategy to improve students’ success in school. Indeed, a strong body of evidence suggests that parental involvement in schooling is positively associated with various desired school-related outcomes such as school performance and positive affect (e.g., Fan and Chen, 2001 ; Hill and Tyson, 2009 ; Ma et al., 2016 ). According to Epstein (1995) , supportive and event-independent communication between parents, school principals, and teachers may result in a deepened mutual understanding about school as well as improved support of students by their parents and teachers. Hoover-Dempsey and Sandler (1995 , 1997 , 2005) developed a theoretical model of parental involvement process that describes the antecedents and consequences of parental involvement in schooling. The model proposes five sequential levels to explain factors that might influence parents’ choice to become involved, their resulting forms of involvement and their consequences. The first level identifies three reasons for parents to become involved in their children’s schooling: parents’ perceived role construction (e.g., whether they feel obliged to help), their perceived invitations to involvement from the school, the teacher, and their child, as well as their sense of efficacy for helping their children. The second level suggests two forms of parental involvement, namely home- and school-based involvement, both of which include encouragement, modeling, reinforcement, and instruction. At the third level , children’s perceptions of the four types of parental involvement (encouragement, modeling, reinforcement, and instruction) are described. The fourth level describes mediating variables, namely child attributes and use of developmentally appropriate parental involvement. Finally, the fifth level focuses on school achievement (for a more detailed description, see Hoover-Dempsey et al., 2005 ; Hoover-Dempsey and Sandler, 2005 ). The focus of the present study was on the first level of the model, which deals with the question of why parents become involved in their children’s schooling. Hoover-Dempsey and Sandler’s model identifies three sources of invitations for parents to become involved in schooling: invitations from the school, the child, and the child’s teachers. Invitations from the school might include a welcoming school climate and the perception that parental involvement is crucial and desired in supporting children’s learning and achievement. Teachers can foster parental involvement through direct requests for involvement in children’s education; for instance, by encouraging parents to talk about school activities with their child. Finally, children’s attributes (e.g., prior achievement in school) might act as an invitation to become involved. Numerous previous studies have provided evidence regarding the relationship between level 1 variables (reasons for becoming involved) and the amount of involvement in school and at home (e.g., Green et al., 2007 ). For example, Green and colleagues used the data of 853 parents of elementary and middle school students to examine associations between antecedent factors (level 1) and different forms of parental involvement (level 2) proposed in the theoretical model by Hoover-Dempsey and Sandler. Regression analyses revealed that parental self-efficacy, child invitations, and parents’ time and energy were positively associated with the amount of home- and school-based involvement. Moreover, teacher invitations predicted the quantity of parents’ school-based involvement. Yotyodying and Wild (2014) examined whether parental perceptions of invitations for involvement from the school and teachers in a German and Thai sample as one among other predictors variables would predict two distinct forms of home-based parental involvement: authoritative (greater autonomy support and responsiveness) and authoritarian (greater control and structure). In the German sample, the significant results showed that parental perceptions of invitations from the school and teachers were negatively associated with both authoritative and authoritarian ways of involvement. This means that parents who prefer either authoritative or authoritarian ways of involvement tend to neglect becoming involved if they feel less invited by the school and teachers.

However, it should be critically noted that Hoover-Dempsey and Sandler’s model as well as most related empirical studies have focused particularly on the quantity (how often parents become involved) of parental involvement, while the quality (the ways in which parents become involved) of parental involvement has been neglected in many studies.

The present study aims to expand the existing body of knowledge by taking the quality (instead of the quantity) of parental involvement into account. In order to gain deeper insights into the mechanisms of parental involvement, we concentrated on one subdimension of parental involvement in schooling: parental homework involvement. Adopting a self-determination perspective on parental need support, the quality of parental homework involvement was differentiated into two dimensions of parental supportive behavior: autonomy support and competence support. The following research questions arise from the above explanations: is high-quality parental homework involvement positively associated with students’ achievement and well-being? Moreover, how can high-quality parental involvement be fostered?

Family-School Partnerships in Germany

Given the importance of improving parental involvement, scholars have attempted to identify variables that increase beneficial parental involvement. In recent years, the concept of family-school partnerships (FSPs) has become well known as an instrument that might foster parental choice to become involved in their children’s education and parental abilities to help their children with learning. Indeed, studies have proven that successful FSPs are positively associated with students’ performance (see Henderson and Mapp, 2002 ; Sheldon, 2003 ). A positive contact between teachers and parents increases the probability that parents become involved in their children’s education ( Ames et al., 1993 ; Kohl et al., 2000 ; Hoover-Dempsey and Walker, 2002 ). Moreover, information from teachers about classroom learning and instruction shape parental strategies to become involved ( Ames et al., 1993 ). In order to strengthen successful FSP, in 1997, the National Parent Teacher Association (PTA) published the National Standards for Family-School Partnership for the US context. These standards build upon Epstein’s typology of parental involvement (see Epstein, 2001 ) and provide a practical guideline to implement FSP. The PTA proposed six standards: (1) welcoming all families into the school community, (2) communicating effectively, (3) supporting student success, (4) speaking up for every child, (5) sharing power, and (6) collaborating with community (for more information, see Parent-Teacher Association, 2009 ). Compared to the US, to our knowledge, in Germany, much less is known about the concept and the benefits of well-functioning FSP ( Wild and Yotyodying, 2012 ). To date, contacts between schools and parents are rare and not very effective and mostly take place at parent evening events ( Wild and Hofer, 2002 ; Sacher, 2008 ). Moreover, conversations between teachers and parents mainly concern learning problems and students’ grades ( Wild and Lorenz, 2010 ; Wild and Yodyodying, 2012 ). For this reason, the Vodafone Foundation in collaboration with a scientific expert committee (see Sacher et al., 2013 ) recently proposed a compass for family-school partnerships for the German context comprising four different standards. The development of the four indicators is based on the six PTA standards described above, although the standards were adapted to the German context and the sixth standard “collaborating with community” was excluded for Germany. Standard A “Welcoming and Meeting Culture” describes a welcoming and friendly school climate that can be characterized by mutual respect and the inclusion of all stakeholders. Standard B “Various and Respectful Communication” is characterized by a regular and routine information exchange between the school, teachers, and parents, the use of various ways of information, and a regular information exchange between all stakeholders. Standard C “Educational Cooperation” focuses on parental participation in school life, the encouragement of parents to support their children with learning, the information about external school-related offers, and it emphasizes the role of parents as interceders of their child. Finally, Standard D “Parent Participation” describes the provision of information about parents’ participatory rights, the possibility for parents to participate in school decisions, and the inclusion of social, political, and external networks in school life. To our knowledge, little is known about whether the proposed standards would be met in German schools and whether they would help to ensure parental involvement, especially parental help with homework. For this reason, we developed and validated a parental questionnaire to assess parental perceptions on different aspects of FSP based on the proposals of Vodafone’s scientific committee.

The aim of the present study was to identify factors that might promote the quality of parental homework involvement. In consideration of Hoover-Dempsey and Sandler’s model, which identifies three reasons for parents to become involved (their role construction, their perceived invitations, and their sense of competence to help) and previous studies (e.g., Becker and Epstein, 1982 ; Epstein, 1986 ; Epstein and Van Voorhis, 2001 ), we proposed that EFSC would foster the quality of parental homework involvement. In order to operationally characterize EFSC, we relied on three indicators of Standard B “Various and Respectful Communication” and developed three scales (15 items) assessing EFSC. B1 “Information Exchange” describes a regular and routine information exchange between the school, teachers, and parents. Standard B2 “Various Forms of Communication” focuses on the use of the variety of ways of communication between the school and parents (e.g., email, homepage, etc.). B3 “School Transitions” refers to a regular knowledge transfer and information exchange between schools, teachers, and parents during school transitions.

The Present Study

The present study addresses three research deficits. First , parental school involvement is a multidimensional construct comprising both parental involvement at school and parental involvement at home. Research findings on parental school-based involvement are not transferable to home-based involvement, given that the context of the two forms of involvement differs. The present study concentrates on home-based involvement, more precisely on homework involvement as one facet of it. Research on parental homework involvement has provided evidence for the need to distinguish between the quality and quantity of parental involvement, whereby it is the quality (rather than the quantity) of involvement that matters for desired student outcomes (e.g., Dumont et al., 2014 ; Moroni et al., 2015 ). Adopting a self-determination perspective on parental need support, the quality of parental homework involvement was differentiated into two dimensions of parental supportive behavior: autonomy support and competence support. Our first research question concerned the relationship between parental homework involvement and four different student outcomes: well-being at school, well-being at home, mathematics achievement, and language achievement. Second , the concept of FSP is well known and has been much studied in the US context. There is clear consensus that parental involvement in schooling is beneficial and that a successful implementation of FSP fosters parental involvement, thereby promoting student achievement ( Ames et al., 1993 ; Kohl et al., 2000 ; Fan and Chen, 2001 ; Henderson and Mapp, 2002 ; Hoover-Dempsey and Walker, 2002 ; Sheldon, 2003 ; Epstein, 2005 ; Hill and Tyson, 2009 ; Ma et al., 2016 ). However, theoretical models and much FSP research have concentrated on the effects of FSP on the quantity (the amount) of involvement, while the relationship between FSP and the quality of parental school involvement and student outcomes remains unclear. Moreover, to our knowledge, in Germany, much less is known about effects of the implementation of successful FSP. The four standards of FSP proposed by the Vodafone Foundation and a scientific expert committee ( Sacher et al., 2013 ) are the first theoretical compass for FSP in the German context. To date, the concept has not been empirically analyzed in Germany and it is unclear whether a successful implementation of FSP is related to parental school- and home-based involvement. Our second research question thus concerned the relationship between EFSC (as one facet of FSP) and parental homework involvement and the different student outcomes. Finally, our third research question focuses on the mediating role of parental homework involvement for the relationship between EFSC and the four student outcomes. In order to investigate these relationships, we assumed that socioeconomic status and student gender may act as barriers to parental homework involvement (e.g., Hornby and Lafaele, 2011 ). Thus, there is a need to control for both variables.

Materials and Methods

Data source and sample.

Between winter 2015 and spring 2018, we conducted an online survey with parents of primary and secondary school students. The sample included 309 parents (82% mothers; M age = 42 years) of school students. Of the participants’ children ( M age = 12 years, SD = 3.58), 55% were girls and 44% attended elementary schools. Parents were asked to rate the amount of EFSC and their homework support. Moreover, parents rated children’s well-being and school achievement. The percentage of missing data was low for the variables analyzed here (on average 0.91%).

Instruments

Effective family-school communication.

EFSC was assessed with three indicators of Standard B “Various and Respectful Communication” and comprises: (1) “Regular and event-independent information exchange” [five items, e.g., “If I am (or my child is) concerned about something, I can discuss this with the teachers, the school principal, or other parents.”], (2) “various forms of communication” [six items, e.g., “The school communicates with parents in different ways (e.g., email, telephone, and website).”], and (3) “school transitions” [five items, e.g., “The school management and teachers actively inform parents and children about the possibilities when making their school decisions.”]. All items were rated on a 4-point Likert scale ranging from 1 = “strongly disagree” to 4 = “strongly agree.” Cronbach’s alpha for EFSC was 0.91. The psychometric properties of the subscales are shown in Table 1 .

Means, standard deviations, and internal consistencies for all study variables.

Parental Homework Involvement

Adopting a self-determination perspective on parental need support, the quality of parental homework involvement was differentiated into two dimensions of parental supportive behavior ( Katz et al., 2011 ): (1) autonomy-supportive homework involvement was assessed with five items (e.g., “While working on homework, I am willing to hear my child provide answers that are different from mine.”); and (2) competence-supportive homework involvement comprised three items (e.g., “I am glad if my child provides an answer in homework that is different from what is expected but is interesting.”). Items were rated on a 4-point Likert scale ranging from 1 = “strongly disagree” to 4 = “strongly agree.” Cronbach’s alpha for parental homework support was 0.83.

In the present study, we differentiated between student well-being at home and in school. Using two different 10-point ladders ( Cantril, 1965 ) ranging from 1 (they are doing really poorly in school/at home ) to 10 ( they are doing really well in school/at home ), parents were asked to rate how their children feel about their lives in school (well-being at school) and at home (well-being at home).

School Achievement

School achievement was assessed with two indicators. Parents were asked to rate their children’s mathematics achievement in mathematics with three items on a 4-point Likert scale: (a) my child is (1) not good ...(4) very good in arithmetic, (b) my child makes (1) many mistakes ...(4) very few mistakes in arithmetic, (c) arithmetic is (1) difficult ...(4) easy for my child . Cronbach’s alpha of this scale was 0.95. Language achievement comprised six items about the reading and writing abilities of their children. Parents were asked to judge the items on a 4-point Likert scale, e.g., (a) my child makes (1) so many mistakes ...(4) very few mistakes when reading, (b) writing is (1) difficult ...(4) easy for my child . Cronbach’s alpha of this scale was 0.92.

Socioeconomic Status

Parental socioeconomic status (SES) was assessed using the CASMIN classification (Comparative Analysis of Social Mobility in Industrial Nations; König et al., 1988 ), a comparative educational scale. Parents provided information on their school education (e.g., A-level) and their professional education (e.g., university degree). In order to build a CASMIN index, both variables of each parent were combined and then distinguished into three different educational levels (elementary, intermediate, and higher level). According to this classification, 2% of the parents reported having a SES at the elementary level, 15% at the intermediate level, and 83% at the higher level. We created a dummy variable for the SES, coded as 1 if participants reported a CASMIN at the higher level, and 0 if participants reported a lower CASMIN.

Statistical Analyses

In order to test our hypotheses empirically, structural equation modeling (SEM) analyses were performed. SEM allows testing the relationships postulated in the present study. All analyses were performed using MPlus 7.4 ( Muthén and Muthén, 2012–2014 ). EFSC was operationalized as a latent construct, measured by three manifest indicators (regular and event-independent information exchange, various forms of communication, and school transitions). Parental homework involvement was measured by two indicators: autonomy- and competence-supportive homework involvement. In order to control for parental SES and student gender, we estimated the links between both variables and the mediator (parental homework involvement), as well as the outcomes (achievement and well-being). Standardized parameter estimates of models with good fit were reported. Model fit was evaluated by considering the χ 2 test, the comparative fit index (CFI), the Tucker Lewis Index (TLI), the standardized root mean square residual SRMR, and the root mean square error of approximation RMSEA. According to Schreiber et al. (2006) , a nonsignificant χ 2 test, and a value of 0.95 or higher for the GFI and CFI indicates an acceptable model fit. The average percentage of missing data ranged from 0 to 3.2%. Since the proportion of missing values was low and could be assumed to be missing at random (MAR), it was dealt with the full information maximum likelihood estimation (FIML) implemented in MPlus. In FIML, all information available is considered to estimate the parameters. FIML produces unbiased parameter estimates and standard errors and is superior to traditional deletion methods (e. g., listwise and pairwise deletion) ( Schafer and Graham, 2002 ).

