Psychology in the Schools, Vol.

50(6), 2013 
C 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
View this article online at wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/pits DOI: 10.1002/pits.21698

MULTIPLE DIMENSIONS OF PARENTAL INVOLVEMENT AND ITS LINKS TO YOUNG

ADOLESCENT SELF-EVALUATION AND ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT
NURIT KAPLAN TOREN
University of Haifa

Drawing on early research on parental involvement and its effect on children’s school functioning,
it was hypothesized in this study that parents’ educational involvement is positively related to two
indicators of school functioning: academic self-competence and academic achievement. However,
in light of research on the distinction between parents’ home- and school-based educational
involvement in terms of their different provisions of parents’ school-related support, this study
examined the relationship between each of these two bases and two adolescent outcomes: self-
evaluation (consisting of global self-worth and scholastic self-evaluation) and school-reported
academic achievement. Analyses using structural equation modeling (SEM) on data collected from
397 (187 girls) Israeli seventh-graders (first year of junior high school) confirm the distinction
between home- and school-based parental involvement and their different links to adolescent
outcomes. SEM analyses carried out separately for girls and boys showed positive links between
home-based parental involvement for girls and parent’s volunteering for boys and global self-worth.
This analysis also showed direct negative links between school-based parental involvement and
academic achievement for boys. The discussion addresses these differences and their implication
for the school experiences of young adolescents in the wake of the transition to junior high school.
C 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Parents’ educational involvement is a term used to describe a wide range of parental practices,
ranging from educational beliefs and academic achievement expectations to the multiple behav-
iors parents employ to advance children’s academic achievement and other educational outcomes
(Seginer, 2006). Research has focused on many components of parental involvement: attitudes to-
ward and implementation of parental involvement (Epstein, 1995, 2001); parents’ involvement in
homework (Hoover-Dempsey et al., 2001); parents’ beliefs about education and academic expec-
tations for children (Bleeker & Jacobs, 2004; Neuenschwander, Vida, Garrett, & Eccles, 2007;
Wood, Kertz-Costes, Rowley, & Okeke-Adeyanju, 2010); and discussing school matters with chil-
dren (Friedel, Cortina, Turner, & Midgley, 2010; Paulson, 1994). Parents’ educational involvement
clearly benefits children’s school learning and achievement (e.g., Eccles & Harold, 1993; Epstein,
2005; Fan & Williams, 2010; Fan & Chen, 2001; Henderson & Mapp, 2002).
Of the many ways parents are involved in their children’s schooling, the present study examines
the distinction between parents’ home-based and school-based educational involvement (Seginer,
1983; Trusty, 1999). Drawing on Epstein’s work, home-based involvement strategies pertain to
parents’ engagement in educational activities at home, whereas school-based involvement strate-
gies consist of participation in volunteer activities at school, communication between parents and
teachers, and involvement in school governance (Conners & Epstein, 1995; Epstein, 1987; Epstein
& Sanders, 2002). Following Scott-Jones (1995), Seginer (2006) expanded the definition and de-
scribed home-based parental involvement as pertaining to education-related practices that take place
at home and that apply to three aspects: motivational (e.g., providing the child with support and setting
standards of achievement), cognitive (e.g., training the child to read and to solve logical or math-
ematical problems), and behavioral (e.g., teaching school-related routines, especially those related
to school conduct and schoolwork). School-based parental involvement consists of para-educational
activities such as helping the school in various domains, from academics to extracurricular

Correspondence to: Nurit Kaplan Toren, University of Haifa–Education, 23 Peretz Berenstein St., Haifa 34981,
Israel. E-mail: ntoren@ edu.haifa.ac.il

634
 Multiple Dimensions of Parental Involvement 635

activities and school maintenance tasks, as well as participating in school activities and parent–
teacher conferences.
Parents’ educational involvement has been defined in a number of ways, but has consistently
been shown to positively affect children’s achievement, regardless of its form. For example, chil-
dren’s academic achievement is positively related to parental expectations (Seginer, 1983, 1986) and
whether parents value achievement (Paulson, 1994; Steinberg, Lamborn, Dornbusch, & Darling,
1992). Additionally, research has documented the positive relationship of parents’ involvement in
children’s schoolwork or homework and their involvement in school functions and extracurricular ac-
tivities with achievement outcomes (Paulson, 1994; Steinberg et al., 1992; Stevenson & Baker, 1987).
Much of the research focuses on parents’ involvement in elementary schools. The assumption
is that parents’ involvement decreases as children move to middle and high school, in part because
they believe they can no longer assist their child with more challenging high school subjects and in
part because they (erroneously) doubt the effectiveness of their involvement in adolescence (Hill &
Chao, 2009).
Another barrier is the middle school structure, which does not support parents’ involvement.
Specifically, the size and complex structure of middle schools make it difficult for parents to know
whom to contact to obtain information about their adolescents’ progress (Sanders & Epstein, 2000).
When they learn their way through the middle school system, parents meet teachers who instruct a
large number of students and thus interact less frequently with individual students (Eccles & Harold,
1996).
However, developmental and educational research attests to the importance of parents’ educa-
tional involvement. Specifically, in adolescence, parents continue to be a major source of support for
children (Collins & Laursen, 2004), and their educational involvement affects children’s academic
motivation and school achievement (Seginer, 2006). Drawing on this research, this study is intended
to further examine the effect of parents’ educational involvement on young adolescents’ academic
achievement by assessing the direct and indirect effect of parental involvement on adolescents’
self-evaluation and academic achievement. Specifically, the study tests a three-step model in which
adolescents’ perception of parental involvement relates to self-evaluation, which in turn relates to
school-reported academic achievement. As Figure 1 shows, parental involvement is conceptualized
as both home- and school-based (Trusty, 1999), and adolescent self-evaluation is conceptualized in
terms of global self-worth and scholastic self-evaluation (Harter, 1999).

Home-Based
Parental Involvement

Scholastic
Competence

School-Based Academic
Parental Involvement Achievement

Global
Self-Worth

Parental
Volunteering

FIGURE 1. The theoretical relation model among parental educational involvement, adolescent self-evaluation, and academic
achievement.

