By Camille Wilson Cooper And Christina A. Christie Evaluating Parent Empowerment: A Look at the Potential of Social Justice Evaluation in Education By Camille Wilson Cooper And Christina A. Christie Presented By Dorothy Poirier

District Parent Training Program Evaluation of a Parent Education Program Southern California School District UCLA Outreach Evaluation Team Qualitative Case Study Responsive Evaluation Approach Social Justice Evaluation Model

California Based Laws Resolution SP-1 Proposition 209 Eliminated race, gender, and ethnicity in student admissions Proposition 209 Abolished state affirmative action policy

The Parker Unified School District Low-income, working class families 80% Latino 20% African American Vietnamese, Filipino, and White Low standardized test scores Title I school district

Overview of the DPTP 13 week program, 2 days a week Parker teachers/parent graduates teach classes Free meals and child care $150 stipend upon completion Conferences/workshops UCLA’s DPTP director Parent director/parent site coordinator Group action plans

Participants in the DPTP Six schools in Parker District 236 program participants 92% Latina mothers Mexico and Central America Spanish as first language Low % high school completion 12 Latino fathers 6 African American mothers

Evaluation Design and Methods Fall 2000-Winter 2001 Qualitative Evaluation Approach Purposive sampling techniques Designed interview and observation protocols 21 interviews with stakeholders 10 % parents interviewed Field observations Data was analyzed and coded

Evaluation Findings Classroom instruction Advocacy Educational events Math, social studies, English Advocacy Action plans Educational events Coordinate/facilitate programs Expanding the curriculum Safe and supportive environment

One parent’s view: The program offers parents “a great opportunity to develop leadership” and also learn about “parents’ rights, students’ rights, how to help with the school, [and] how to grow up learning district and state guidelines.”

Parent Participation and Leadership Developing action plans Seven groups of five parents Groups proposed concerns Addressing the issues Increased involvement and power Leadership opportunities

Program Effectiveness Provided new sources of knowledge Increased self-confidence Safe and supportive environment Produced volunteers

Parent Power vs. Parent Involvement Varied notions of parent empowerment: A parent director explained, “I think it really empowers [parents] to feel better about themselves. I think each day they’re opening up more and more and asking more questions, and getting help with the math and reading. They really want to learn and they really want to help.” Parker’s superintendent admitted that district officials and some school principals felt threatened by the success of the DPTP. He suggested that UCLA offer more information to Parker’s employees to help “remove threats of [parents] taking over the district.”

Evaluation Conclusions The program enriched parents and contributed to school improvement. The DPTP’s goals were not clearly defined, nor were program’s methods of achieving it’s goals. Many mothers were re-evaluating conventional gender roles. Since the evaluation, the parents are more active and vocal.

There was a reluctance by district officials to fully support and increase the program’s funding. The district and school administrators’ commitment may be influenced by their perception that the DPTP parents are a threat. The collaboration between the university and the district is an important part of the DPTP.

Implications for Educators and Evaluators What can educators and district administrators do to empower parents? What is important for them to consider when establishing partnerships with parents? Why was the social justice evaluation technique more in line with the goals of the District Parent Training Program?