Descriptive Statistics and Zero-Order Correlations

Table 1 presents means, standard deviations, and Cronbach’s alpha for the study variables. Parents’ average ratings of EFSC were moderately above the scale midpoint, indicating a rather frequent contact between schools and parents and a “well-functioning information flow.” Parents report a regular and routine information exchange between the school, teachers, and parents. Moreover, as perceived by parents, most schools used various forms to communicate with parents, e.g., email, homepage, etc. Finally, parents perceived a regular knowledge transfer and information exchange between schools, teachers, and parents during school transitions. Parental ratings of homework support were significantly above the scale midpoint. Hence, from a self-determination perspective on parental need support, parents reported a rather high quality of parental homework involvement. They reported being autonomy- and competence-supportive during homework completion. Achievement was rated on a 4-point Likert scale. As shown in Table 1 , on average, parents rated their children’s achievement in mathematics and reading high. While well-being was also rated high. On a 10-point ladder with high values indicating high well-being, parents perceived their children to feel rather well in school and very well at home.

In order to gain insights into the association between the research variables, Table 2 presents the Pearson’s correlation coefficients between all analyzed variables. The significant correlations ranged from r  = 0.14 ( p  < 0.05) to r  = 0.53 ( p  < 0.01). As expected, EFSC was positively associated with supportive parental homework involvement ( r  = 0.39, p  < 0.01), indicating that a well-functioning contact and information flow between schools, teachers, and parents is related with autonomy- and competence-supportive parental homework behavior. Moreover, high values in EFSC were related with well-being at school ( r  = 0.35, p  < 0.01) and home ( r  = 0.14, p  < 0.05). Finally, EFSC was positively associated with achievement in mathematics ( r  = 0.20, p  < 0.01) and language ( r  = 0.20, p  < 0.01). The same holds for autonomy- and competence-supportive parental homework behavior. The variable was positively related with well-being at school ( r  = 0.16, p  < 0.01) and home ( r  = 0.42, p  < 0.01) and with school achievement (mathematics: r  = 0.24, p  < 0.01; language: r  = 0.47, p  < 0.01). In sum, the intercorrelations revealed that our research variables are related to each other in the expected way. In order to draw further conclusions about their relationship and answer our research questions, we estimated regression analyses and a structural equation model to predict parental homework involvement, school achievement, and well-being, as well as to test the mediating role of parental homework involvement for the potential association between EFSC and our outcome variables.

Intercorrelations among study variables.

Note: EFSC = Effective family-school communication, N = 309, *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01

The Relationship Between Parental Homework Involvement and Student Outcomes

In the first step, we performed a regression analyses to predict students’ well-being at school and home and their achievement in mathematics and language. The results are shown in Table 3 , model 1. Model fit was rated based on the χ 2 test, the CFI, the TLI, the SRMR, and the RMSEA. The model revealed good model fit to the data, χ 2 (522, N  = 309) = 5.03, CFI = 1.00, TLI = 1.00; SRMR = 0.01, RMSEA = 0.01. As can be seen in Table 3 , controlling for socioeconomic status and gender (female), parental homework involvement predicted well-being at school ( β  = 0.15, p  < 0.05), well-being at home ( β  = 0.42, p  < 0.01), mathematics achievement ( β  = 0.24, p  < 0.01), and language achievement ( β  = 0.46, p  < 0.01). Hence, according to their parents, students whose parents are autonomy- and competence-supportive during homework completion feel more well at school and home and achieve better results in mathematics and language compared to other students. The variance explained was between 3% (for well-being at school) and 23% (for language achievement).

Associations among effective family-school communication, parental homework involvement, well-being at school, well-being at home, mathematics achievement, and language achievement after controlling for child gender and parental SES.

Note: N = 309, *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.01

The Relationship Between Effective Family-School Communication and Parental Homework Behavior and Student Outcomes

The next section presents the findings of regression analyses to empirically test the assumed relationships between EFSC and the other variables of this study. Table 3 , model 2, shows the results for the prediction of parental homework involvement, well-being at school and home, as well as achievement in mathematics and language. The model revealed good model fit to the data, χ 2 (22, N  = 309) = 32.21, CFI = 0.99, TLI = 0.97; SRMR = 0.02, RMSEA = 0.04. As can be seen in Table 3 , after controlling for socioeconomic status (CASMIN) and gender (female), regression analysis indicated that EFSC predicts parental homework support ( β  = 0.40, p  < 0.01). Thus, parents whose children visit schools with a well-functioning EFSC reported being more autonomy- and competence-supportive during homework completion. The variance explained was 16% for this model.

The next two columns show the results for the prediction of students’ well-being. After controlling for socioeconomic status and gender, the results revealed a positive relationship between parental homework support and well-being at school ( β  = 0.34, p  < 0.01), as well as well-being at home ( β  = 0.16, p  < 0.01). Hence, the results indicate that children whose parents perceive themselves as being autonomy- and competence-supportive during their children’s homework completion feel more well at school and home compared to other children. The variance explained was 14% for well-being at school and 4% for well-being at home. The last two columns in Table 3 present the results for the prediction of mathematics and language achievement. Mathematics achievement was predicted by EFSC ( β  = 0.22, p  < 0.01) and female gender ( β  = −0.12, p  < 0.05). Language achievement was predicted by EFSC ( β  = 0.19, p  < 0.05) and female gender ( β  = 0.12, p  < 0.05). The results thus indicate that a well-functioning communication between schools, teachers, and parents may improve students’ achievement in mathematics and the language domain. The percentage of variance explained was 6% for mathematics achievement and 6% for language achievement. In sum, the study provided first evidence for the German context that EFSC may improve the quality of parental homework support in terms of autonomy and competence support. Moreover, EFSC proved to be beneficial for students’ well-being at home and may foster mathematics and language achievement.

Mediating Role of Parental Homework Help

In order to gain deeper insights into the mechanisms of the relationships found in the previous section, our third research question concerned the mediating role of parental homework involvement in the relationship between EFSC and well-being as well as school achievement. Figure 1 shows the results of a structural equation model. For the sake of easier readability, only significant pathways are shown. Overall, the model shows excellent model fit to the data: χ 2 (22, N  = 309) = 32.21, CFI = 0.99, TLI = 0.97; SRMR = 0.02, RMSEA = 0.04.

Structural model for the associations between effective family-school communication, quality of parental homework involvement, and students’ desired outcomes after controlling for parental SES and student gender. Note: N  = 309, * p  < 0.05, ** p  < 0.01, *** p  < 0.001. For reasons of simplification, only significant path coefficients are shown.

After controlling for socioeconomic status and female gender, EFSC was found to be positively associated with parental homework involvement ( β  = 0.40, p  < 0.001). Compared with the regression coefficients found in regression analyses (see Table 3 , model 2), the relationship between EFSC and well-being at school remained at a substantial level ( β  = 0.35, p  < 0.001). However, the coefficient for the relationship between EFSC and mathematics achievement slightly decreased from β  = 0.19 to β  = 0.15 ( p  < 0.05). Moreover, the inclusion of parental homework involvement in our analyses led to reduced coefficients for the relationship between EFSC and well-being at home ( β  = −0.01) and language achievement ( β  = 0.00). These relationships were no longer statistically significant.

In addition to the direct effects, indirect effects of the predictor EFSC on well-being and achievement as mediated by parental homework support were examined. The inclusion of the mediator variables partly led to different regression coefficients for EFSC, indicating the mediating role of parental homework involvement. The indirect effect of EFSC on well-being at home was statistically significant ( β  = 0.17, p  < 0.01), indicating a full mediation of the relationship. The indirect relationship between EFSC and mathematics achievement was statistically significant ( β  = 0.07, p  < 0.01), indicating a partial mediation. Furthermore, the indirect effect of EFSC on language achievement was statistically significant ( β  = 0.19, p  < 0.001), indicating a full mediation. Because the link between parental homework involvement and well-being at school was not found, the indirect effect was not examined.

Together, the results demonstrated that the quality of parental homework support fully mediated the relations of EFSC with well-being at home and language achievement, while it partially mediated the relations of EFSC with mathematics achievement. Hence, EFSC had significant positive indirect effects on well-being at home and student’s achievement.

The primary aim of the present study was to analyze predictors and consequences of high-quality parental homework involvement. More precisely, we tested whether EFSC would predict the quality of parental homework involvement and in turn students’ well-being and school achievement. The participants of the study were 309 parents of primary and secondary school students in Germany who participated in an online survey. Three research questions were addressed. Our first research question addressed the role of parental homework involvement. With respect to the SDT, parental homework involvement was operationalized as autonomy- and competence-supportive. Based on regression analyses, we tested the relationship between parental homework involvement and four different student outcomes: well-being at school, well-being at home, mathematics achievement, and language achievement. Our second research question focused on the associations among EFSC, the quality parental homework involvement, students’ well-being, and school achievement in two domains. Our third research question concerned the mediating role of parental homework involvement for the relationship between EFSC and the four student outcomes.

In line with our assumptions made for the first research question, we found high-quality parental homework involvement to be positively associated with students’ well-being at school and at home, as well as with students’ achievement in mathematics and language. This result supports the results of earlier studies concluding that the effectiveness of parental homework involvement depends on its quality (e.g., Knollmann and Wild, 2007a , b ; Dumont et al., 2014 ; Gonida and Cortina, 2014 ; Moroni et al., 2015 ).

Past research has suggested that (the quantity of) parental involvement in schooling is beneficial for different student outcomes (e.g., Fan and Chen, 2001 ; Hill and Tyson, 2009 ; Ma et al., 2016 ). Building upon Hoover-Dempsey and Sandler’s model of parental involvement process ( Hoover-Dempsey and Sandler, 1995 , 1997 , 2005 ) and recent studies (e.g., Green et al., 2007 ), we assumed an EFSC to be positively associated with parental homework involvement and different student outcomes. Using a recently developed instrument to assess parental perceptions of EFSC, our second research question focused on the relationship between EFSC and parental homework involvement and the four student outcomes. Our results of regression analyses provided evidence for the predictive power of EFSC for the quality of parental homework involvement and all four different student outcomes. As previously mentioned, Hoover-Dempsey and Sandler’s model underlines specific invitations from school (teachers’ attempt to invite parents to become involved) as one of crucial predictors of the quantity of parental involvement. Our results added to this model in the sense that EFSC – which might function as a reason to become involved – predicts the quality of parental involvement in schooling. Our study extends previous research on the model as it considers the need to distinguish between the quantity and quality of involvement. To our knowledge, our study is the first to provide evidence of the predictive power of EFSC for high-quality parental homework involvement. Contrary to our results, Yotyodying and Wild (2014) found teacher invitations to be related with the amount of parental home-based involvement but not with differences in the quality of home-based involvement. The authors concluded that teachers presumably increase parents’ awareness of the importance to become involved in schooling, but that they possibly do not provide information about how parents might help their children in school-related topics. In their study, the authors asked parents to rate the extent to which they perceive that their school involvement is expected and requested. In the present study, parents were asked to rate an EFSC in a way that a regular and event-independent information exchange exists, that the schools and teachers use various forms of communication and that information about school transitions is provided. An EFSC might not only act as an invitation to help but it also possibly provides parents with information concerning how to help their children in school-related topics. In addition, our results indicated that EFSC positively contributed to all four student outcomes. These results were also in line with previous studies finding that successful FSPs help to improve students’ performance (e.g., Henderson and Mapp, 2002 ; Sheldon, 2003 ).

In order to address our third research question, we examined the mediating role of the quality of parental homework involvement. Controlling for socioeconomic status and students’ gender, SEM analyses showed that the associations between EFSC and three of the four student outcome variables (well-being at home, mathematics achievement, and language achievement) were (partially) mediated by the quality of parental homework involvement. The results of the present study thus highlight the role of EFSC as a key performance factor that helps to improve the quality of parental homework involvement, thereby promoting student outcomes. In addition, our findings on the crucial mediating role of parental homework involvement in the associations between EFSC and well-being at home and school achievement were in line with the assumptions of self-determination theory (SDT: Deci and Ryan, 1987 , 2000 ). Accordingly, the parental provision of autonomy and competence support tend to satisfy the basic needs of their children (autonomy and competence), and in turn it might thus result in improved well-being. Indeed, earlier studies ( Chirkov and Ryan, 2001 ; Niemiec et al., 2006 ; Yotyodying, 2012 ) have provided evidence for the relationship between parental autonomy support and well-being (e.g., life satisfaction, positive affect, school satisfaction, positive academic emotions). Our results suggest that an EFSC results in a higher quality of parental homework involvement (in terms of autonomy and competence support), which in turn leads to increased well-being at home compared to other children. Concerning achievement, our results were in line with previous studies providing evidence of a positive relationship between parental involvement in schooling and students’ achievement (e.g., Fan and Chen, 2001 ; Hill and Tyson, 2009 ; Ma et al., 2016 ), although they extend these studies by showing the mediating role of parental homework involvement for this relationship. Hence, EFSC results in high-quality parental homework involvement and is in turn related to achievement.

Practical and Scientific Implications of the Study

Recent studies have shown that strong family-school partnerships (FSPs) may help to improve parental involvement. From a scientific view, the findings of the present study supplement this research in two aspects: first, to our best knowledge, to date only little is known about the relationship between FSP and parental homework involvement. We were able to confirm that EFSC (as an indicator of FSP) may help to improve the quality of parental involvement at home, which in turn supports well-being and school achievement of students. Second, compared to the US, in Germany, much less is known about the benefits of FSP ( Wild and Yotyodying, 2012 ). We have been able to show that German parents evaluate the communication between families and schools positively. However, according to Hoover-Dempsey and Walker (2002) , various barriers might hinder well-functioning FSP such as parents having a low level of education, inflexible working hours, or low language skills. For schools, structural elements such as personnel resources influence FSP. Hence, our results of the present study hold strong importance for different groups. Administrators may use our results to implement teacher and parent training programs aiming to promote the awareness of teachers and parents about the consequences of parental involvement. Such programs should accentuate the need to become involved in an autonomy- and competence-supportive manner, as this study and recent studies ( Knollmann and Wild, 2007a , b ; Dumont et al., 2014 ; Gonida and Cortina, 2014 ; Moroni et al., 2015 ) have provided evidence of the need to particularly promote the quality rather than quantity of involvement. Hence, teachers should not only learn how to encourage parents to become highly involved; moreover, they should also learn how to assist parents to be more autonomy- and competence-supportive during homework completion. Moreover, parent training programs might help parents to be informed about different parenting styles and their effects on students’ learning and achievement.