Psychology in the Schools DOI: 10.1002/pits

636 Kaplan Toren

PARENTS ’ E DUCATIONAL I NVOLVEMENT IN I SRAEL

Parental involvement in schools in Israel was officially defined in the National Education Act of
1953, which allowed parents to determine about 25% of school curricula. However, until the 1970s,
schools in Israel were heavily bureaucratic and uniform, functioning with only marginal, insubstantial
parental involvement (Friedman, 1984). Beginning in the 1980s, the government granted schools
greater autonomy in curriculum development and encouraged teachers to initiate new programs, to
become involved in school decision making, and to work together with parents and the community.
For their part, parents also began to demand greater input in their children’s education (Goldring,
1992).
During the 1990s, schools won more freedom in decision making. School governing bodies
consisting of the principal, teachers, parents, and local educational representatives were to be respon-
sible for elaborating and defining their pedagogic goals and for monitoring students’ achievement,
free to decide on how to allocate their budgets. These changes empowered teachers as well as par-
ents (Friedman, 1997). However, despite these changes, parent–school relations remained sporadic,
unsystematic (Elboim-Dror, 1985), and dependent on particular school conditions (Addi-Raccah &
Ainhoren, 2009).
Research on parents’ educational involvement in Israel has focused mainly on the relations
between schools and parents—that is, school-based parental involvement (Fisher & Friedman,
2009; Rosenblatt & Peled, 2003)—and only to a lesser extent on home-based involvement and the
differential effects of the two types of parental involvement on academic achievement (Levin et al.,
1997; Seginer, 1986). In light of the Israeli as well as the U.S. findings, the present study focused
on both parental involvement bases—home and school—and examined the unique contributions of
each to the academic achievement of Israeli (Jewish) early adolescents.

T RANSITION TO J UNIOR H IGH S CHOOL

Transition to junior high school consists of multiple changes that occur simultaneously during
this period (e.g., puberty, school transition, changing relations with parents). These changes have an
impact on students’ motivation and achievement (Wigfield, Eccles, Schiefele, Roeser, & Davis-Kean,
2006), indicated by decline in academic interest and school grades (Dotterer, McHale, & Crouter,
2009). Furthermore, these multiple changes impact adolescents’ perceived and actual socioemotional
functioning and behavior. To illustrate, analyses of transition data for boys and girls reveal decline in
perceived overall support and teacher support, as well as an increase in self-report school problems
(Martinez, Aricak, Graves, Peter-Myszak & Nellis, 2011).
Indeed, the transition to junior high school is commonly regarded as a period of stress and
turmoil for young adolescents, associated with change in anxiety and other psychological problems
(Grill-Taquechel, Norton, & Ollendick, 2010). In light of the finding that students who are most likely
to experience a successful transition to junior high school report having parents and teachers who
are invested in their education (Gutman & Midgley, 2000), this study examined the links between
parental involvement and adolescents’ academic achievement and their implications for the school
experiences of young adolescents, in the wake of the transition to junior high school.

E ARLY A DOLESCENT D EVELOPMENT AND PARENTS ’ E DUCATIONAL I NVOLVEMENT

According to family system theory, relationships in families change most dramatically when
the circumstances of individual family members or of the family as a whole change. One period in
which family relationships usually change a great deal is adolescence. During this period, families
move from patterns of influence and asymmetrical interaction toward establishing equilibrium and
less hierarchical relationships (Steinberg, 2008). In addition, adolescents’ cognitive development

Psychology in the Schools DOI: 10.1002/pits

 Multiple Dimensions of Parental Involvement 637

increases their sense of self-efficacy as well as their ability to make decisions and to understand how
academic achievement and extracurricular activities help them achieve their goals and aspirations;
as a result, they need less direct parental involvement (Hill & Tyson, 2009).
That is, in adolescence, direct involvement strategies, such as school-based involvement and
direct homework assistance, might be less needed and thus are less effective (Seginer, 2006).
However, as mentioned earlier, although adolescents gain autonomy (Eccles & Harold, 1996; Spera,
2005) and become less willing to have their parents visit school (Stevenson & Baker, 1987), parents’
educational involvement remains an important predictor of school outcomes throughout adolescence.
Overall, parental involvement during middle school is positively related to academic achievement.
However, parents implement educational involvement strategies. In a recent meta-analysis, Hill
and Tyson (2009) identified parental involvement strategies that have the strongest positive relation
with the academic achievement of middle school students. Such parental involvement creates an
understanding about the purposes, goals, and meaning of academic achievement and provides
strategies that students can effectively use.
Nonetheless, Hill et al. (2004) showed that although parental involvement is associated with
adolescents’ academic achievement and future aspirations across the middle and high school years,
parents’ strategies change. Specifically, parents shift to creating alternative communication channels.
Conversely, low monitoring is correlated with risk behaviors, delinquency, substance use, teenage
pregnancy (Cottrell et al., 2007; Fletcher, Steinberg, & Sellers, 1999), and lower grades (Crouter,
Helms-Erikson, Updegraff, & McHale 1999). In this study, parent–adolescent communication and
monitoring indicate home-based involvement, and school contact (through interaction with the
school) indicates school-based involvement.

A DOLESCENTS ’ S ELF -E VALUATION AND PARENTAL I NVOLVEMENT

Self-evaluation is the perception of one’s own worth (Harter, 1999). It serves as an indicator of
psychological well-being (Shek, 1998) and of the success with which one handles the developmental
period of adolescence (Barber, Chadwick, & Oerter, 1992). The challenges of the biological, cogni-
tive, and social changes that characterize early adolescence in particular may introduce changes in
the levels and configurations of adolescents’ resources, self-esteem, and social support, which carry
significant implications for their coping processes (Lerner et al., 1996).
The self is viewed as an internal asset and appears to be valuable in helping young adolescents
avoid emotional difficulties (Harter, 1999), in reducing the likelihood of engagement in maladaptive
behaviors (Kaplan, 1996), and consequently in protecting early adolescents from an excessive
independence. Thus, various sources of social support, and parents in particular, become less directly
influential and more likely to shape adolescents’ adjustment outcomes indirectly (DuBois et al.,
2002) via the self. Recent findings reiterated the positive effect that parenting by both mothers and
fathers—as indicated by involvement, quality relationships, and availability—has on adolescents’
self-esteem (Bulanda & Majumdar, 2009).