Limitations of the Present Study

First, the generalization of our results is limited due to different attributes of the sample. All analyses were based on parental self-reports. Future studies should assess the study variables by taking other perspectives into account (e.g., school principals, teachers, and students). In these studies, teachers and school principals should be investigated as an additional source of information on EFSC. Their perspectives might differ from parents’ perspectives as teachers and school principals may consider other aspects of EFSC as particularly important than parents. Moreover, in order to improve EFSC in the school, there is a need to identify possible barriers from the school (e.g., teachers’ characteristics) or family (e.g., available time to effectively communicate, etc.) that may undermine teachers’ and parents’ abilities to communicate effectively with each other. Finally, students should rate their well-being in school and at home in future studies. In addition, the generalization of our results is limited due to the high socioeconomic status and the high proportion of mothers in our sample. In our study, the socioeconomic status was not related with parental homework involvement. However, previous studies suggest that high-SES parents tend to be more involved in schooling than other parents. Compared with low-SES parents, their higher education might be associated with feelings of being competent to help leading in higher amounts of involvement ( Lee and Bowen, 2006 ). In the present study, the participants reported on average a comparatively high socioeconomic status. Future studies should take this limitation of the analyzed sample into account and investigate a more representative sample of parents. In future studies, also children with different achievement levels should be considered, as parents of low achieving children or children with special needs might employ other parenting strategies in face of difficulties in school. For these parents and their children, strong FSP might be particularly important. In Germany, cooperation between schools and parents often takes place in the form of short meetings during parent-teacher conferences in school ( Sacher, 2008 ). Commonly, teachers and parents discuss learning problems and children’s grades ( Wild and Lorenz, 2010 ; Yotyodying, 2012 ). Strong FSP and effective communication might result in a deeper understanding of children’s needs for learning and how parents might support their children’s learning at home. Second, no conclusions on the causality could be drawn due to a cross-sectional research design. Hence, a longitudinal research design should be employed in future studies. Third, the study has exclusively focused on functional ways of parenting (autonomy- and competence-supportive homework involvement), while other parenting styles were not considered here. For instance, according to the SDT perspective on parenting, other forms of parenting such as responsiveness (providing emotional support) and structure (providing clear guidelines and expectations) are related with desired students’ outcomes (for an overview, see Grolnick, 2009 ) and should thus be analyzed in future studies. Finally, future studies should investigate both qualitative and quantitative ways of parental homework involvement to gain deeper insights into the mechanisms and differences between the two dimensions of involvement.

Ethics Statement

An ethics approval for this research was not required as per the ethical guidelines of the Faculty of Psychology at FernUniversität in Hagen and regulations of the German Psychological Society due to the noncontroversial nature of the content and the administration of the study. All subjects were parents (adults aged above 21 years). Before their participation, all subjects were informed about the research purposes. Also, they were informed that participation in this research is anonymously and voluntarily. Furthermore, they were informed about the applicable data protection guidelines and the possibility to quit participation whenever they wanted without any disadvantages. Informed consent of the participants was implied through survey completion.

Author Contributions

SD contributed to the design of the study and the data collection, carried out the analyses and data interpretation, drafted and finalized the manuscript. SY and KJ contributed to the design of the study, parts of the analyses, and data interpretation and provided input for revisions of the manuscript draft.

Conflict of Interest Statement

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

• Ames C., Khoju M., Watkins T. (1993). Parent involvement: The relationship between school-to-home communication and parents’ perceptions and beliefs Report No.: 15. Available at: http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED362271.pdf . (Retrieved from: 15.01.2019)
• Becker H., Epstein J. (1982). Parent involvement: a survey of teacher practices . Elem. Sch. J. 83 , 85–102. 10.1086/461297 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Cantril H. (1965). The pattern of human concerns. (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press; ). [ Google Scholar ]
• Chirkov V. I., Ryan R. M. (2001). Parent and teacher autonomy-support in Russian and U.S. adolescents: common effects on well-being and academic motivation . J. Cross-Cult. Psychol. 32 , 618–635. 10.1177/0022022101032005006 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Cooper H. (1989). Homework. (White Plains, NY: Longman; ). [ Google Scholar ]
• Deci E. L., Ryan R. M. (1987). The support of autonomy and the control of behavior . J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 53 , 1024–1037. 10.1037/0022-3514.53.6.1024, PMID: [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Deci E. L., Ryan R. M. (2000). The “what” and “why” of goal pursuits: human needs and the self-determination of behavior . Psychol. Inq. 11 , 227–268. 10.1207/S15327965PLI1104_01 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Dettmers S., Trautwein U., Lüdtke O., Kunter M., Baumert J. (2010). Homework works, if homework quality is high: using multilevel modeling to predict the development of achievement in mathematics . J. Educ. Psychol. 102 , 467–482. 10.1037/a0018453 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Dumont H., Trautwein U., Lüdtke O. (2012). Familiaerer Hintergrund und die Qualitaet elterlicher Hausaufgabenhilfe [Family background and the quality of parental homework involvement] . Psychol. Erzieh. Unterr. 59 , 109–121. 10.2378/peu2012.art08d [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Dumont H., Trautwein U., Nagy G., Nagengast B. (2014). Quality of parental homework involvement: predictors and reciprocal relations with academic functioning in the reading domain . J. Educ. Psychol. 106 , 144–161. 10.1037/a0034100 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Epstein J. L. (1986). Parents’ reactions to teacher practices of parent involvement . Elem. Sch. J. 86 , 277–294. 10.1086/461449 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Epstein J. L. (1995). School-Family-Community Partnerships: Caring for the children we share . Phi Delta Kappan 76 , 701–712. [ Google Scholar ]
• Epstein J. L. (2001). School, family, and community partnerships: Preparing educators and improving schools. (Boulder, CO: Westview Press; ). [ Google Scholar ]
• Epstein J. L., Van Voorhis F. L. (2001). More than minutes: teachers’ roles in designing homework . Educ. Psychol. 36 , 181–193. 10.1207/S15326985EP3603_4 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Epstein J. (2005). School-initiated family and community partnerships . In Erb T. (Ed.), This we believe in action: Implementing successful middle level schools. 77–96. (Westerville, OH: National Middle School Association; ). [ Google Scholar ]
• Fan X., Chen M. (2001). Parental involvement and students’ academic achievement: a meta-analysis . Educ. Psychol. Rev. 13 , 1–22. 10.1023/A:1009048817385 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Gonida E. N., Cortina K. S. (2014). Parental involvement in homework: relations with parent and student achievement-related motivational beliefs and achievement . Br. J. Educ. Psychol. 84 , 376–396. 10.1111/bjep.12039, PMID: [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Green C. L., Walker J. M. T., Hoover-Dempsey K. V., Sandler H. (2007). Parents’ motivations for involvement in children’s education: an empirical test of a theoretical model of parental involvement . J. Educ. Psychol. 99 , 532–544. 10.1037/0022-0663.99.3.532 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Grolnick W. S. (2009). The role of parents in facilitating autonomous self-regulation for education . Theory Res. Educ. 7 , 164–173. 10.1177/1477878509104321 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Grolnick W. S., Slowiaczek M. L. (1994). Parents’ involvement in children’s schooling: a multidimensional conceptualization and motivational model . Child Dev. 65 , 237–252. 10.2307/1131378, PMID: [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Henderson A. T., Mapp K. L. (2002). A new wave of evidence: The impact of school, family, and community connections on student achievement. (Austin, TX: Southwest Educational Development Laboratory; ). [ Google Scholar ]
• Hill N. E., Tyson D. F. (2009). Parental involvement in middle school: a meta-analytic assessment of the strategies that promote achievement . Dev. Psychol. 45 , 740–763. 10.1037/a0015362, PMID: [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hoover-Dempsey K. V., Sandler H. M. (1995). Parental involvement in children’s education: why does it make a difference? Teach. Coll. Rec. 97 , 310–331. [ Google Scholar ]
• Hoover-Dempsey K. V., Sandler H. M. (1997). Why do parents become involved in their children’s education? Rev. Educ. Res. 67 , 3–42. [ Google Scholar ]
• Hoover-Dempsey K. V., Sandler H. M. (2005). Final performance report for OERI grant#R305T010673: The social context of parental involvement: A path to enhanced achievement . Presented to Project Monitor (Washington, DC: Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education; ). [ Google Scholar ]
• Hoover-Dempsey K. V., Walker J. M. T. (2002). Family-school communication: A report for the Metropolitan Nashville Public Schools. (Tennessee: Paper prepared for the Research Committee of the Metropolitan Nashville/Davidson County Board of Public Education; ). [ Google Scholar ]
• Hoover-Dempsey K. V., Walker J. M., Jones K. P., Reed R. P. (2002). Teachers Involving Parents (TIP): an in-service teacher education program for enhancing parental involvement . Teach. Teach. Educ. 18 , 843–867. 10.1016/S0742-051X(02)00047-1 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hoover-Dempsey K. V., Walker J. M. T., Sandler H. M. (2005). “ Parents’ motivations for involvement in their children’s education ” in School-family partnerships for children’s success. eds. Patrikakou E. N., Weissberg R. P., Redding S., Walberg H. J. (New York and London: Teachers College, Columbia University; ), 40–56. [ Google Scholar ]
• Hornby G., Lafaele R. (2011). Barriers to parental involvement in education: an explanatory model . Educ. Rev. 63 , 37–52. 10.1080/00131911.2010.488049 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Katz I., Kaplan A., Buzukasshvily T. (2011). The role of parents’ motivation in students’ autonomous motivation for doing homework . Learn. Individ. Differ. 21 , 376–386. 10.1016/j.lindif.2011.04.001 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kay P. J., Fitzgerald M., Paradee C., Mellencamp A. (1994). Making homework work at home: The parent's perspective . Journal of Learning Disabilities 27 , 550–561. 10.1177/002221949402700902 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kenney-Benson G. A., Pomerantz E. M. (2005). The role of mothers’ use of control in children’s perfectionism: implications for the development of children’s depressive symptoms . J. Pers. 73 , 23–46. 10.1111/j.1467-6494.2004.00303.x, PMID: [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Knollmann M., Wild E. (2007a). Quality of parental support and students’ emotions during homework: moderating effects of students motivational orientations . Eur. J. Psychol. Educ. 22 , 63–76. 10.1007/BF03173689 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Knollmann M., Wild E. (2007b). Alltägliche Lernemotionen im Fach Mathematik: Die Bedeutung emotionaler Regulationsstrategien, motivationaler Faktoren und der Instruktionsqualität [Daily learning emotions in mathematics: the role of emotion regulation, motivation, and quality of instruction] . Unterrichtswissenschaft 35 , 334–354. [ Google Scholar ]
• Kohl G. O., Lengua L. J., McMahon R. J. (2000). Parental involvement in school: conceptualizing multiple dimensions and their relations with family and demographic risk factors . J. Sch. Psychol. 38 , 501–523. 10.1016/S0022-4405(00)00050-9, PMID: [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• König W., Lüttinger P., Müller W. (1988). A comparative analysis of the development and structure of educational systems. Methodological foundations and the construction of a comparative educational scale. CASMIN Working Paper No. 12. (Mannheim: University of Mannheim; ). [ Google Scholar ]
• Lee J., Bowen N. (2006). Parent involvement, cultural capital, and the achievement gap among elementary school children . Am. Educ. Res. J. 43 , 193–218. 10.3102/00028312043002193 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ma X., Shen J., Krenn H. Y., Hu S., Yuan J. (2016). A meta-analysis of the relationship between learning outcomes and parental involvement during early childhood education and early elementary education . Educ. Psychol. Rev. 28 , 771–801. 10.1007/s10648-015-9351-1 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Markow D., Kim A., Liebman M. (2007). The MetLife survey of the American teacher: The homework experience. (New York, NY: Metropolitan Life Insurance Company; ). [ Google Scholar ]
• Moroni S., Dumont H., Trautwein U., Niggli A., Baeriswyl F. (2015). The need to distinguish between quantity and quality in research on parental involvement: the example of parental help with homework . J. Educ. Res. 108 , 417–431. 10.1080/00220671.2014.901283 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Muthén L. K., Muthén B. O. (2012–2014). Mplus user’s guide. (Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén; ). [ Google Scholar ]
• Niemiec C. P., Lynch M. F., Vansteenkiste M., Bernstein J., Deci E. L., Ryan R. M. (2006). The antecedents and consequences of autonomous self-regulation for college: a self-determination theory perspective on socialization . J. Adolesc. 29 , 761–775. 10.1016/j.adolescence.2007.02.002 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Parent-Teacher Association (2009). PTA National Standards for Family-School Partnerships: An implementation guide. Retrieved from http://s3.amazonaws.com/rdcms-pta/files/production/public/National_Standards_Implementation_Guide_2009.pdf [ Google Scholar ]
• Paschal R. A., Weinstein T., Walberg H. J. (1984). The effects of homework on learning: a quantitative synthesis . J. Educ. Res. 78 , 97–104. [ Google Scholar ]
• Patall E. A., Cooper H., Robinson J. C. (2008). Parent involvement in homework: a research synthesis . Rev. Educ. Res. 78 , 1039–1101. 10.3102/0034654308325185 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Patrikakou E. N., Weissberg R. P. (2000). Parents’ perceptions of teacher outreach and parent involvement in children’s education . Journal of Prevention & Intervention in the Community 20 , 103–119. 10.1300/J005v20n01_08 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Pekrun R., Goetz T., Titz W., Perry R. P. (2002). Academic emotions in students' self-regulated learning and achievement: a program of qualitative and quantitative research . Educ. Psychol. 37 , 91–105. 10.1207/S15326985EP3702_4 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Sacher W. (2008). Elternarbeit: Gestaltungsmöglichkeiten und Grundlagen für alle Schularten [Parental involvement: Scope for design and basic principles for all school types]. (Bad Heilbrunn: Klinkhardt; ). [ Google Scholar ]
• Sacher W., Sliwka A., Tschöpe-Scheffler S., Walper S., Wild E. (2013). Qualitätsmerkmale schulischer Elternarbeit: Ein Kompass für die partnerschaftliche Zusammenarbeit von Schule und Elternhaus [Quality characteristics of family-school involvement: A compass for the partnership between school and family]. (Düsseldorf: Vodafone Stiftung; ). [ Google Scholar ]
• Schafer J. L., Graham J. W. (2002). Missing data: our view of the state of the art . Psychol. Methods 7 , 147–177. 10.1037/1082-989X.7.2.147, PMID: [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Scheerens J., Bosker R. J. (1997). The foundations of educational effectiveness. (Oxford: Pergamon; ). [ Google Scholar ]
• Schreiber J. B., Nora A., Stage F. K., Barlow E. A., King J. (2006). Reporting structural equation modeling and confirmatory factor analysis results: a review . J. Educ. Res. 99 , 323–337. 10.3200/JOER.99.6.323-338 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Sheldon S. B. (2003). Linking school-family-community partnerships in urban elementary schools to student achievement on state tests . Urban Rev. 35 , 149–165. 10.1023/A:1023713829693 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Silinskas G., Kikas E. (2011). Parental Involvement in math homework: links to children’s performance and motivation . Scand. J. Educ. Res. , 1470–1170. 10.1080/00313831.2017.1324901 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Trautwein U., Niggli A., Schnyder I., Lüdtke O. (2009). Betweenteacher differences in homework assignments and the development of students’ homework effort, homework emotions, and achievement . J. Educ. Psychol. 101 , 176–189. 10.1037/0022-0663.101.1.176 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• U.S. Department of Education (2002). The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001. Retrieved from https://www2.ed.gov/policy/elsec/leg/esea02/107-110.pdf [ Google Scholar ]
• U.S. Department of Education (2005). Helping your child with homework. 3rd Edn . Washington, DC: Author; Available at: https://www2.ed.gov/parents/academic/help/homework/homework.pdf . (Retrieved from: 15.01.2019) [ Google Scholar ]
• Van Voorhis F. L. (2003). Interactive homework in middle schools: effects on family involvement and science achievement . J. Educ. Res. 96 , 323–338. 10.1080/00220670309596616 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Wild E., Hofer M. (2002). “ Familien mit Schulkindern [Families with school-age children] ” in Lehrbuch Familienbeziehungen. eds. Hofer M., Wild E., Noack P. (Göttingen, Germany: Hogrefe; ), 216–240. [ Google Scholar ]
• Wild E., Lorenz F. (2010). Elternhaus und Schule [Parents’ house and school]. (Paderborn, Germany: Schöningh; ). [ Google Scholar ]
• Wild E., Yodyodying S. (2012). “ Studying at home: with whom and in which way? Homework practices and conflicts in the family ” in The politicization of parenthood. eds. Richter M., Andresen S. (Berlin, Germany: Springer; ), 165–180. [ Google Scholar ]
• Xu J. (2004). Family help and homework management in urban and rural secondary schools . Teach. Coll. Rec. 106 , 1786–1803. 10.1111/j.1467-9620.2004.00405.x [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Xu M., Kushner Benson S., Mudrey-Camino R., Steiner R. (2010). The relationship between parental involvement, self-regulated learning, and reading achievement of fifth graders: a path analysis using the ECLS-K database . Soc. Psychol. Educ. 13 , 237–269. 10.1007/s11218-009-9104-4 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Yotyodying S. (2012). The quality of home-based parental involvement: antecedents and consequences in German and Thai families. Doctoral dissertation. Germany: Bielefeld University. Available at: http://pub.uni-bielefeld.de/luur/download?func=downloadFile &recordOId=2508819&fileOId=2508820
• Yotyodying S., Wild E. (2014). Antecedents of different qualities of home-based parental involvement: findings from a cross-cultural study in Germany and Thailand . Learn. Cult. Soc. Interact. 3 , 98–110. 10.1016/j.lcsi.2014.02.002 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]

Parental involvement in homework: relations with parent and student achievement-related motivational beliefs and achievement

Affiliation.