S ELF -E VALUATION AND ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT

As children grow up, it becomes increasingly important to distinguish self-evaluation that
represents global characteristics of the individual from that which reflects the individual’s sense of
adequacy across particular domains, such as cognitive, social, or physical competence (Bouchey &
Harter, 2005; Harter, 1999). Hence, recent research on educational issues has examined two self-
evaluation domains: global worth, namely, overall general satisfaction with oneself as a person, and
academic competence, which focuses on the self as a student at school.
Studies have reported a correlation between self-evaluation and academic achievement
(Bouchey & Harter, 2005; Eccles, Wigfield, & Schiefeler, 1998; Fuligni, 1997). However, the

Psychology in the Schools DOI: 10.1002/pits

638 Kaplan Toren

direction of the relation varies. Significant correlations were found from academic achievement to
academic self-concept to overall self-esteem (Bachman & O’Malley, 1986), but also from general
self-esteem or academic self-concept to academic achievement (Marsh, 1989; Skaalvik & Hagtvet,
1990).

G ENDER D IFFERENCES
Adolescents face a number of unique developmental challenges. Perry and Pauletti (2011)
suggest that gender affects how youth manage all of these challenges. Wigfield et al. (2006) gave a
psychological explanation for these gender-specific behaviors. They argue that success expectations
depend on the confidence individuals have in their intellectual abilities and the difficulty of the
course or activity.
Research has shown that in early adolescence, girls experience lower self-esteem and poorer
body image (Perry & Pauletti, 2011), greater self-consciousness, and a more fragile self-image than
do boys. Consequently, girls tend to be more insecure (Steinberg, 2008); more concerned about
physical attractiveness, dating, and peer acceptance; and altogether at greater risk for low self-worth
(Harter, 1999). Moreover, gifted and high-achieving girls are more likely to underestimate both their
ability and their class standing (Frome & Eccles, 1998). However, boys hold higher competence
beliefs for math and sports than do girls (Wigfield et al., 2006).
Focusing on interpersonal relationships, Flook’s (2011) findings show that girls report more
interpersonal stressors and more positive daily interpersonal events than do boys. Furthermore,
girls showed greater reactivity to daily interpersonal stressors, as well as more stress predicted by
daily negative emotions, compared with boys. In sum, adolescent boys and girls differ in how they
conceive of themselves and their ability. Therefore, in this study, analyses were run separately for
boys and girls.
To conclude, given the multidimensionality of parental involvement, this study was designed
to examine three hypotheses. Hypothesis 1 posits that the two bases of parental involvement—
home and school—affect self-evaluation and academic achievement in different ways, so that the
effect of home-based involvement on two aspects of self-evaluation is positive and the effect of
school-based involvement is negative. Hypothesis 2 proposes that both home- and school-based
parental involvement are linked to academic achievement indirectly via self-evaluation, indicated by
scholastic competence and global self-worth (Figure 1). Hypothesis 3 relates to adolescents’ gender
differences and postulates that compared with boys, girls’ self-evaluation will be lower. Moreover,
in terms of traditional gender roles in the family, the relationship between parents’ educational
involvement and self-evaluation will be stronger for girls than for boys.

M ETHOD
Participants
The Israeli school system spans 12 years: 6 years of elementary school (first grade to sixth
grade for children 6 to 12 years old), 3 years of junior high school (seventh grade to ninth grade, for
children 13 to 15 years old), and 3 years of senior high school (10th grade to 12th grade). Participants
were 397 Jewish seventh-graders (210 boys, 187 girls) attending a junior high school that serves an
urban middle-class residential area. All participants came from relatively small (mean number of
children = 2.9, SD = .09), mainly two-parent (79%), educated families (65% of mothers and fathers
had more than a high school education). Of these, 78% were Israeli-born. The others were born in
European, North American, or South American countries (19%), or in Asian or African countries
(3%). According to the Israel Center Bureau of Statistics (2010), Jewish families have 2.2 children
on average, and 63% of Jewish children grow up in two-parent families. Seventy-one percent of the

Psychology in the Schools DOI: 10.1002/pits

 Multiple Dimensions of Parental Involvement 639

Jewish population is Israeli-born, 19.5% were born in Europe or North America, and 9.2% were
born in Asian or African countries.
Instruments
Data were collected by self-report questionnaires, to which all participants responded toward
the middle of the first school semester (December to January of that year) and end-of-year (the
month of June) academic achievement records reported by the school. Information about the number
of items, sample items, and alpha reliability coefficients for each scale are presented in Table 1.
Parental Involvement (Seginer, 2002). This questionnaire consists of 28 Likert-type items
scored from 1 (low) to 5 (high). It describes parent–adolescent relationships as perceived by ado-
lescents (Laursen & Collins, 2009) and includes statements pertaining to multiple behaviors that
parents employ to advance children’s academic achievement.
The Perceived Competence Scale for Children (Harter, 1982). Of the many scales included
in Harter’s questionnaires, only two were used in this study: global self-worth and scholastic com-
petence. Both scales consist of structured alternative-choice items. Thus, in a sample question, the
respondent is first asked to read each of two statements (“Some kids forget what they learn” and
“Some other kids can remember easily everything they learn”) and then asked to indicate whether
that statement is “Really true for me” or just “Sort of true for me.” Items are scored on a 4-point
scale, where 1 equals low perceived competence and a 4 equals high perceived competence.
The Perceived Competence Scale for Children scale consists of 12 items (six for global self-
worth and six for scholastic competence). In the structural equation modeling (SEM) procedure, the
parameterization of each of these variables in the model consists of the mean of the six items.
Academic Achievement. School grades for the Hebrew language, literature, English, and math
were reported by the school at the end of the school year.
Procedure
Data collection was conducted toward the middle of the first semester (December to January
of that school year). Data were collected during one class session, following an explanation of the
aim of the study and the voluntary nature of participation. All students who attended school on the
days of data collection agreed to participate. The District Director of the Ministry of Education, as
required, approved the study.