• 1 Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Greece.
• PMID: 24905081
• DOI: 10.1111/bjep.12039

Background: Parental involvement in homework is a home-based type of involvement in children's education. Research and theory suggest that it is beneficial for learning and achievement under certain conditions and for particular groups of individuals.

Aims: The study examined whether different types of parents' involvement in homework (autonomy support, control, interference, cognitive engagement) (1) are predicted by their mastery and performance goals for their child and their beliefs of the child's academic efficacy, and (2) predict student achievement goal orientations, efficacy beliefs, and achievement. Grade-level differences were also investigated.

Sample: The sample consisted of 282 elementary school (5th grade) and junior high school students (8th grade) and one of their parents.

Methods: Surveys were used for data collection. Structural equation modelling was applied for data analysis.

Results: (1) Autonomy support during homework was predicted by parent mastery goal, parents' control and interference by their performance goal and perceptions of child efficacy, and cognitive engagement as supplementary to homework by parent perceptions of child efficacy. (2) Parental autonomy support, control, and interference were differentially associated with student mastery and performance goal orientations, whereas parent cognitive engagement was associated with student efficacy beliefs. (3) The structural model was the same for elementary and junior high school students but the latent means for a number of variables were different.

Conclusion: Different types of parental involvement in homework were associated with different outcomes with parent autonomy support to be the most beneficial one.

Keywords: academic efficacy; achievement; achievement goal orientations; parent goals; parent involvement in homework.

© 2014 The British Psychological Society.

• Achievement*
• Middle Aged
• Models, Psychological
• Motivation / physiology*
• Parent-Child Relations*
• Parenting / psychology*
• Students / psychology*

K-12 Resources By Teachers, For Teachers Provided by the K-12 Teachers Alliance

• Teaching Strategies
• Classroom Activities
• Classroom Management
• Technology in the Classroom
• Professional Development
• Lesson Plans
• Writing Prompts
• Graduate Programs

The Value of Parents Helping with Homework

Dr. selena kiser.

• September 2, 2020

The importance of parents helping with homework is invaluable. Helping with homework is an important responsibility as a parent and directly supports the learning process. Parents’ experience and expertise is priceless. One of the best predictors of success in school is learning at home and being involved in children’s education. Parental involvement with homework helps develop self-confidence and motivation in the classroom. Parents helping students with homework has a multitude of benefits including spending individual time with children, enlightening strengths and weaknesses, making learning more meaningful, and having higher aspirations.

How Parental Involvement with Homework Impacts Students

Parental involvement with homework impacts students in a positive way. One of the most important reasons for parental involvement is that it helps alleviate stress and anxiety if the students are facing challenges with specific skills or topics. Parents have experience and expertise with a variety of subject matter and life experiences to help increase relevance. Parents help their children understand content and make it more meaningful, while also helping them understand things more clearly.

Also, their involvement increases skill and subject retention. Parents get into more depth about content and allow students to take skills to a greater level. Many children will always remember the times spent together working on homework or classroom projects. Parental involvement with homework and engagement in their child’s education are related to higher academic performance, better social skills and behavior, and increased self-confidence.

Parents helping with homework allows more time to expand upon subjects or skills since learning can be accelerated in the classroom. This is especially true in today’s classrooms. The curricula in many classrooms is enhanced and requires teaching a lot of content in a small amount of time. Homework is when parents and children can spend extra time on skills and subject matter. Parents provide relatable reasons for learning skills, and children retain information in greater depth.

Parental involvement increases creativity and induces critical-thinking skills in children. This creates a positive learning environment at home and transfers into the classroom setting. Parents have perspective on their children, and this allows them to support their weaknesses while expanding upon their strengths. The time together enlightens parents as to exactly what their child’s strengths and weaknesses are.

Virtual learning is now utilized nationwide, and parents are directly involved with their child’s schoolwork and homework. Their involvement is more vital now than ever. Fostering a positive homework environment is critical in virtual learning and assists children with technological and academic material.

Strategies for Including Parents in Homework

An essential strategy for including parents in homework is sharing a responsibility to help children meet educational goals. Parents’ commitment to prioritizing their child’s educational goals, and participating in homework supports a larger objective. Teachers and parents are specific about the goals and work directly with the child with classwork and homework. Teachers and parents collaboratively working together on children’s goals have larger and more long-lasting success. This also allows parents to be strategic with homework assistance.

A few other great examples of how to involve parents in homework are conducting experiments, assignments, or project-based learning activities that parents play an active role in. Interviewing parents is a fantastic way to be directly involved in homework and allows the project to be enjoyable. Parents are honored to be interviewed, and these activities create a bond between parents and children. Students will remember these assignments for the rest of their lives.

Project-based learning activities examples are family tree projects, leaf collections, research papers, and a myriad of other hands-on learning assignments. Children love working with their parents on these assignments as they are enjoyable and fun. This type of learning and engagement also fosters other interests. Conducting research is another way parents directly impact their child’s homework. This can be a subject the child is interested in or something they are unfamiliar with. Children and parents look forward to these types of homework activities.

Parents helping students with homework has a multitude of benefits. Parental involvement and engagement have lifelong benefits and creates a pathway for success. Parents provide autonomy and support, while modeling successful homework study habits.

• #homework , #ParentalInvolvement

More in Professional Development

How Sensory Rooms Help Students with Autism Thrive

Students with autism often face challenges in the classroom due to their sensory…

Establishing a Smooth Flow: The Power of Classroom Routines

Learners thrive in environments where there’s structure and familiarity, and implementing classroom routines…

The Benefits of Learning a Foreign Language

One of my favorite memories from my time in high school was when…

How to Enhance Working Memory in your Classroom

Enhancing working memory is vital in the learning process of all classrooms. There…

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW article

Parental homework involvement and students' mathematics achievement: a meta-analysis.

• College of Teacher Education, Ningbo University, Ningbo, China

Introduction: Given the importance of parent involvement to students' academic achievement, researchers have used a variety of methods to investigate the relationship between the two, but few focus on the relationship between parental homework involvement and students' achievement in a specific subject by using meta-analysis. This meta-analysis investigated the relationship between parent homework involvement and students' mathematics achievement from two dimensions: supportive (SPI) and intrusive parent homework involvement (IPI), along with their moderators.

Methods: Accessed through Web of Science, Taylor and Francis Online, EBSCO, Springer Link, Elsevier, and ProQuest databases, a total of 20 empirical studies between 2005 to 2022, 41 independent effect sizes were included ( N = 16,338). Effect size estimations were obtained by transforming Fisher's correlation coefficient. This study has conducted the heterogeneity tests of the magnitudes grouped according to different moderators, and investigated the publication bias that affects meta-analysis studies.

Results and discussion: The results showed an overall positive link between SPI and students' mathematics achievement ( r = 0.076, 95% CI = [0.037, 0.114]) and a negative link between IPI and students' mathematics achievement ( r = −0.153, 95% CI = [−0.226, −0.079]). For the link of SPI and students' mathematics achievement, the effect sizes were (a) strongest when SPI was measured by autonomy support, followed by content support and provision of structure respectively; (b) stronger when students' mathematics achievement indicated by non-standardized measurement than standardized measurement. For the link of IPI and students' mathematics achievement, the effect sizes varied across grade level, strongest in high school, followed by middle school and lowest in primary school. These findings provide important implications for how to improve parental homework involvement practice to increase students' mathematics achievement.

1. Introduction

Homework as a valuable method of improving students' learning and academic achievement has been widely used across countries ( Cooper et al., 2000 ; Trautwein, 2007 ; Trautwein and Lüdtke, 2009 ; Núñez et al., 2015 ; Fan et al., 2017 ; Šilinskas and Kikas, 2019b ). Characterized by greater pressure and difficulty than other subjects, mathematics typically includes homework that requires help from parents ( Kitsantas et al., 2011 ). Although a plethora of studies have proved that students' mathematics achievement was related to parental homework involvement ( Patall et al., 2008 ; Dumont et al., 2012 ; Kikas et al., 2022 ), researchers have not reached a consistent conclusion on whether the relationship is positive or negative. Some argued that the two were positively related (e.g., Dumont et al., 2012 ; Gonida and Cortina, 2014 ; Lerner et al., 2021 ), while others found a negative link (e.g., Patall et al., 2008 ; Levpušček and Zupančič, 2009 ; Šilinskas et al., 2013 ; Šilinskas and Kikas, 2019b ), making parental homework involvement became the most controversial one among all other types of parent involvement ( Moroni et al., 2015 ).

Fiskerstrand (2022) recommended that it is essential to conduct a meta-analysis of the significance and causal–effect relationships at the indicator level between parental involvement and the mathematics outcome based on comparable quantitative methods. Thus, this study conducted a meta-analysis aimed at answering the following research questions:

(1) What is the relationship between parental homework involvement and students' mathematics achievement in basic education?

(2) Whether the relationship between parental homework involvement and students' mathematics achievement in basic education is influenced by a variety of moderating variables?

1.1. Parental homework involvement and students' mathematics achievement

Researchers have pointed out that the mixed conclusion was largely due to the types of parental involvement in homework (e.g., Ng et al., 2004 ; Pomerantz et al., 2007 ; Patall et al., 2008 ; Karbach et al., 2013 ; Gonida and Cortina, 2014 ; Suárez et al., 2014 ; Núñez et al., 2015 ), thus it is important to disentangle the different types of parental homework involvements, rather than to focus only on the quantity or frequency of involvement ( Balli et al., 1997 ; Fan and Chen, 2001 ; Hoover-Dempsey et al., 2001 ; Pomerantz et al., 2007 ; Patall et al., 2008 ; Dumont et al., 2012 ).

Informed by the Self-Determination Theory (SDT) ( Ryan and Deci, 2000 , 2017 ), types of parental homework involvement were generally measured by two dimensions: supportive parental homework involvement (SPI) and intrusive parental homework involvement (IPI) ( Moroni et al., 2015 ; Xu et al., 2018 ). According to SDT, parents' supportive involvement, such as autonomy support, has a positive influence on maintained intrinsic motivation, enhanced internalization, and greater psychological adjustment and wellbeing, whereas the parents' intrusive involvement, such as controlling, has a negative effect on children's important outcomes, leaving children feeling less engaged, being viewed by teacher as less competent, and becoming more physically aggressive over time. In addition, these general results held in young people from both individualistic and collectivist cultures. When the relationship was discussed from these two dimensions, the conclusion became clearer. Specifically, when parental homework involvement has been characterized as supportive (i.e., support of autonomy and provision of structure), a positive relationship between SPI and students' achievement has been found ( Cooper et al., 2000 ; Pomerantz et al., 2005 ). However, IPI (i.e., controlling or monitoring) was generally associated with negative or null outcomes of student learning and achievement ( Ng et al., 2004 ; Brown, 2005 ; Pomerantz et al., 2007 ; Patall et al., 2008 ; Dumont et al., 2014 ; Gonida and Cortina, 2014 ; Moè et al., 2018 ; Xu et al., 2018 ; Šilinskas and Kikas, 2019b ).

In this meta-analysis, we expect to get a conclusion consistent with the abovementioned research and propose the following hypotheses:

H1: Students' mathematics achievement is positively related to supportive parental homework involvement (SPI).

H2: Students' mathematics achievement is negatively related to intrusive parental homework involvement (IPI).

1.2. Potential moderators

Findings from previous studies on the relationship between parental homework involvement and students' academic achievement are inconclusive. On the one hand, the insufficient sample size for each separate study may be the reason for the mixed results. On the other hand, results vary depending on factors such as the different dimensions of the parental homework involvement measured (e.g., parent homework control vs. parents homework support; Kikas et al., 2022 ); different participants' types (e.g., students vs. parents vs. teachers; Erdem and Kaya, 2020 ); different measuring tools of students' mathematics achievement (e.g., non-standardized measurement vs. standardized test; Jeynes, 2005 ; Castro et al., 2015 ); different demographics characteristics such student grade level (e.g., primary school vs. Middle school vs. High school; Núñez et al., 2015 ), region and culture (e.g., minority vs. white students; Jeynes, 2005 ) among studies. Meanwhile, different study attributes, such as the type and year of publications, may also lead to inconsistent research results. Therefore, this meta-analysis addressed the small sample size issue and tested the moderating effects from three aspects: measurement tools, demographic variables, and study attributes, in order to model different results across studies.

1.2.1. Measuring tools

1.2.1.1. type of spi and ipi.