R ESULTS
Preliminary Analyses
Confirmatory factor analysis carried out on all parental-involvement items resulted in 15 mea-
sured variables subsumed under three correlated factors that corresponded to home- and school-
based parental involvement (Table 1). The home-based factor pertains to parents’ daily educational-
involvement activities at home (e.g., monitoring, cognitive help, and emotional support). The original
school-based factor yielded two factors: (a) communication with the school, particularly when a
problem involving the child arises; and (b) volunteering to assist with the school’s educational
activities. These results supported the distinction between the two bases of parental involvement
(Seginer, 2006; Trusty, 1999).
The fit of the confirmatory factor analysis model was tested with SEM. This model showed
a good fit; for the entire group, the comparative fit index (CFI) was .91, and the root mean square
error of approximation (RMSEA) was .04. For girls and boys separately, CFI = .94 and RMSEA =
.04 for boys, and CFI = .92 and RMSEA = .05 for girls. Moreover, the factor analysis model

Psychology in the Schools DOI: 10.1002/pits

640 Kaplan Toren

Table 1
Sample Items and Cronbach’s Alpha Reliabilities for Measures Employed in This Study

Alpha Reliabilities

Sample Item No. of Item Boys Girls Total

Home-Based Parental Involvement 8. My parents are interested in 6 .62 .67 .70

School-Based Parental Involvement
Parental School Volunteering
General Self-Evaluation
School Self-Evaluation
Academic Achievement
everything happening at school
15. When I submit a paper I can trust
my parents’ help
16. When I am working on a paper I
can trust my parents to provide
me materials/information
18. When I get a poor grade my
parents encourage me to try again
20. My parents usually know all my
grades
25. When I get a poor grade my
parents help me
4. My parents contact my teachers 6 .74 .68 .71
frequently
5. My parent are acquainted with my
teachers
6. My parents are acquainted with all
my teachers
7. When a problem arises in class,
my parents talk with my teacher
9. When I come back from school
unhappy my parents immediately
contact the school
10. When a teacher grades me
unfairly my parents immediately
contact school
26. My parents volunteer at school 3 .65 .69 .67
27. My parents join our school’s field
trips
28. My parents are members of PTA
Some kids are usually satisfied with 6 .71 .81 .73
themselves
Some kids forget what they learn 6 .69 .78 .78
School grades for Hebrew language, 4
English, and Math were reported
by the school at the end of the year

Note. N = 397(child); academic achievement was measured using grades from 1 to 100.

comparison test showed no estimated differences, indicating that the confirmatory factor model was
robust.
The complete model included six variables (which were the latent variables that were included
in the SEM model), with low to moderate correlation coefficients (Table 2). Gender differences—
examined by t test for independent samples, means, and standard deviations for boys and girls—are

Psychology in the Schools DOI: 10.1002/pits

 Multiple Dimensions of Parental Involvement 641

Table 2
Correlation Matrix and Mean Differences Between Boys and Girls (t Test for Independent Samples)

Boys Girls

1 2 3 4 5 6 Mean SD Mean SD t df p

1. Home-Based Parental 1 4.25 .65 4.24 .69 .11 393 .90

Involvement
2. School-Based Parental .38** 1 2.83 .86 2.83 .79 .02 393 .98
Involvement
3. Parental School Volunteering .23** .29** 1 1.81 .85 1.77 .84 .59 394 .55
4. Global Self-Worth .29** .13** .14** 1 3.08 .57 3.02 .64 .96 391 .33
5. Scholastic Competence .19** .02 .13** .50** 1 3.09 .54 2.93 .59 2.78 391 .006
6. Academic Achievement .11* − .11* .01 .05 .42** 1 74.75 13.11 77.33 11.45 − 2.04 385 .04

* p< .05. ** p< .01.

presented in Table 2, which shows that boys scored higher than girls on scholastic competence and
lower than girls on academic achievement. Namely, although subjective, boys evaluate themselves
higher than girls do, and teachers grade girls’ academic achievement higher than they grade that of
boys.

Structural Equation Modeling

Analyses employing the maximum likelihood estimation method were carried out on covari-
ance matrices for girls and boys separately using AMOS 7 SEM. Factor loadings as well as structural
parameters were estimated simultaneously. Each latent variable in the theoretical model was linked
to several (from one to six) indicators. It should be noted that following Harter’s (1982) conceptu-
alization of self-competence for children, the global self-worth and the scholastic competence each
consists of one empirical variable. Hence, the mean of each of these two variables was weighted
by alpha [σ 2 (1-α)] to treat measurement error in each of these variables. The factor loading of the
first indicator of each latent variable was fixed to 1. Lambda coefficients indicated that most of the
latent variables that were linked to multiple manifest variables had sufficiently high loadings for
each of the two estimated models. For purposes of clarity, the standardized factor loadings (lamb-
das) of the measurement model were omitted from the graphic presentations and are presented in
Table 3.
The structural models for boys and girls presented in Figures 2 and 3 show a good fit. For boys,
CFI = .93 and RMSEA = .04, and for girls, CFI = .90 and RMSEA = .06. Compared with the
initial theoretical model (Figure 1), the expected links between home-based parental involvement
and scholastic competence (for boys and girls) and global worth-self (for girls) and between parents’
volunteering and global self-worth (for boys) were reproduced in the expected direction. In addition,
the models indicate a direct negative link between school-based parental involvement and academic
achievement (for boys) and between parents’ volunteering and academic achievement (negative for
girls and positive for boys).
To test gender differences in the structural parameter estimates of the models, a multiple-
group testing procedure was conducted. Results of this analysis are presented in Table 4. The
gender differences were found for two paths: between parents’ volunteering and global self-worth
(significant for boys and nonsignificant for girls) and between parents’ volunteering and academic
achievement (positive for boys and negative for girls).

Psychology in the Schools DOI: 10.1002/pits

642 Kaplan Toren

Table 3
Factor Loadings (Lambdas) for Structural Models

Factor Loading

Manifest Variables Latent Variables Boys Girls

X1 Parental involvement 8 Home-based .51 .64

X2 Parental involvement 15 Home-based .49 .48
X3 Parental involvement 16 Home-based .37 .36
X4 Parental involvement 18 Home-based .56 .61
X5 Parental involvement 20 Home-based .48 .51
X6 Parental involvement 25 Home-based .75 .80
X7 Parental involvement 4 School-based .62 .52
X8 Parental involvement 5 School-based .51 .42
X9 Parental involvement 6 School-based .56 .54
X10 Parental involvement 7 School-based .70 .60
X11 Parental involvement 9 School-based .50 .48
X12 Parental involvement 10 School-based .32 .42
X13 Parental involvement 26 Volunteering .87 .97
X14 Parental involvement 27 Volunteering .47 .44
X15 Parental involvement 28 Volunteering .57 .60
Y3 Hebrew grammar Academic achievement .91 .86
Y4 English Academic achievement .75 .76
Y5 Math Academic achievement .78 .80
Y6 Hebrew literature Academic achievement .82 .76