How SPI and IPI were measured may lead to distinctive results. By comparing the questionnaires of SPI and IPI in past research, we found that SPI may measure several typical sub-types, including autonomy support, content support, and provision of structure, while IPI was generally measured by parental control and interference. Specifically, questions such as “My parents convey confidence in my ability to do math homework assignments ( Xu and Corno, 2022 ); When my parents help me with my school work, they always encourage me to find the correct answer by myself ( Karbach et al., 2013 )” were used to measure parent autonomy support, which can be defined as “allowing children to explore their environment, initiate their own behavior, and take an active role in solving problems” ( Pomerantz et al., 2007 ). SDT indicated that when acting with autonomy, behaviors are engaged wholeheartedly, whereas one experiences incongruence, and conflict when doing what is contrary to one's volition. What is more important in most settings having support for autonomy as a contextual factor plays a critical role in allowing individuals to actively satisfy all of their needs—to gravitate toward, make relevant choices in relation to, and employ optimizing strategies for satisfying each basic need ( Ryan and Deci, 2017 ). In other words, autonomy support is seen as the most critical aspect of the satisfaction of human psychological needs. Thus, it is believed that when parental homework involvement is measured by autonomy support, the largest correlation should be discovered in the SPI-students' mathematics achievement link.

Questions such as “My parents help me with math if I ask them; I can always ask my parents if I don't understand something in math” were used to measure content support, another sub-type of SPI, referring to the extent to which parents provide direct help on homework when asked by children ( Xu et al., 2018 ; Xu and Corno, 2022 ). By being available for help if needed, content support tends to increase students' sense of autonomy, sense of competence, and persistence in learning ( Moorman and Pomerantz, 2008 ). Nevertheless, Xu et al. (2018) revealed that as compared with parental autonomy support, parental content support may backfire even when asked by children. Since parental content support may lead to a sense of incompetence in children, and when asked by children for content support, many parents may find it difficult to withdraw their support as children become more competent and are well on their own. Therefore, we speculate that when parental homework involvement is measured by content support, it may also have a positive impact on students' math achievement, although this correlation may not be as significant as the parent autonomy support students' math achievement link.

Questions such as “Do you provide incentives for your child to finish his/her mathematics homework ( O'Sullivan et al., 2014 ); whether the television was on or off when their child did homework ( Cooper et al., 2000 )” were used to measure “provision of structure”, referring to the degree of parents provide clear and consistent guidelines and follow through on contingencies for their children's homework ( Cooper et al., 2000 ). SDT indicated that the provision of structure supports one's competence needs. The need for competence is evident as an inherent striving, manifested in curiosity, manipulation, and a wide range of epistemic motives ( Deci and Moller, 2005 ). In this way, parental provision of structure may enhance children's sense of competence, believing that they can exert a positive influence on their grades and other academic outcomes ( O'Sullivan et al., 2014 ). Nevertheless, Wang and Cai (2017) indicated that the impact of the parental provision of structure on students' math achievement may largely depend on how students perceive their parents' behavior. For example, parental provision of structure is positively associated with students' academic performance in China, given that Chinese children may perceive parental provision of structure as an act of love. Thus, we speculate that when parental homework involvement is measured by the provision of structure, it may have a positive impact on students' math achievement, provided that students view it as a supportive involvement.

H3-a: The positive correlation is strongest when SPI was measured by autonomy support, followed by content support and provision of structure, respectively.

For IPI, questions such as “Me doing homework is very important to my parents; My parents scold and punish me if I don't do all the homework ( Núñez et al., 2015 ); I insisted my child do things in my way when it came to doing his/her math homework ( Wu et al., 2022 )” were used to measure parent homework controlling, which can be defined as “control and pressure on student to complete assignments” ( Šilinskas and Kikas, 2019b ). Questions such as “My parents often interfere when I'm doing my math homework; When I'm doing math homework, my parents ask if I need help ( Kikas et al., 2022 )” were used to measure parental interference which refers to parents' tendency to solve the students' homework although the student has not asked for it or interrupting student in their homework ( Moroni et al., 2015 ). It has been shown that parental control decreases students' sense of autonomy, sense of competence, and effort in challenging learning situations ( Pomerantz et al., 2007 ). On the other hand, interference was the most damaging type of parental homework involvement because it undermined mastery goal orientation and reduced perceived competence ( Gonida and Cortina, 2014 ). Thus, we generate the following hypothesis:

H3-b: The negative correlation is strongest when IPI was measured by interference, followed by controlling.

1.2.1.2. Questionnaire reporter

Parental homework involvement questionnaire reporters might have an impact on the parental homework involvement-students' math achievement link, as parents' and students' perceptions regarding parental homework involvement may differ. It is likely that students' perceptions of parental homework involvement are more real or “knowable” to them than the actual nature or extent of parents' behavior related to homework ( Grolnick and Slowiaczek, 1994 ; Hoover-Dempsey et al., 2005 ). Studies have also pointed out that students' interpretations of parental involvement often shape their responses to that involvement and are therefore more closely related to their development than parents' actual behavior ( Schaefer, 1965 ; Grolnick et al., 1991 ; Hoover-Dempsey et al., 2005 ). Based on that, we can speculate as follows:

H4: When the parental homework involvement questionnaire is reported by students, the relationship between parental homework involvement and students' math achievement is stronger than when reported by parents themselves.

1.2.1.3. Mathematics achievement indicator

Different indicators of students' mathematics achievement may also yield different results. Andrews and Harlen (2006) suggested that various assessments of academic achievement could present problems during the synthesis stage of the study that would challenge the usefulness of the findings. A meta-analysis further revealed that “the manner of assessing student scholastic performance did not seem to impact the existence of the relationship between parental involvement and academic achievement. It did, however, affect the strength of that relationship” ( Wilder, 2014 ). Compared to standardized tests that typically have tighter confidence intervals and smaller standard deviations for the test scores, non-standardized measurement can be easily influenced by many factors or biases of the assessor. Since Jeynes (2005) revealed that the teacher as a significant person in rating students' mathematics performance is likely to be influenced by a high degree of parent involvement. It is possible that when students' mathematics achievement is reported by non-standardized measurement, larger parental homework involvement-students' mathematics achievement links may find. Given this, we propose the following hypothesis:

H5: In both SPI-students' math achievement and IPI-students' math achievement link, students' mathematics achievement reported by non-standardized measurement have larger links than those reported by standardized tests.

1.2.2. Demographic variables

1.2.2.1. culture.

Differences in culture might also drive inconsistent results. Since the existing research on the relationship between parental homework involvement and students' mathematics achievement was mainly conducted in a certain area, it remained a research gap to investigate the potential moderating effect of cultural background, so we test it in this meta-analysis. Danişman (2017) , pointed out that the moderating effect of culture was statistically significant in the parent involvement and students' achievement link ( Q = 5.382, p < 0.05). Specifically, parents from collectivist countries ( r = 0.43) had a stronger effect on student achievement than those from individualist ( r = 0.30) countries. According to Hofstede (1991) cultural dimensions theory, people in collectivist cultures feel as if they belong to larger in-groups or collectives which care for them in exchange for loyalty. As a result, a collectivist culture is especially likely to emphasize the importance of social harmony, respectfulness, and group needs over individual needs. Thus, the relationship between parents and children might be closer in collectivist cultures, and parental homework involvement may have a greater impact on students' math achievement. On the contrary, people who live in individualist cultures tend to believe that independence, competition, and personal achievement are more important. Children tend to complete their homework independently. Thus, parental homework involvement may not have a significant impact on students' math achievement.

H6: Compared with individualism, the correlation between parents' homework involvement and students' math achievement under the collectivism culture is stronger.

1.2.2.2. Grade level

Past studies suggested that students' grade levels moderated the link between parental homework involvement and students' achievement (e.g., Skaliotis, 2010 ). Since younger students appear to have less developed study habits, parental homework involvement has been found to have desirable effects on elementary school students ( Dufresne and Kobasigawa, 1989 ). However, others found contradictory results that the relationship between perceived parental homework involvement and academic achievement was stronger in middle high school and high school than in elementary school ( Núñez et al., 2015 ). The inconsistent conclusion largely fails to consider the type of parental homework involvement. We speculate that lower-grade students often lack the ability to self-control and self-management, and have not formed good learning habits or strategies yet. At this stage, parental supportive homework involvement will have the strongest effect on improving their academic achievement. Furthermore, younger students, who have not yet developed independent personalities, rely more on their parents' help, therefore might have a greater tolerance for parental control or interference in homework. However, students in middle and high school have gradually developed an independent learning style, and they no longer require much supportive homework involvement from their parents, making the correlation between SPI and math achievement weakened. Furthermore, puberty sharply distinguishes middle and high school students from other students, by changing their brains yielding greater emotional intensity ( Nelson et al., 2012 ). SDT also revealed that psychological needs, satisfactions, and frustrations vary within persons over time. Therefore, IPI may cause their extremely strong resistance, and eventually lead to a stronger negative impact on middle and high school students' math achievement. We generate the following hypothesis, hoping to adjudicate these mixed results:

H7-a: As students' grades increase, the correlation between SPI and students' math achievement gradually weakens.

H7-b: As students' grades increase, the correlation between IPI and students' math achievement gradually strengthens.

1.2.3. Study attributes

1.2.3.1. publication type.

Publication type may affect the relationship between parental homework involvement and students' mathematics achievement. It has been well established that journals are more likely to publish significant findings than non-significant findings ( Card, 2015 ), and the non-significant results are usually excluded from quantitative reviews of research results. Therefore, the effect size may be larger in journal articles than in dissertations.

1.2.3.2. Publication year

The publication year of studies may moderate the relationship between parental homework involvement and students' mathematics achievement. From the perspective of technological progress, the rapid development of information technology has brought a new look to student mathematics learning. Using online homework tools in mathematics learning has thus become a new phenomenon that complements traditional homework ( Sarmiento, 2017 ). Though such web-based mathematics homework can help students obtain skills that lessen anxiety and raise students' consciousness in the learning process ( Albelbisi, 2019 ), it often requires more parental involvement as well. Meanwhile, global, national, and local policies also started to promote the importance of parent education involvement and advocate for a greater role of parents in education in order to enhance the academic achievement of their children ( Englund et al., 2004 ). Therefore, parental homework involvement behavior may increase over time, and the relationship between parental homework involvement and students' mathematics achievement might become stronger.

1.3. This study

In this meta-analysis, we aim to synthesize the results of previous studies testing the impact of SPI and IPI on students' mathematics achievement and to identify the potential factors that moderate it. First, we sum up the overall effect size of the relationship between SPI and students' mathematics achievement, IPI, and students' mathematics achievement, respectively. Next, we explore whether this relationship differs across measuring tools (type of SPI/IPI, questionnaire reporter, mathematics achievement indicator), demographics (culture and grade level), and study attributes (publication type and year) by testing moderators.

2. Research methods

2.1. literature search and screening.

This study mainly uses electronic retrieval to collect journals and doctoral dissertations about the relationship between parental homework involvement and students' mathematics achievement (Unpublished documents such as government documents and conference papers are not included in the search scope) between June 2005 (No earlier studies of parental homework involvement and student's mathematics achievement) to December 2022. We searched the following databases: Web of Science, Taylor and Francis Online, EBSCO, Springer Link, Elsevier, and ProQuest databases. Meanwhile, Google Scholar was used to assist with retrieval.

The literature search has gone through two rounds of procedures. The first round was extensive searching through keywords compilation. During the search process, it was found that there were few relevant articles about the relationship between parental homework involvement and students' mathematics achievement. Most of the studies on the relationship between them were included in a broader scope of “parent involvement and students' academic achievements” for discussion. In order to collect articles as much as possible, we took the following as the retrieval formula, combining three retrieval fields of subject, title, and full text:

(parent involvement OR parent engagement OR parent participation OR parent help) AND (academic achievements OR academic attainment OR academic outcomes OR academic scores OR academic grades).

A total of 338 articles were obtained in the first round of large-scale retrieval. The second round of retrieval was based on citation backtracking. By tracking the references and cited articles of the articles obtained from the first round, 96 articles were obtained in this round. After deleting 25 repetitive articles, 409 articles were obtained in two rounds.

Subsequently, we began two rounds of screening for these 409 articles. By reading the titles and abstracts, 103 articles unrelated to the research question were excluded in the first round of screening. The second round of screening was conducted by reading the full text of the remaining 306 articles. The inclusion criteria for this round of screening are as follows (see Figure 1 for a flow chart of the article selection process): (1) only empirical studies are included; (2) the Pearson's product-moment correlation coefficient r between parental homework involvement and students' mathematics achievement is clearly reported; (3) it reports the measuring tool of students' mathematics achievement (The mathematics achievement here do not include comprehensive achievement including math, such as GPA, composite scores of language and math, etc.); and (4) it reports the sample size. By reading the abstract and full text while screening according to the above criteria, 20 articles published between 2005 and 2022 met the requirements and were finally included in the study.

Figure 1 . Flow diagram of literature search and study inclusion criteria.

2.2. Coding variables

The selected articles were coded according to the constituent elements, and each independent sample was coded only once (See Table 1 for coding results).

1. References: Author, Year of publication (if the same study contains multiple results, it shall be distinguished by serial number).

2. Type of SPI/IPI 1 : Supportive (Autonomy Support, Content Support, Provision of Structure); Intrusive (Controlling, Interference).

3. Questionnaire reporter: Students; Parents.

4. Mathematics achievement indicator 2 : Standardized measurement; Non-standardized measurement.

5. Culture: Individualist; Collectivist (Refer to the evaluation results of Hofstede Cultural Guide for judgment of cultural background of different countries/regions: https://www.hofstede-insights.com/ ).

6. Grade level: Primary school; Middle school; High school; Mixed.

7. Publication type: Journal; Doctoral dissertation.

Table 1 . Characteristics of the 41 studies in the meta-analysis.

In order to ensure the coding reliability, two researchers who studied and regularly run meta-analyses coded the included articles separately. Cohen's kappa coefficient was used to analyze the consistency of the two researchers coding results for the two moderators (types of SPI/IPI, mathematics achievement indicators) that may have different opinions. Results showed that Cohen's kappa coefficient was 0.969 ( p < 0.0001) and 0.945 ( p < 0.0001), respectively, indicating that there was a strong consistency between them. Then, the two researchers discussed their disagreements and agreed on the final codes via consensus.

2.3. Assessment of study quality

The methodology quality of included studies was assessed by two independent reviewers using the standardized critical appraisal instruments prepared by the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI). For cross-sectional surveys, the JBI Critical Appraisal Checklist for prevalence studies was used. This tool comprised nine questions, and studies that obtained five or more “Yes” ratings out of nine were included in the review ( Munn et al., 2015 ). For longitudinal studies (e.g., Šilinskas et al., 2013 ; Viljaranta et al., 2018 ; Šilinskas and Kikas, 2019a , b ; Kikas et al., 2022 ), JBI Critical Appraisal Checklist for cohort studies was used. This tool comprised eleven questions, and studies that obtained <6 “Yes” scores were excluded. The final score consistency of the two independent reviewers was 0.85. All 20 studies met the inclusion standard, indicating that the quality of the studies included in this study met the analysis requirements.

2.4. Effect size calculation

In this meta-analysis, data were analyzed using Comprehensive Meta Analysis 3.0, and Pearson's product–moment correlation coefficient r was used to calculate the effect size. First, we extracted the initial effect size in each study, that is, the correlation coefficient r between parents' homework involvement and students' mathematics achievement. Then, Fisher's z-transformation was applied to r , weighted based on the sample size with 95% confidence intervals: Z = 0.5 * ln [(1 + r)/(1 – r)], where the variance of Z is V Z = 1/n−3 and the standard deviation of Z is SE Z = square root of (1/n−3).