Table 4
Results for Testing Model Differences Between Boys and Girls

χ2 df χ 2 df p

Unconstraineda 559.69 348

Equal Lambdasb 566.33 363 6.64 15 n.s.
Equal Betasc 568.16 365 1.82 2 n.s.
Equal Gammasd 587.36 374 19.20 9 <.05
Home Parental Involvement in Scholastic Competence 568.48 366 .31 1 n.s.
Home Parental Involvement in Academic Achievement 568.31 366 .14 1 n.s.
Home Parental Involvement in Global Self-Worth 570.05 366 1.89 1 n.s.
School Parental Involvement in Scholastic Competence 568.31 366 .15 1 n.s.
School Parental Involvement in Academic Achievement 569.43 366 1.26 1 n.s.
School Parental Involvement in Global Self-Worth 569.15 366 .98 1 n.s.
Volunteering for Scholastic Competence 568.29 366 .13 1 n.s.
Volunteering for Academic Achievement 575.67 366 7.51 1 <.01
Volunteering for Global Self-Worth 575.21 366 7.05 1 <.01

a χ 2 consists of the sum of χ 2 values for boys’ and girls’ models.

b Lambda parameters indicate links between manifest and latent variables.
c Beta parameters indicate links between endogenous variables.
d Gamma parameters indicate links between exogenous and endogenous variables.

Psychology in the Schools DOI: 10.1002/pits

 Multiple Dimensions of Parental Involvement 643

X1

X2

X3

X4

X5 Y1
Home-Based
Parental Involvement .15
.39***
X6

-.11 Scholastic Y3
.54***
X7 Competence
.14 .86***
Y4
School-Based .29** -.07 Academic
X8 Parental Involvement Achievement
.32** Y5
-.42**
X9 .40** Global
.22 Self-Worth
Y6
X10 Parental -.24**
-.13
Volunteering
X11 Y2

X12

X13

X14

X15

FIGURE 2. Structural equation model: girls, n = 187; CFI = .91; RMSEA = .057.

D ISCUSSION
Research on parents’ educational involvement clearly conveys its benefits for children’s school
learning and achievement (Seginer, 2006). The initial goal of this study was to examine the interper-
sonal process linking parents’ involvement and adolescent academic achievement. However, in light
of the fact that as adolescents grow up, the effect of parents—as well as the effect of others in the
school environment—is not direct but is instead processed and interpreted by the self (Harter, 1999;
Higgins, 1991), the model consists of three steps: parents’ educational involvement as perceived by
adolescents, adolescents’ self-evaluation, and academic achievement (as reported by the school).
Overall, the results of this study show that although not all predicted links are statistically
significant, when they are, home-based parental involvement has a positive effect on both girls and
boys, and parental volunteering (initially conceptualized as one indicator of school-based involve-
ment) has a positive effect on global self-worth and academic achievement for boys and a negative
effect on academic achievement for girls. However, school-based parental involvement negatively
affects academic achievement (for boys), as a recent study also found (Fan & Williams, 2010). As
predicted, scholastic competence had a positive effect and global self-worth had a negative effect on
academic achievement for both girls and boys.
Thus, despite the findings that during the middle school years, self-esteem and academic
achievement decrease and the barriers associated with maintaining parents’ educational involvement
in adolescence increase (Hill & Chao, 2009), the findings of the present study strongly suggest

Psychology in the Schools DOI: 10.1002/pits

644 Kaplan Toren

X1

X2

X3

X4

X5 Y1
Home-Based
Parental Involvement .24*
X6
.06
-.17 Scholastic Y3
.58*** Competence
X7 .76***
.16
Y4
School-Based -.29* Academic
X8 Parental Involvement
.17* .06 Achievement
Y5
.02 -.50***
X9 .39** Global
Self-Worth
Y6
X10 .22*
Parental .16*
Volunteering
Y2
X11

X12

X13

X14

X15

FIGURE 3. Structural equation model: boys, n=210; CFI=.93; RMSEA=.04.

that parents’ educational involvement plays an important role in adolescents’ self-evaluation and
academic achievement. Moreover, they confirm the proposition that parents remain meaningful
figures for adolescents (Collins & Laursen, 2004). These findings are consistent with other findings
about the links between parental involvement and adolescents’ sense of well-being (Wentzel, 1998)
and academic achievement (Fan & Chen, 2001). Moreover, it is important to note that although
Jewish adolescents in Israel, like adolescents in other Western countries, spend more of their time
with unrelated peers than with family members, their sense of closeness with their parents does
not diminish (Seginer & Shoyer, in press). However, the findings also show that the specific mode
parents use to implement educational involvement matters.

Home-Based and School-Based Educational Involvement of Parents

The empirical support of the model of direct and indirect relations between parental involvement
and academic achievement and the positive and negative effects of home- and school-based parental
involvement emphasizes the multidimensionality of parental involvement and the need to distinguish
between parents’ home-based, school-based, and volunteer educational involvement.
Actually, home- and school-based parental involvement strategies are similar and include mon-
itoring and behavioral and emotional support. Whereas home-based parental involvement pertains to
a supportive relationship at home, school-based parental involvement focuses on a relationship with
the school system that reflects parents’ judgment that they need the school to help their children.

Psychology in the Schools DOI: 10.1002/pits

 Multiple Dimensions of Parental Involvement 645

Hence, these findings, like those of Hill and Tyson (2009), suggest that in middle school, the
parental involvement that has the strongest positive relationship with achievement is one that creates
an understanding of the purposes, goals, and meaning of academic performance; that communicates
expectations about involvement; and that provides strategies that students can use effectively. This
involvement takes place mainly at home.
Although studies indicated that adolescents report parental involvement to be declining (Eccles
& Harold, 1996; Seginer, 2006), home-based parental involvement (and parents’ volunteering for
boys) remains essential. Thus, parents play an important role in their adolescents’ psychological
well-being and academic achievement. These findings further support the understanding that in
middle school, school-based parental involvement changes its nature and, as discussed next, is
gender specific (Seginer, 2006). Adolescents need a different sort of parental involvement, one that
includes discussing learning strategies, linking material discussed at school with students’ interests
and goals, and making preparations and plans for the future (Hill & Tyson, 2009).

Parental Involvement: Gender Differences

As indicated previously, the empirical estimates for girls and boys show both commonalities and
differences. Common to both is the indirect positive effect of home-based involvement on academic
achievement via scholastic competence and the negative effect of global self-worth on academic
achievement. However, parental antecedents of self-worth differ. Whereas for girls global self-worth
is affected by home-based involvement, for boys, self-worth is affected by parental volunteering at
school.
These findings may be explained by gender-related family practices that create greater obstacles
for autonomy-seeking girls. Parents monitor their adolescent daughters more closely, even when they
have more reason to monitor their sons (Svensson, 2003). In fact, parental activities encourage girls
to spend more time at home, as shown by the varieties of parent–adolescent conflict as a function of
gender. Parents have greater expectations for their daughters to perform household duties and to not
be disruptive at home during the early years of adolescence. Whereas being more restrictive of their
daughters’ freedom to go out alone, choose friends, make decisions about money, and decide how to
spend free time led to greater conflict between parents and daughters, the only issue that generated
greater conflict between parents and sons was doing homework and getting good grades in school
(Allison & Schultz, 2004). To conclude, these gender differences indicated that gender-typing occurs
in the school-related socialization of girls and boys.
The negative link found between parental school-based involvement and boys’ academic
achievement was reported earlier in Israel by Seginer (1986). Thus, 25 years later, the findings
of this study point out continuity in the meaning that boys’ parents assign to educational involve-
ment and its negative link to academic achievement. Interpretation of this finding draws on two
considerations. The first relates to the specific nature of parents’ school-based involvement in Israel,
which is reactive and which consists of communication with the school in response to a problem
involving the child. The second consideration relates to the question of why school-based involve-
ment has a direct negative effect on academic achievement for boys only. Interpretation draws on
two findings of earlier research. One is the greater tendency of adolescent boys to seek independent
interpersonal relationships, which often involve risk-taking behavior (Galambos, 2004), and the
other is the negative relation between high-risk behaviors and academic achievement, particularly
for boys (Farmer, Irvin, Sgammato, Dadisman, & Thompson, 2009). Consequently, it is possible
that schools show less tolerance for low academic achievement in boys and therefore call on parents
to bear responsibility for boy’s education and be more involved in school.

Psychology in the Schools DOI: 10.1002/pits

646 Kaplan Toren

The Negative Effect of Self-Evaluation on Academic Achievement

The findings showing a positive effect of scholastic competence on academic achievement
for both girls and boys are plausible and were indicated in earlier studies (Shapka & Keating,
2005). However, the finding showing a negative net effect of global self-worth is counterintuitive.
To explain it, attention should be paid to correlations among the three variables. These show that
for both girls and boys, the correlations between scholastic competence and global self-worth and
between scholastic competence and academic achievement are positive and significant, whereas
the correlation between global self-worth and academic achievement is close to zero. However, as
multivariate analysis is performed and the net effect of each aspect of the self-evaluation is tested, and
the relation between scholastic competence and global self-worth is controlled for, the net negative
effect of global self-worth is revealed.
Drawing on Harter’s (1999) finding that global self-worth is related to several domains (i.e.,
physical appearance, social acceptance, behavioral conduct, athletic competence, and scholastic
competence), and holding the effect of scholastic competence on global self-worth constant, only
the other domains of global self-worth are found to have a potential negative effect on academic
achievement.

Present Limitations and Future Directions

In light of the direct negative link between parents’ school-based involvement and academic
achievement and in the different effects (negative for girls but positive for boys) of parents’ volunteer-
ing on adolescent function in school, future research should expand the conceptualization of parental
involvement to correspond to adolescents’ developmental needs. Drawing on parent–adolescent re-
lationships research (Barber et al., 1992), monitoring and guidance are relevant behaviors. Further-
more, an important task for future research is to examine a possible third variable through which
self-evaluation is related to academic achievement, such as the achievement of goals and intrinsic
motivation. To summarize, by examining the effect of home- and school-based parental involvement
on self-evaluation and academic achievement, reported by adolescents at a critical time of transition
from elementary to middle school, this study highlights the essential role of parental involvement, the
multiple dimensions of parental involvement, and their different effects on adolescents’ evolutional
outcomes.

R EFERENCES
Addi-Raccah, A., & Ainhoren, R. (2009). School governance and teachers’ attitudes to parents’ involvement in schools.
Teaching and Teacher Education, 25, 805 – 813.
Allison, B. N., & Schultz, J. B. (2004). Parent-adolescent conflict in early adolescence. Adolescence, 39, 101 – 119.
Bachman, J., & O’Malley, P. (1986). Self-concepts, self-esteem, and educational experiences: The frog pond revisited (again).
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50, 35 – 46.
Barber, B., Chadwick, B., & Oerter, R. (1992). Parental behaviors and adolescent self-esteem in the United States and
Germany. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 54, 128 – 141.
Bleeker, M. M., & Jacobs, J. E. (2004). Achievement in math and science: Do mothers’ beliefs matter 12 years later? Journal
of Educational Psychology, 96, 97 – 109.
Bouchey, H. A., & Harter, S. (2005). Reflected appraisals, academic self-perceptions, and math/science performance during
early adolescence. Journal of Educational Psychology, 97, 673 – 686.
Bulanda, R. E., & Majumdar, D. (2009). Perceived parental-child relations and adolescent self-esteem. Journal of Child and
Family Studies, 18, 203 – 212.
Collins, W. A., & Laursen, B. (2004). Parent-adolescent relationships and influence. In R. Lerner & L. Steinberg (Eds.),
Handbook of adolescent psychology. New York, NY: Wiley.
Conners, L. J., & Epstein, J. L. (1995). Parents and school partnerships. In M. H. Bornstein (Ed.), Handbook of parenting:
Vol. 4. Social conditions and applied parenting (pp. 437 – 458). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Psychology in the Schools DOI: 10.1002/pits