2.5. Data processing and analysis

Homogeneity tests determined whether each result was significantly different from the overall effect size, which informs the selection of a fixed-effect model vs. a random-effect model. If a homogeneity test shows that the effect size is homogeneous, a fixed-effect model is used. If it indicates significantly large heterogeneity in the effect size, a random-effect model is used. In addition, large heterogeneity suggests potential moderation effects ( Lipsey and Wilson, 2001 ; Card et al., 2010 ).

2.6. Sensitivity analysis

We conducted a cumulative analysis to assess if the effect size estimate stabilizes with the inclusion of studies. If any new study produces a sudden shift as the volume of data accumulates, then there might exist a bias ( Borenstein et al., 2009 ).

2.7. Evaluation of publication bias

We assessed the risk of publication bias through funnel plot and Egger's linear regression method to determine whether potential bias affects the validity and robustness of research results under different circumstances. CMA software is used to draw funnel plots that can visually identify deviations, and Egger's regression method is used to quantify the asymmetry of funnel plots. The assumption is that, without publication bias, the scattered points representing each study will be symmetrically distributed on both sides of the average effect quantity, and the intercept of Egger's regression is close to 0 and not significant ( Egger et al., 1997 ). On the contrary, when the scatter points are asymmetric and the p -value of Egger's test is <0.05, it indicates the existence of publication bias.

3.1. Effect size and homogeneity tests

This meta-analysis of 20 articles and 41 independent effect sizes had 16,338 participants. The sample sizes of the studies ranged from 33 to 3,018. The average sample size is about 583, and the time span is 2005–2022. As illustrated in the Table 2 and forest plot of SPI and IPI (see Figures 2 , 3 ), the homogeneity tests for 22 independent samples of SPI and 19 independent samples of IPI both showed substantial heterogeneity among the selected studies ( Q SPI = 94.391, df = 21, p < 0.0001; Q IPI = 297.629, df = 18, p < 0.0001) and likely moderation effects. Meanwhile, I SPI 2 = 77.752%, I IPI 2 = 93.952%, both are larger than 75%, indicating that there were variables moderating the relationship between parental homework involvement and students' math achievement ( I 2 values: 25% [low], 50% [medium], 75% [high]; Higgins and Thompson, 2002 ), so a random-effect model was used.

Table 2 . Random-effect model of the correlation between parental homework involvement and students' mathematics achievement.

Figure 2 . Forest plot for the random-effects model of 22 studies (SPI).

Figure 3 . Forest plot for the random-effects model of 19 studies (IPI).

The random-effect model showed a significant positive correlation between SPI and students' math achievement ( r = 0.076, 95% CI = [0.037, 0.114]), and a significant negative correlation between IPI and students' math achievement ( r = −0.153, 95% CI = [−0.226, −0.079]).

3.2. Sensitivity analysis

As is shown in Figures 4 , 5 , the effect size tended to stabilize and the confidence intervals tended to narrow as studies were added to the analysis, which suggests that the results were robust to our assumptions.

Figure 4 . Cumulative analysis results for 22 SPI studies.

Figure 5 . Cumulative analysis results for 19 IPI studies.

3.3. Publication bias tests

As shown in Figures 6 , 7 , there was no obvious asymmetry in the funnel plots, which indicated that there was no publication bias. In addition, Egger's regression test showed that t SPI(22) = 0.092, p = 0.928; t IPI(19) = 1.169, p = 0.258, which further verified that there was no potential publication bias in the data set. Therefore, the abovementioned tests support that the effects included in this study have no publication bias.

Figure 6 . Funnel plot of effect sizes of the correlation between SPI and students' mathematics achievement.

Figure 7 . Funnel plot of effect sizes of the correlation between IPI and students' mathematics achievement.

3.4. Moderator analysis

We used a meta-analysis of variance to test the potential moderate effect of six categories of variables: type of SPI/IPI, questionnaire reporter, mathematics achievement indicator, culture, grade level, and publication type. Meanwhile, meta-regression analysis was used to test the potential moderating effect of the publication year (see Tables 3 , 4 ).

Table 3 . Correlation between parental homework involvement and students' mathematics achievement: Univariate analysis of variance for the moderator variables (categorical variables).

Table 4 . The correlation between parental homework involvement and students' mathematics achievement: Univariate regression analysis of continuous variables (random-effects model).

3.4.1. Measuring tools

3.4.1.1. type of spi/ipi.

The homogeneity tests results showed that three different sub-types of supportive parental homework involvement can significantly moderate the relationship between SPI and students' mathematics achievement ( Q BET SPI = 6.216, df = 2, p = 0.045), while two sub-types of intrusive parental homework involvement had no moderating effect on the relationship between IPI and students' mathematics achievement ( Q BET IPI = 0.004, df = 1, p = 0.950). Specifically, when SPI was measured as autonomy support, content support, and provision of structure, respectively, the correlation between SPI and students' mathematics achievement decreased successively and even showed a weak negative correlation when measured as the provision of structure ( r SPI − AS = 0.133, 95% CI = [0.084, 0.181]; r SPI − CS =0.049, 95% CI = [−0.002, 0.099]; r SPI − PS = −0.009, 95% CI = [−0.243, 0.227]).

3.4.1.2. Questionnaire reporter

The homogeneity test results showed that the questionnaire reporter has no moderating effect on the relationship between both SPI-students' math achievement link and IPI-students' math achievement ( Q BETS PI = 2.293, df = 1, p = 0.084; Q BET IPI = 0.962, df = 1, p = 0.327).

3.4.1.3. Mathematics achievement indicator

The homogeneity test results showed that it can significantly moderate the relationship between SPI and students' mathematics achievement ( Q BET SPI = 14.423, df =1, p = 0.009), but has no effect on the relationship between IPI and students' mathematics achievement ( Q BET IPI = 1.225, df = 1, p = 0.233). When students' mathematics achievement was indicated by non-standardized measurement, the correlation was stronger than indicated by standardized measurement ( r SPI-non-standardized = 0.123, 95% CI = [0.087, 0.159], r SPI-standardized = 0.036, 95% CI = [−0.019, 0.091]).

3.4.2. Demographic variables

3.4.2.1. culture.

Homogeneity test results showed that although cultural background could not moderate the relationship between SPI and students' mathematics achievement ( Q BET SPI = 0.088, df = 1, p = 0.767), it could significantly moderate the relationship between IPI and students' mathematics achievement ( Q BET IPI = 70.039, df = 1, p < 0.0001). However, given that the collectivist category included only one independent sample, we supposed that this moderating effect was not representative.

3.4.2.2. Grade level

Homogeneity test results indicated that it could not significantly moderate the relationship between SPI and students' mathematics achievement ( Q BET SPI = 6.682, df = 3, p = 0.083), but it could significantly moderate the relationship between IPI and students' mathematics achievement ( Q BET IPI = 21.041, df = 3, p < 0.0001). To be more specific, with the increase in the grade level, the correlation between IPI and students' math achievement was gradually increasing ( r IPI-primary < r IPI-middle < r IPI-high : −0.093 < −0.228 < −0.360).

3.4.3. Study attributes

3.4.3.1. publication type.

Homogeneity test results showed that it has a moderating effect on the relationship between SPI and students' math achievement ( Q BET SPI = 3.970, df = 1, p = 0.046); but no moderating effect between IPI and students' math achievement ( Q BET IPI = 0.994, df = 1, p = 0.319). However, considering that the source of 22 SPI studies only includes one doctoral dissertation (three independent samples from the dissertation were actually all from Nwokedi (2020) doctoral dissertation), we supposed that this moderation effect of publication type was not representative.

3.4.3.2. Publication year

The results of the meta-regression analysis show that the publication year has no moderating effect on the relationship between SPI, IPI, and students' math achievement ( Q Model [1, k = 22] = 2.94, p = 0.086; Q Model [1, k = 19] = 0.84, p = 0.358, respectively).

4. Discussion

This study analyzed the effects of 22 independent samples of SPI and 19 independent samples of IPI on students' mathematics achievement from 2005 to 2022. The results showed that SPI was significantly positively correlated with students' mathematics achievement, while IPI was significantly negatively correlated with students' mathematics achievement. Among them, the type of SPI, mathematics achievement indicators, and grade level moderated those effects.

4.1. Parental homework involvement and students' mathematics achievement

The results of meta-analysis support the hypotheses H1 and H2 that student's mathematics achievement was positively related to SPI and negatively related to IPI. These findings refute previous studies that reported non-significant or only negative correlations between parental homework involvement and math achievements (e.g., Karbach et al., 2013 ), demonstrating the value of supporting children's autonomy. As SDT states, autonomy, competence, and relatedness are three innate psychological needs of human beings, when they are satisfied, it yields enhanced self-motivation and mental health and when they are thwarted, it led to diminished motivation and wellbeing ( Ryan and Deci, 2000 ). By enhancing students' feelings of autonomy, competence, and relatedness which contributes to their intrinsic motivation, SPI can improve students' mathematics achievement. In contrast, when parental homework involvement is intrusive, students' innate needs for competence, autonomy, and psychological relatedness were undermined ( Moroni et al., 2015 ) and their persistence during homework tend to diminish, thus it may have a negative impact on their math achievement ( Cooper et al., 2000 ; Grolnick and Pomerantz, 2009 ; Hill and Tyson, 2009 ; Dumont et al., 2012 , 2014 ).

4.2. Moderation

The moderation tests showed that the link between SPI and students' mathematics achievement was moderated by three sub-types of SPI and mathematics achievement indicator, while the link between IPI and students' mathematics achievement was moderated by students' grade level; we will discuss these in the following subsections.

4.2.1. Measuring tools

4.2.1.1. type of spi.

Among the three sub-types of SPI, the largest correlation was found between parental autonomy support and students' mathematics achievement. But a small positive correlation was found in content support-students' math achievement link, and even a negative correlation was found between the parental provision of structure-students' math achievement link, partially rejecting hypothesis H3-a. The largest correlation between parental autonomy support and students' math achievement is congruent with previous research (e.g., Viljaranta et al., 2018 ). Furthermore, it supports the SDT argument—autonomy support as a contextual factor plays a critical role in allowing individuals to actively satisfy all their needs. Satisfaction with each of the three psychological needs (autonomy, competence, and relatedness) is all facilitated by autonomy support ( Ryan and Deci, 2017 ).

What needs to be carefully explained is the intriguing results that why parental content support showed a weak positive correlation with students' math achievement, and when measured as the provision of structure it even showed a weak negative correlation. One explanatory reason may be that parental content support, even when requested, may lead to a sense of incompetence for children ( Xu et al., 2018 ; Xu and Corno, 2022 ). The sense of incompetence will lead to self-doubt, undermining children's self-efficacy and intrinsic motivation, and in turn reducing its positive impact on mathematical achievement. In addition, it is worth noting that although SDT indicated that parental provision of structure is critical in helping children develop a sense of control understanding and perceived competence, which become the basis for effective functioning ( Grolnick and Ryan, 1989 ; Soenens et al., 2010 ), the premise is that students can internalize the values behind the activities supported by parents. However, students may display behavioral compliance by adapting their behavior to parental directives in the presence of the parental provision of structure but fail to internalize the values ( Wang and Cai, 2017 ). For example, driven by Asian cultural values that emphasize interdependence and filial piety ( Pomerantz et al., 2011 ; Cheung and Pomerantz, 2012 ), students are more inclined to display behavioral compliance to show their obedience, even though they do not agree with their parents' arrangement. Over time, they fail to internalize the values behind parental structural support or even have an aversion, but they never show it, which leads to their inability to develop control awareness, understanding, and perception, and ultimately has a negative impact on mathematics achievement. In addition, Ryan and Deci (2017) indicated that without autonomy support, the structure is not likely to be internalized to a degree that yields identified or integrated motivation. Furthermore, findings confirm that more beneficial outcomes occur under autonomy-supportive, high-structure circumstances ( Grolnick et al., 2014 ). This provides inspiration for future parental homework involvement that a structuring parent is not one who just sets out rules and communicates consequences but who also facilitated the child in successfully enacting them and supports their autonomy as well.

4.2.1.2. Mathematics achievement indicator

For students' mathematics achievement, non-standardized measurement showed a greater correlation in the SPI-mathematics achievement link, echoing Jeynes (2005) research, supporting hypothesis H5. When parents are supportively involved in students' homework and their support is perceived by teachers, it may affect the validity of teachers using non-standardized measurement to rate students' math achievement. As a result, students' mathematics achievement will become more positive, leading to a larger positive correlation between supportive parent homework involvement and students' mathematics achievement link.

4.2.2. Grade level

In higher grade levels, IPI had stronger negative effects on students' mathematics achievement, supporting hypothesis H7-b. The moderating effect of grade level can be explained by the following aspects:

The first is the rising math anxiety of parents. This explanation was previously suggested by Maloney et al. (2015) that when higher-math-anxiety parents frequently help their children with math homework, their children learn less math over the course of the school year. Retanal et al. (2021) further proved that parents' math anxiety will have a negative impact on students' math achievement through parental intrusive homework involvement. On this basis, we can further deduce that the rising math anxiety of parents may be closely related to students' grade levels. As Hembree (1990) demonstrated that students' math anxiety varies in grade level: it is low or medium in primary school, and it then increases, peaks in the high school period, and slowly falls after graduation. For parents who involve in students' math homework, their anxiety may also differ across grade levels. To be more specific, the content of primary school mathematics homework is very basic, parent do not need to acquire expert knowledge and skills in mathematics to explain math problems in homework to their children ( Szczygieł, 2020 ). However, with the increase in grade level, the math curriculum is more complex and abstract, and students start to have difficulties maintaining good performance in mathematics ( Núñez et al., 2015 ). Correspondingly, parents may also feel more anxious when involved in advanced math homework, as they may lack sufficient knowledge and expertise ( Jeynes, 2007 ; Patall et al., 2008 ; Wilder, 2014 ). In general, the increase in grade level drives the increase of parents' math anxiety, and parents' math anxiety will have an indirect negative impact on students' math achievement through IPI, which makes the negative correlation between IPI and students' math achievement show a trend of increasing with the grade level.

In addition, the mental characteristics of students in different grades can also explain the results. Compared to students in middle and high school, young children have less effective study habits and are less capable of avoiding distractions ( Cooper and Valentine, 2001 ), thus parental control and interference are needed as an important way to help them focus and get rid of procrastination ( Bronson, 2000 ). In contrast, middle- and high-school students have more developed self-regulation skills ( Zimmerman and Pons, 1990 ), which supports them to become more autonomous, free, and independent, and conduct their learning in a more planned, conscious manner ( Gorgoz and Tican, 2020 ). In this case, parents' control and interference will disrupt their rhythm by undermining their innate needs for competence, autonomy, and psychological relatedness. Thus, they had a stronger negative impact on middle and high school students' math achievement.