 Multiple Dimensions of Parental Involvement 647

Cottrell, S. A., Branstetter, S., Cottrell, L., Harris, C. V., Rishel, C., & Stanton, B. F. (2007). Development and validation of
a parental monitoring instrument: Measuring how parents monitor adolescents’ activities and risk. The Family Journal:
Counseling and Therapy for Couples and Families, 15, 328 – 335.
Crouter, A. C., Helms-Erikson, H., Updegraff, K., & McHale, S. M. (1999). Conditions underlying parents’ knowledge about
children’s daily lives in middle childhood: Between- and within-family comparisons. Child Development, 70, 246 – 259.
Dotterer, A. M., McHale, S. M., & Crouter, A. C. (2009). The development and correlates of academic interests from
childhood through adolescence. Journal of Educational Psychology, 101, 509 – 519.
DuBois, L. D., Burk-Braxton, C., Swenson, L. P., Tevendale, H. D., Lockerd, E. M., & Moran, B. L. (2002). Getting by with
a little help from self and others: Self-esteem and social support as resources during early adolescence. Developmental
Psychology, 38, 822 – 839.
Eccles, J. S., & Harold, R. D. (1993). Parent-school involvement during the early adolescent years. Teachers College Record,
94, 560 – 587.
Eccles, J. S., & Harold, R. D. (1996). Family involvement in children’s and adolescent’s schooling. In A. Booth & F. J. Dunn
(Eds.), Family–school links: How do they affect educational outcome? (pp. 3 – 33). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Eccles, J. S., Wigfield A., & Schiefeler, U. (1998). Motivation to succeed. In W. Damon (Series Ed.) & N. Eisenberg (Vol.
Ed.), Handbook of child psychology: Vol. 3. Social, emotional, and personality development (5th ed., pp. 1017 – 1096).
New York, NY: Wiley.
Elboim-Dror, R. (1985). Educational policy-makers in Israel. In W. Ackerman, A. Carom, & D. Zucker (Eds.), Education in
an evolving society (pp. 35 – 116). Jerusalem, Israel: Van Leer Foundation (in Hebrew).
Epstein, J. L. (1987). Toward a theory of family-school connections: Teacher practices and parent involvement. In K.
Hurrelman, F. X. Kaufman, & F. Losel (Eds.), Social intervention: Potential and constraints (pp. 121 – 136). Berlin,
Germany: de Gruyer.
Epstein, J. L. (1995). School/family/community partnerships: Caring for the children we share. Phi Delta Kappan, 76,
701 – 712.
Epstein, J. L. (2001). School and family partnerships: Preparing educators and improving schools. Boulder, CO: Westview.
Epstein, J. L. (2005). School-initiated family and community partnerships. In T. Erb (Ed.), This we believe in action:
Implementing successful middle level school (pp. 77 – 96). Westerville, OH: National Middle School Association.
Epstein, J. L., & Sanders, M. G. (2002). Family, school and community partnerships. In M. H. Bornstein (Ed.), Handbook of
parenting: Vol. 5. Practical issues in parenting (pp. 507 – 437). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Fan, W., & Williams, C. M. (2010). The effects of parental involvement on students’ academic self-efficacy, engagement and
intrinsic motivation. Educational Psychology, 30, 53 – 74.
Fan, X., & Chen, M. (2001). Parental involvement and students’ academic achievement: A meta-analysis. Educational
Psychology Review, 13, 1 – 22.
Farmer, T. W., Irvin, M. J., Sgammato, A. N., Dadisman, K., & Thompson, J. H. (2009). Interpersonal competence config-
urations in rural Appalachian fifth grades: Academic achievement and associated adjustment factors. The Elementary
School Journal, 109, 301 – 321.
Fisher, Y., & Friedman, Y. (2009). Parents and school: Relationships and involvement. Dapim, 47, 11 – 39 (in Hebrew).
Fletcher, A. C., Steinberg, L., & Sellers, E. B. (1999). Adolescents’ well-being as a function of perceived interparental
consistency. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 61, 599 – 610.
Flook, L. (2011). Gender differences in adolescents’ daily interpersonal events and well-being. Chid Development, 82,
454 – 461.
Friedel, J. M., Cortina, K. S., Turner, J. C., & Midgley, C. (2010). Changes in efficacy beliefs in mathematics across the
transition to middle school: Examining the effects of perceived teacher and parent goal emphases. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 102, 102 – 114.
Friedman, A. I. (1997). Teacher work-autonomy: The freedom to make principle pedagogical and administrative decisions.
Megamot, 38, 578 – 598 (in Hebrew).
Friedman, Y. (1984). School, parents and the community in Israel. Jerusalem, Israel: The Szold Institute (in Hebrew).
Frome, P. M., & Eccles, J. S. (1998). Parents’ influence on children’s achievement–related perceptions. Journal of Personality
and School Psychology, 74, 435 – 452.
Fuligni, A. J. (1997). The academic achievement of adolescents from immigrant families: The role of family background,
attitudes, and behavior. Child Development, 68, 351 – 363.
Galambos, N. (2004). Gender and gender role development in adolescence. In R. Lerner & L. Steinberg (Eds.), Handbook of
adolescent psychology. New York, NY: Wiley.
Goldring, E. B. (1992). System-wide diversity in Israel: Principals as transformational and environmental leaders. Journal of
Educational Administration, 30, 63 – 76.
Grill-Taquechel, A. E., Norton, P., & Ollendick, T. H. (2010). A longitudinal examination of factors predicting anxiety during
the transition to middle school. Anxiety, Stress, & Coping, 23, 493 – 513.