Culture and publication type show moderating effects on IPI-mathematics achievement and SPI-mathematics achievement link respectively. However, we believe that such moderating effects are caused by uneven sample size distribution and therefore are not representative. This inspires future meta-analyses to retest the moderating effect of these two variables on the basis of richer data. Meanwhile, the homogeneity test results showed that questionnaire reporters have no moderating effect. The result echoes Thomas et al. (2020) , indicating a parallel between parent and student perception. Since many researchers believe that parents' and students' perceptions of what counts as parental involvement seem to vary ( Barge and Loges, 2003 ; DePlanty et al., 2007 ), further studies are needed to shed light on the mixed results.

5. Implications

This meta-analysis has theoretical, practical, and methodological implications. The findings indicate that an ecological theoretical model is needed to understand the outcome of students' mathematics achievement ( Bronfenbrenner, 1974 ). Whether students' autonomy is supported by parents' homework involvement, which is a type of interaction students experience in their immediate environment, plays an important role according to SDT theory ( Ryan and Deci, 2000 , 2017 ). The relationship between parental homework involvement and students' mathematics achievement is not an either-or issue. It is the type and quality of parental homework involvement that matters.

Practically, educators may utilize these findings to consider how to collaborate with parents in students' mathematics learning. First, schools can design and run family education workshops to increase parents' awareness of the value of autonomy support rather than just providing structural support, controlling, or interfering. Second, teachers may provide supportive counseling or direct strategies to help parents become more effectively involved in their children's homework, ensuring that instructional techniques parents use are in line with those being used by teachers. Third, teachers should use homework as a formative assessment tool to diagnose students' strengths and weaknesses in mathematics and improve instruction accordingly rather than just report summative scores to parents. It may reduce math anxiety of parents as grade level increases, and thus decrease instructive parental homework involvement and its negative impacts.

Methodologically, this meta-analysis showed the need to differentiate the type of parental homework involvement, mathematics achievement measurement, and grade level. Future studies should define different types of parental homework involvement more clearly and consider the impact of specific parental homework involvement types. Also, future studies should use standardized mathematics achievement tests to make the results more comparable. Furthermore, more longitudinal studies should be conducted to capture the differences across grade levels.

6. Limitations and prospects

Though this study followed meta-analysis methods and procedures, there are still some limitations in the classification of parental homework involvement, data collection, analysis of moderating variables, and selection of sample participants, which need to be improved in future research.

First, there is currently no comprehensive study on the classification of parental homework involvement, and questionnaires for each type of parental homework involvement are validated by the authors of included studies rather than standardized tests that have been widely used. Future studies should further classify parental homework involvement from a functional perspective and develop standardized scales to measure it. Second, in terms of data collection, this meta-analysis only included 41 independent samples. As more such studies accumulate, future meta-analysis might yield more profound results. In addition, we only examined the searchable literature published in English, thus future studies can expand the language range of literature search to Chinese, Japanese, Spanish, Korean, and so on. Third, regarding the analysis of moderating variables, there are significant differences in the sample size within some of the moderating variables examined in this study, which makes it difficult to ensure the robustness of the subgroup analysis results. Future research can further validate the analysis results of this study by enriching and balancing the number of studies within the moderating variable group. Finally, regarding the selection of sample groups, as the participants included were mainly focused on primary to high school students, future studies can include younger students (e.g., kindergarteners), school dropouts, or older adults.

7. Conclusion

This meta-analysis extends previous studies on the relationship between parental homework involvement and students' academic achievement with attention to types of parental involvement—supportive and intrusive, using mathematics as a specific subject. Through 41 effect sizes from 20 articles of 16,338 participants, we found a significant positive link between SPI and students' mathematics achievement and a negative link between IPI and students' mathematics achievement. The link between SPI and students' mathematics achievement differed across the three types of SPI (autonomy support, content support, and provision of structure) and mathematics achievement indicators. Specifically, autonomy support showed the strongest positive link, followed by content support and provision of structure. The link was stronger when measured by non-standardized measurements than standardized measurements. For the IPI-mathematics achievement link, it differed across students' grade levels, the negative link was strongest in high school, followed by middle school, and lowest in primary school.

Data availability statement

The original contributions presented in the study are included in the article/ Supplementary material , further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author.

Author contributions

QJ: writing-original draft preparation and methodology. LS: writing-reviewing, editing, and supervision. DZ: conceptualization, writing-reviewing, editing, and supervision. WM: methodology, supervision, and writing-reviewing and editing. All authors contributed to the article and approved the submitted version.

This work was supported by National Social Science Fund of China-On Mechanism and Strategy of Classroom Assessment for Deeper Learning (Grant No: BHA180121).

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Publisher's note

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Supplementary material

The Supplementary Material for this article can be found online at: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1218534/full#supplementary-material

1. ^ The codes of parents' homework involvement types for each independent sample were based on the questionnaire items used by the sample. For example, “My parent helped me find a quiet area for doing my 7th grade math homework ( Nwokedi, 2020 )” focuses on the structural support behavior of parents in the homework process, so it was coded as “provision of structure”; “My parents will not let me watch TV, or play with my friends…until I have finished my homework ( Núñez et al., 2015 )”. This item refers to pressure on students to complete homework, hence it was coded as “controlling”.

2. ^ Standardized measurement came exclusively from standardized math tests, while non-standard measurement involves some forms of teacher rating, school rating, and parents rating, such as math curriculum grades and school report card grades. This practice is common among existing meta-analyses on the topic (e.g., Jeynes, 2005 ; Ma et al., 2016 ).

Albelbisi, N. A. (2019). The role of quality factors in supporting self-regulated learning (SRL) skills in MOOC environment. Educ. Inf. Technol. 24, 1681–1698. doi: 10.1007/s10639-018-09855-2

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Andrews, R., and Harlen, W. (2006). Issues in synthesizing research in education. Educ. Res. 48, 287–299. doi: 10.1080/00131880600992330

Balli, S. J., Wedman, J., and Demo, D. H. (1997). Family involvement with middle-grades homework: Effects of differential prompting. J. Exper. Educ. 66, 31–48. doi: 10.1080/00220979709601393

Barge, J. K., and Loges, W. E. (2003). Parent, Student, and Teacher Perceptions of Parental Involvement. J. Appl. Commun. Res. 31, 140–163. doi: 10.1080/0090988032000064597

Borenstein, M., Hedges, L. V., Higgins, J. P. T., and Rothstein, H. R. (2009). Introduction to Meta-Analysis . Oxford: John Wiley & Sons. doi: 10.1002/9780470743386

Bronfenbrenner, U. (1974). Developmental research, public policy, and the ecology of childhood. Child Dev. 45, 1–5. doi: 10.2307/1127743

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Bronson, M. B. (2000). Self-Regulation in Early Childhood: Nature and Nurture . New York: Guilford.

Google Scholar

Brown, C. M. (2005). Parent home involvement and student achievement for Mexican – American and European American students with learning disabilities (Publication No. 3178743) [Doctoral dissertation, University of California]. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global.

Card, D., Kluve, J., and Weber, A. (2010). Active labor market policy evaluations: A meta–analysis. Econ. J. 120, F452–F477. doi: 10.3386/w16173

Card, N. A. (2015). Applied Meta-Analysis for Social Science Research . New York: Guilford Publications.

Castro, M. J., Expósito-Casas, E., López-Martín, E., Lizasoain, L., Navarro-Asencio, E., and Gaviria, J. L. (2015). Parental involvement on student academic achievement: A meta-analysis. Educ. Res. Rev. 14, 33–46. doi: 10.1016/j.edurev.2015.01.002

Cheung, C. S., and Pomerantz, E. (2012). Why does parents' involvement enhance children's achievement? The role of parent-oriented motivation. J. Educ. Psychol. 104, 820–832. doi: 10.1037/a0027183

Cooper, H., Lindsay, J. J., and Nye, B. (2000). Homework in the home: how student, family, and parenting–style differences relate to the homework process. Contemp. Educ. Psychol. 25, 464–487. doi: 10.1006/ceps.1999.1036

Cooper, H., and Valentine, J. C. (2001). Using research to answer practical questions about homework. Educ. Psychol. 36, 143–153. doi: 10.1207/S15326985EP3603_1

Danişman, S. (2017). “The effect of expectation on student achievement,” in The Factors Effecting Student Achievement , eds. E. Karadag (Cham: Springer). doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-56083-0_14

Deci, E. L., and Moller, A. C. (2005). “he concept of competence: A starting place for understanding intrinsic motivation and self-determined extrinsic motivation,” in Handbook of Competence and Motivation (New York: Guilford Press) 579–597.

DePlanty, J., Coulter-Kern, R., and Duchane, K. A. (2007). Perceptions of parent involvement in academic achievement. J. Educ. Res. 100, 361–368. doi: 10.3200/JOER.100.6.361-368

Dufresne, A., and Kobasigawa, A. (1989). Children's spontaneous allocation of study time: Differential and sufficient aspects. J. Exper. Child Psychol. 42, 274–296. doi: 10.1016/0022-0965(89)90033-7

Dumont, H., Trautwein, U., Lüdtke, O., Neumann, M., Niggli, A., and Schnyder, I. (2012). Does parental homework involvement mediate the relationship between family background and educational outcomes. Contemp. Educ. Psychol. 37, 55–69. doi: 10.1016/j.cedpsych.2011.09.004

Dumont, H., Trautwein, U., Nagy, G., and Nagengast, B. (2014). Quality of parental home work involvement: Predictors and reciprocal relations with academic functioning in the reading domain. J. Educ. Psychol. 106, 144–161. doi: 10.1037/a0034100

Egger, M., Smith, G. D., Schneider, M., and Minder, C. (1997). Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test. BMJ 315, 629–634. doi: 10.1136/bmj.315.7109.629

Englund, M. M., Luckner, A. E., Whaley, G. J. L., and Egeland, B. (2004). Children's achievement in early elementary school: longitudinal effects of parental involvement, expectations, and quality of assistance. J. Educ. Psychol. 96, 723–730. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.96.4.723

Erdem, C., and Kaya, M. (2020). A meta-analysis of the effect of parental involvement on students' academic achievement. J. Learn. Dev. 7, 367–383. doi: 10.56059/jl4d.v7i3.417

Fan, H., Xu, J., Cai, Z., He, J., and Fan, X. (2017). Homework and students' achievement in math and science: A 30–year meta-analysis, 1986–2015. Educ. Res. Rev. 20, 35–54. doi: 10.1016/j.edurev.2016.11.003

Fan, X., and Chen, M. (2001). Parental involvement and students' academic achievement: A meta-analysis. Educ. Psychol. Rev. 13, 1–22. doi: 10.1023/A:1009048817385

Fiskerstrand, A. (2022). Literature review–Parent involvement and mathematic outcome. Educ. Res. Rev. 37, 1–16. doi: 10.1016/j.edurev.2022.100458

Gonida, E. N., and Cortina, K. S. (2014). Parental involvement in homework: relations with parent and student achievement–related motivational beliefs and achievement. Br. J. Educ. Psychol. 84, 376–396. doi: 10.1111/bjep.12039

Gorgoz, S., and Tican, C. (2020). Investigation of middle school students' self–regulation skills and vocabulary learning strategies in foreign language. Int. J. Educ. Methodol. 6, 25–42. doi: 10.12973/ijem.6.1.25

Grolnick, W. S., and Pomerantz, E. M. (2009). Issues and challenges in studying parental control: toward a new conceptualization. Child Dev. Persp. 3, 165–170. doi: 10.1111/j.1750-8606.2009.00099.x

Grolnick, W. S., Raftery-Helmer, J. N., Marbell, K. N., Flamm, E. S., Cardemil, E. V., and Sanchez, M. (2014). Parental provision of structure: Implementation and correlates and outcomes in three domains. Merrill–Palmer Quart. 60, 355–384. doi: 10.13110/merrpalmquar1982.60.3.0355

Grolnick, W. S., and Ryan, R. M. (1989). Parent styles associated with children's self–regulation and competence in school. J. Educ. Psychol. 81, 143–154. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.81.2.143

Grolnick, W. S., Ryan, R. M., and Deci, E. L. (1991). Inner resources for school achievement: Motivational mediators of children's perceptions of their parents. J. Educ. Psychol. 83, 508–517. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.83.4.508

Grolnick, W. S., and Slowiaczek, M. L. (1994). Parents' involvement in children's schooling: A multidimensional conceptualization and motivational model. Child Dev. 65, 237–252. doi: 10.2307/1131378

Hembree, R. (1990). The nature, efects, and relief of mathematics anxiety. J. Res. Mathem. Educ. 21, 33–46. doi: 10.2307/749455

Higgins, J. P., and Thompson, S. G. (2002). Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta–analysis. Stat. Med. 21, 1539–1558. doi: 10.1002/sim.1186

Hill, N. E., and Tyson, D. F. (2009). Parental involvement in middle school: a meta–analytic assessment of the strategies that promote achievement. Dev. Psychol. 45, 740–763. doi: 10.1037/a0015362

Hofstede, G. (1991). Cultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind. London, England: McGraw-Hill.

Hoover-Dempsey, K. V., Battiano, A. C., Walker, J. M. T., Reed, R. P., DeJong, J. M., and Jones, K. P. (2001). Parental involvement in homework. Educ. Psychol. 36, 195–209. doi: 10.1207/S15326985EP3603_5

Hoover-Dempsey, K. V., Walker, J. M. T., Sandler, H. M., Whetsel, D., Green, C. L., Wilkins, A. S., et al. (2005). Why do parents become involved? Research findings and implications. Element. School J. 106, 105–130. doi: 10.1086/499194

Jeynes, W. H. (2005). A meta-analysis of the relation of parental involvement to urban elementary school student academic achievement. Urban Educ. 40, 237–269. doi: 10.1177/0042085905274540

Jeynes, W. H. (2007). The relationship between parental involvement and urban secondary school student academic achievement: A meta–analysis. Urban Educ. 42, 82–110. doi: 10.1177/0042085906293818

Karbach, J., Gottschling, J., Spengler, M., Hegewald, K., and Spinath, F. M. (2013). Parental involvement and general cognitive ability as predictors of domain–specific academic achievement in early adolescence. Learn. Instr. 23, 43–51. doi: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2012.09.004

Kikas, E., Mädamürk, K., and Šilinskas, G. (2022). Parental homework–help profiles throughout grades 6–9: Relations to motivation and mathematics skills. Front. Educ. 7, 914992. doi: 10.3389/feduc.2022.914992

Kitsantas, A., Cheema, J. R., and Ware, H. W. (2011). Mathematics achievement: The role of homework and self–efficacy beliefs. J. Adv. Acad. 22, 310–339. doi: 10.1177/1932202X1102200206

Lerner, R. E., Grolnick, W. S., Caruso, A., and Levitt, M. R. (2021). Parental involvement and children's academics: The roles of autonomy support and parents' motivation for Involvement. Contemp. Educ. Psychol. 68:102039. doi: 10.1016/j.cedpsych.2021.102039

Levpušček, M. P., and Zupančič, M. (2009). Math achievement in early adolescence: The role of parental involvement, teachers' behavior, and students' motivational beliefs about math. J. Early Adolesc. 29, 541–570. doi: 10.1177/0272431608324189

Lipsey, M. W., and Wilson, D. B. (2001). Practical Meta-Analysis. London: Sage Publication.

Ma, X., Shen, J., Krenn, H. Y., Hu, S., and Yuan, J. (2016). A meta–analysis of the relationship between learning outcomes and parental involvement during early childhood education and early elementary education. Educ. Psychol. Rev. 28, 771–801. doi: 10.1007/s10648-015-9351-1

Maloney, E. A., Ramirez, G., Gunderson, E. A., Levine, S. C., and Beilock, S. L. (2015). Intergenerational effects of parents' math anxiety on children's math achievement and anxiety. Psychol. Sci. 26, 1480–1488. doi: 10.1177/0956797615592630

Moè, A., Katz, I., and Alesi, M. (2018). Scaffolding for motivation by parents, and child homework motivations and emotions: Effects of a training programme. Br. J. Educ. Psychol. 88, 323–344. doi: 10.1111/bjep.12216

Moorman, E. A., and Pomerantz, E. M. (2008). The role of mothers' control in children's mastery orientation: a time frame analysis. J. Family Psychol. 22, 734–741. doi: 10.1037/0893-3200.22.5.734

Moroni, S., Dumont, H., Trautwein, U., Niggli, A., and Baeriswyl, F. (2015). The need to distinguish between quantity and quality in research on parental involvement: The example of parental help with homework. J. Educ. Res. 108, 417–431. doi: 10.1080/00220671.2014.901283

Munn, Z., Moola, S., Lisy, K., Riitano, D., and Tufanaru, C. (2015). Methodological guidance for systematic reviews of observational epidemiological studies reporting prevalence and cumulative incidence data. Int. J. Evid. Based Healthcare 13,147–153. doi: 10.1097/XEB.0000000000000054

Nelson, C. A., Thomas, K. M., and De Haan, M. (2012). Neuroscience of Cognitive Development: The Role of Experience and the Developing Brain. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley Blackwell.

PubMed Abstract | Google Scholar

Ng, F. F., Kenney–Benson, G. A., and Pomerantz, E. M. (2004). Children's achievement moderates the effects of mothers' use of control and autonomy support. Child Dev. 75, 764–780. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8624.2004.00705.x

Núñez, J. C., Epstein, J. L., Suarez, N., Rosário, P., Vallejo, G., and Valle, A. (2017). How do student prior achievement and homework behaviors relate to perceived parental involvement in homework? Front. Psychol. 8, 1–13. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01217

Núñez, J. C., Suárez, N., Rosário, P., Vallejo, G., Valle, A., and Epstein, J. L. (2015). Relationships between perceived parental involvement in homework, student homework behaviors, and academic achievement: Differences among elementary, junior high, and high school students. Metacogn. Learn. 10, 375–406. doi: 10.1007/s11409-015-9135-5

Nwokedi, P. C. (2020). The relationship between students'math test scores and their reported at-home parental academic support (Publication No. 28086293) Doctoral dissertation, Northcentral University. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global.

O'Sullivan, R. H., Chen, Y., and Fish, M. C. (2014). Parental mathematics homework involvement of low-income families with middle school students. School Commun. J. 24, 165–188. doi: 10.1037/t21929-000

Patall, E. A., Cooper, H., and Robinson, J. C. (2008). Parent involvement in homework: A research synthesis. Rev. Educ. Res. 78, 1039–1101. doi: 10.3102/0034654308325185

Pomerantz, E. M., Grolnick, W. S., and Price, C. E. (2005). “The role of parents in how children approach achievement: A dynamic process perspective,” in Handbook of Competence and Motivation (Guilford Publications) 229–278.

Pomerantz, E. M., Moorman, E. A., and Litwack, S. D. (2007). The how, whom, and why of parents' involvement in children's academic lives: More is not always better. Rev. Educ. Res. 77, 373–410. doi: 10.3102/003465430305567

Pomerantz, E. M., Qin, L. L., Wang, Q., and Chen, H. (2011). Changes in early adolescents' sense of responsibility to their parents in the United States and China: Implications for academic functioning. Child Dev. 82, 1136–1151. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8624.2011.01588.x

Purnomo, Y. W., Apriyanti, N., Mubarokah, S. A., and Susilowati Anggraheni, W. A. (2022). The role of parental involvement and mathematics self-concept of elementary school students in online mathematics learning. Educ. Sci. J. 24, 110–125. doi: 10.17853/1994-5639-2022-7-110-125

Retanal, F., Johnston, N. B., Di Lonardo Burr, S. M., Storozuk, A., DiStefano, M., and Maloney, E. A. (2021). Controlling–supportive homework help partially explains the relation between parents' math anxiety and children's math achievement. Educ. Sci. 11, 620. doi: 10.3390/educsci11100620

Rogers, M. A., Theule, J., Ryan, B. A., Adams, G. R., and Keating, L. (2009). Parental involvement and children's school achievement. Canadian J. School Psychol. 24, 34–57. doi: 10.1177/0829573508328445

Ryan, R. M., and Deci, E. L. (2000). Self–determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. Am. Psychol. 55, 68–78. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.68

Ryan, R. M., and Deci, E. L. (2017). Self–Determination Theory: Basic Psychological Needs in Motivation, Development, and Wellness . New York: The Guilford Press. doi: 10.1521/978.14625/28806

Sarmiento, C. P. (2017). Student perceptions of online homework in mathematics of accounting and finance. Adv. Sci. Lett. 23, 1122–1125. doi: 10.1166/asl.2017.7513

Schaefer, E. S. (1965). Children's reports of parental behavior: An inventory. Child Dev. 36, 413–424. doi: 10.2307/1126465

Šilinskas, G., and Kikas, E. (2019a). Math homework: parental help and children's academic outcomes. Contemp. Educ. Psychol. 59, 101784. doi: 10.1016/j.cedpsych.2019.101784

Šilinskas, G., and Kikas, E. (2019b). Parental involvement in math homework: links to children's performance and motivation. Scandin. J. Educ. Res. 63, 17–37. doi: 10.1080/00313831.2017.1324901

Šilinskas, G., Niemi, P., Lerkkanen, M., and Nurmi, J. (2013). Children's poor academic performance evokes parental homework assistance—but does it help? Int. J. Behav. Dev. 37, 44–56. doi: 10.1177/0165025412456146

Skaliotis, E. (2010). Changes in parental involvement in secondary education: an exploration study using the longitudinal study of young people in England. Br. Educ. Res. J. 36, 975–994. doi: 10.1080/01411920903342020

Soenens, B., Vansteenkiste, M., and Luyten, P. (2010). Toward a domain-specific approach to the study of parental psychological control: Distinguishing between dependency–oriented and achievement-oriented psychological control. J. Person. 78, 217–256. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-6494.2009.00614.x

Suárez, N., Regueiro, B., Tuero, E., Cerezo, R., and Rodríguez, C. (2014). La implicación familiar en el ámbito educativo como herramienta para trabajar el éxito académico [family involvement in education as a tool for working towards academic success] Rev. Psicol. Educ. 9, 83–93.

Szczygieł, M. (2020). Gender, general anxiety, math anxiety and math achievement in earl–y school–age children. Educ. Res. 30, 1126–1142.

Thomas, V., Muls, J., De Backer, F., and Lombaerts, K. (2020). Middle school student and parent perceptions of parental involvement: unravelling the associations with school achievement and wellbeing. Educ. Stud. 46, 404–421, doi: 10.1080/03055698.2019.1590182

Trautwein, U. (2007). The homework–achievement relation reconsidered: Differentiating homework time, homework frequency, and homework effort. Learn. Instr. 17, 372–388. doi: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2007.02.009

Trautwein, U., and Lüdtke, O. (2009). Predicting homework motivation and homework effort in six school subjects: The role of person and family characteristics, classroom factors, and school track. Learn. Instr. 19, 243–258. doi: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2008.05.001

Viljaranta, J., Šilinskas, G., Lerkkanen, M., Hirvonen, R., Pakarinen, E., Poikkeus, A., et al. (2018). Maternal homework assistance and children's task-persistent behavior in elementary school. Learn. Instr. 56, 54–63. doi: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2018.04.005

Wachiya Indimuli, M. (2022). Parental correlates of academic achievement among primary school pupils in Nairobi city county, Kenya. Int. J. Innov. Res. Adv. Stud. 9, 1–8.

Wang, H., and Cai, T. (2017). Parental involvement, adolescents' self–determined learning and academic achievement in Urban China. Int. J. Psychol. 52, 58–66. doi: 10.1002/ijop.12188

Wilder, S. (2014). Effects of parental involvement on academic achievement: A meta-synthesis. Educ. Rev. 66, 377–397. doi: 10.1080/00131911.2013.780009

Wu, J., Barger, M. M., Oh, D. D., and Pomerantz, E. M. (2022). Parents' daily involvement in children's math homework and activities during early elementary school. Child Dev. 93, 1347–1364. doi: 10.1111/cdev.13774

Xu, J., and Corno, L. (2022). Extending a model of homework: a multilevel analysis with Chinese middle school students. Metacogn. Lear. 17, 1–33. doi: 10.1007/s11409-022-09296-w

Xu, J., Du, J., Wu, S., Ripple, H., and Cosgriff, A. (2018). Reciprocal effects among parental homework support, effort, and achievement? An empirical investigation. Front. Psychol. 9, 1–11. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02334

Zimmerman, B. J., and Pons, M. N. (1990). Student differences in self–regulated learning: Relating grade, sex and giftedness to self–efficacy and strategy use. J. Educ. Psychol. 82, 51–59. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.82.1.51

Keywords: supportive parental homework involvement, intrusive parental homework involvement, students, mathematics achievement, meta-analysis

Citation: Jiang Q, Shi L, Zheng D and Mao W (2023) Parental homework involvement and students' mathematics achievement: a meta-analysis. Front. Psychol. 14:1218534. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1218534

Received: 07 May 2023; Accepted: 26 June 2023; Published: 13 July 2023.

Reviewed by:

Copyright © 2023 Jiang, Shi, Zheng and Mao. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY) . The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

*Correspondence: Donghui Zheng, ndzdh@163.com

Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

• Our Mission

4 Ways to Support Partnerships With Families

An expert in special education shares strategies for building strong and enduring relationships with students’ families that every teacher can use.

The ways in which U.S. education agencies and personnel work and engage with families are constantly evolving, in both concept and practice. Increasingly, those relationships are shifting to a partnership model, in which families and professionals collaborate throughout the course of a child’s education.

There has always been an expectation that family engagement in education is primarily coordinated by the educational leadership in state agencies, districts, schools, and classrooms, causing teachers and administrators at every level to ask, “How do we do this?” In 2011, I worked as the primary writer for WestEd, a research, development, and service agency, to assist the California Department of Education on the initial publication of the Family Engagement Framework: A Tool for California School Districts. The general education community was moving from “parental involvement,” which at the time seemed to describe and promote primarily one-way communication (from educators to families) and supportive volunteering (parents in classrooms and on school sites), to terms and practices intended to broaden interactions to include intentional information exchange, purposeful interaction, and meaningful participation—remember Beyond the Bake Sale: The Essential Guide to Family-School Partnerships ? 

For those of us associated with special education, this approach was and is nothing new. So, the answer to “How do we do this?” is one we can help provide. After all, the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) requires parental involvement at every level of implementation—from consent and participation in planning for an individual child through parent representation on local- and state-level advisory groups that provide input to lead agencies on fiscal and policy matters and system improvement. IDEA even requires and provides funding for parent centers, operated by parent organizations with a majority of board members who are parents of children with disabilities, to provide training and information to families and assist with dispute resolution. 

Navigating the complex landscape of family–professional partnerships in education is crucial. As the parent of an individual with disabilities and as a special education professional, I recommend four actions to support parents and professionals in working together effectively. 

What Educators and Parents Can Do

1. Intentionally prepare for partnership. First, know that no one has been intentionally and adequately prepared for these kinds of partnerships. Teacher, service provider, and administrator preparation programs may provide information about involvement requirements and resources under initiatives like the IDEA and Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA), but rarely will a pre-service program offer practice or experience in family–professional engagement. Likewise, most families don’t anticipate or have the knowledge and skills needed to engage in the active educational activities of their children, unless they are themselves educators.

New partners, both parents and educators, can access these useful resources for tools and inspiration:

• “Leading by Convening” provides both a framework for state, district, and school leaders engaging stakeholders, broadly, and training modules and tools for implementing engagement activities. This resource is available on the resource library of the National Center for Systemic Improvement (NCSI) site. (Enter “leading” in the keyword search bar.)
• Serving on Groups offers a guidebook and training modules for parents who want to engage.

2. Embrace mutual competence. Essentially, this means that the knowledge and experience of all partners are recognized and valued equally. While professionals hold subject matter expertise and mastery of educational systems and processes, families bring child- and community-specific expertise and have experienced the real-life impacts of educational systems and processes. 

The mutual competence ideal is illustrated nicely in the below two resources developed by the NCSI, both of which acknowledge the wisdom and values of both families and professionals when weighing research and other evidence related to important decisions.

• “ Three Circles of Evidence-Based Decision Making in Early Childhood ” presents information using terminology that is more familiar to pre-K and early elementary school parents and professionals. 
• “Three Circles of Evidence-Based Decision Making to Support Students with Disabilities” presents information using terminology that is more familiar to parents of and professionals working with K–12 students. This is available in the NCSI resource library (linked in the “Leading by Convening” section above this section) by entering “3 circles” into the keyword search bar.

3. Assume good intention. Adapting this concept from a much-respected parent-professional mentor, Victor Bernstein , I urge potential partners to recognize the following:

• Both families and professionals want what they believe is best for the children.
• Both families and professionals can see what works and what doesn’t... usually on their own... but almost always with support.
• Given the opportunity to really see (i.e., to realize–“real eyes”), both families and professionals will choose what is best.

4. Mindfully transition partnership and responsibility to the next generation. The family will continue to be a significant influence for years to come, because our children matter to us . Although family engagement in education tends to trend downward in middle school and high school years, the family–professional partnership at this stage may serve as a launching point for middle-school- and high school-aged youth to navigate the later years of their educational careers independently. 

When youth observe family members, teachers, and administrators engaged in respectful, supportive partnerships on their behalf, they begin to learn the communication and collaboration skills for building trust, promoting understanding, and working together to identify and address challenges. These groups can mindfully act in the following ways.

• Education professionals can recognize and respect the family’s role and struggles and support them as they cede responsibility to their maturing child.
• Families can support mutual understanding and shared decision-making between education professionals and youth, filling in information gaps that naturally exist for each. Professionals are getting to know evolving youth; youth are increasing their participation in unfamiliar systems and processes. 
• Families and professionals together can support young adults to navigate their emerging independence by staying engaged, maintaining communication, and serving as neutral but supportive guides.

Raising and educating children and youth are challenging and rewarding undertakings. Families and professionals both experience hurdles and contribute significantly. Finding and collaborating with partners along the way is essential, as children thrive when the adults in their lives can genuinely work together.

What are the strategies you've found effective in building strong family-professional partnerships? Share your experiences in the comments.