Psychology in the Schools DOI: 10.1002/pits

648 Kaplan Toren

Gutman, L. M., & Midgley, C. (2000). The role of protective factors in supporting the academic achievement of poor African
American students during the middle school transition. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 29, 223 – 248.
Harter, S. (1982). The perceived competence scale for children. Child Development, 53, 87 – 97.
Harter, S. (1999). The construction of the self: A developmental perspective. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
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.
Higgins, E. T. (1991). Development of self-regulatory and self-evaluative processes: Costs, benefits and tradeoffs. In M. R.
Gunnar & L. A. Sroufe (Eds.), Self processes and development: The Minnesota Symposia on Child Development (Vol.
23, pp. 125 – 166). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Hill, N. E., Castellino, D. R., Lansford, J. E., Nowlin, P., Dodge, K. A., Bates, J., & Pettit, G. (2004). Parent-school
involvement and school performance: Mediated pathway among socioeconomically comparable African-American and
Euro-American families. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 74 – 83.
Hill, N. E., & Chao, R. K. (2009). Families, schools, and the adolescent: Connecting research, policy, and practice. New
York, NY: Teachers College 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, 740 – 763.
Hoover-Dempsey, K. V., Battiato, A. C., Walker, J. M. T., Reed, R. P., DeJong, J. M., & Jones, K. P. (2001). Parental
involvement in homework. Educational Psychology, 36, 195 – 209.
Israel Center Bureau of Statistics (2010). Retrieved February 25, 2011, from http://www.cbs.gov.il
Kaplan, H. B. (1996). Psychological stress from the perspective of self-theory. In H. B. Kaplan (Ed.), Psychosocial stress:
Perspectives on structure, theory, life-course, and methods (pp. 175 – 224). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Laursen, B., & Collins, A. (2009). Parent-child relationships during adolescence. In R. M. Lerner & L. Steinberg (Eds.),
Handbook of adolescent psychology (3rd ed., Vol. 2, pp. 3 – 42). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
Lerner, R. M., Lerner, J. V., von Eye, A., Ostrom, C. W., Nitz, K., Talwar-Suni, R., & Tubman, J. G. (1996). Continuity
and discontinuity across the transition of early adolescence: A developmental contextual perspective. In J. A. Grager,
J. Brooks-Gunn, & C. Petersen (Eds.), Transition through adolescence: Interpersonal domain and context (pp. 3 – 22).
Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Levin, I., Levy-Shiff, R., Appelbaum-Peled, T., Katz, I., Komar, M., & Meiran, N. (1997). Antecedents and consequences of
maternal involvement in children’s homework: A longitudinal analysis. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology,
18, 207 – 227.
MacCallum, R. C., & Austin, J. T. (2000). Applications of structural equation modeling in psychological research. Annual
Review of Psychology, 51, 201 – 226.
Marsh, H. (1989). Age and sex effect in multiple dimensions of self-concept: Preadolescence to early adulthood. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 81, 417 – 430.
Martinez, R. S., Aricak, O. T., Graves, M. N., Peter-Myszak, J., & Nellis, L. (2011).Changes in perceived social support
and socioemotional adjustment across the elementary to junior high school transition. Journal Youth Adolescence, 40,
519 – 530.
Neuenschwander, M. P., Vida, M., Garrett, J. L., & Eccles, J. S. (2007). Parents’ expectations and students’ achievement in
two western nations. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 31, 594 – 602.
Paulson, S. E. (1994). Relations of parenting style and parental involvement with ninth-grade student’s achievement. Journal
of Early Adolescence, 14, 250 – 267.
Perry, D. G., & Pauletti, R. E. (2011). Gender and adolescent development. Journal of research on adolescence, 21, 61 – 74.
Rosenblatt, Z., & Peled, D. (2003). Ethical climate and parents’ involvement in schools. Studies in Educational Administration
and Organization, 27, 177 – 204 (in Hebrew).
Sanders, M. G., & Epstein, J. L. (2000). Building school-family-community partnerships in middle and high schools. In M.
G. Sanders (Ed.), Schooling students placed at risk: Research, policy and practice in the education of poor and minority
adolescents (pp. 339 – 361). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Scott-Jones, D. (1995). Parent-child interaction and school achievement. In B. A. Ryan, G. R. Adams, T. P. Gulitta, R. P.
Weisenberg, & R. L. Hampton (Eds.), The family–school connection: Theory, research and practice (pp. 75 – 107).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Seginer, R. (1983). Parents’ educational aspirations and children’s academic achievement: A literature review. Merrill-Palmer
Quarterly, 29, 1 – 23.
Seginer, R. (1986). Mothers’ behavior and sons’ performance: An initial test of an academic achievement path model.
Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 32, 153 – 166.
Seginer, R. (2002). The family-school link: Microsystemic and mesosystemic stress and coping. In C. Schwarzer & M.
Zeidner (Eds.), Developmental issues in stress and coping. Aachen, Germany: Shaker.

Psychology in the Schools DOI: 10.1002/pits

 Multiple Dimensions of Parental Involvement 649

Seginer, R. (2006). Parents’ educational involvement: A developmental ecology perceptive. Parenting: Science and Practice,
6, 1 – 48.
Seginer, R., & Shoyer, S. (in press). In J. J. Arnett (Ed.), Adolescent psychology around the world. New York, NY: Psychology
Press.
Shapka, J. D., & Keating, D. P. (2005). Structure and change in self-concept during adolescence. Canadian Journal of
Behavioral Science, 37, 83 – 96.
Shek, D. (1998). A longitudinal study of the relations between parent-adolescent conflict and adolescent psychological
well-being. The Journal of Genetic Psychology, 159, 53 – 67.
Skaalvik, E. M., & Hagtvet, K. A. (1990). Academic achievement and self-concept: An analysis of causal predominance in
a developmental perspective. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58, 292 – 307.
Spera, C. (2005). A review of the relationship among parenting practices, parenting styles, and adolescent school achievement.
Educational Psychology Review, 17, 125 – 146.
Steinberg, L. (2008). Adolescence. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Steinberg, L., Lamborn, S., Dornbusch, S., & Darling, N. (1992). Impact of parenting practices on adolescent achievement:
Authoritative parenting, school involvement, and encouragement to succeed. Child Development, 63, 1266 – 1281.
Stevenson, D. L., & Baker, D. P. (1987). The family-school relation and the child’s school performance. Child Development,
58, 1348 – 1357.
Svensson, R. (2003). Gender differences in adolescent drug use: The impact of parental monitoring and peer deviance. Youth
& Society, 34, 300 – 329.
Trusty, J. (1999). Effects of eighth-grade parental involvement on late adolescents’ educational expectation. Journal of
Research and Development in Education, 32, 224 – 233.
Wentzel, K. R. (1998). Parents’ aspirations for children’s educational attainments: Relations to parental beliefs and social
address variables. Marrill-Palmer Quarterly, 44, 20 – 37.
Wigfield, A., Eccles, J. S., Schiefele, U., Roeser, R. W., & Davis-Kean, P. (2006). Development of achievement motivation.
In W. Damon & R. M. Lerner (Series Eds.) & N. Eisenberg (Vol. Ed.), Handbook of child psychology: Vol. 3. Social,
emotional and personality development (6th ed., pp. 933–1002). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
Wood, D., Kertz-Costes, B., Rowley, S. J., & Okeke-Adeyanju, N. (2010). Mothers’ academic gender stereotypes and
education-related beliefs about sons and daughters in African American families. Journal of Educational Psychology,
102, 521 – 530.

Psychology in the Schools DOI: 10.1002/pits