See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/233335357

Assessing Estonian mothers’ involvement in their children’s education and

trust in teachers

Article in Early Child Development and Care · September 2011

DOI: 10.1080/03004430.2010.513435

CITATIONS READS
16 7,358

3 authors:

Eve Kikas Kätlin Peets

Tallinn University St. John's University
128 PUBLICATIONS 3,215 CITATIONS 40 PUBLICATIONS 1,262 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Airi Niilo
University of Tartu
3 PUBLICATIONS 59 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Eve Kikas on 10 February 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Author Query Sheet CE: DP QA: DK

Manuscript Information
Journal Acronym gECD
Volume (issue) G07935 – Flow
Author name E. Kikas et al.
Manuscript No.
(if applicable) 513435

AUTHOR: The following queries have arisen during the editing of your
manuscript. Please answer the queries by making the necessary corrections
on the CATS online corrections form. Once you have added all your
corrections, please press the SUBMIT button.

QUERY
QUERY DETAILS
NO.
1. Please provide the department name for both the author affiliations.

2. Please check the heading levels throughout the text.

Please provide a short biographical note for each author, for example current academic
3.
position, research interests or books published.
Has the reference [Kikas & Lerkkanen, in press] been published yet? If so, please
4.
provide the details.
Please provide the author name(s) in references [Koolieelse lasteasutuse seadus, 2007;
5.
Põhikooli ja gümnaasiumi riiklik õppekava, 2007].
 CE: DP QA: DK
GECD_A_513435.fm Page 1 Wednesday, August 25, 2010 6:23 PM

Early Child Development and Care

Vol. 00, No. 0, Month 2010, 1–16

Assessing Estonian mothers’ involvement in their children’s

education and trust in teachers
5
Eve Kikasa*, Kätlin Peetsb and Airi Niilob
aUniversity of Tallinn, Tallinn, Estonia; bUniversity of Tartu, Tartu, Estonia
AQ1
(Received 13 June 2010; final version received 2 August 2010)
Taylor and Francis
GECD_A_513435.sgm

eve.kikas@ut.ee
Early
10.1080/03004430.2010.513435
0300-4430
Original
Taylor
02010
00
EveKikas
000002010
Childhood
&Article
Francis
(print)/1476-8275
Development(online)
and Care

10
Questionnaires assessing mothers’ involvement in children’s education and their
trust in teachers were developed for the usage in Estonian kindergartens and
elementary schools. The scales were adapted based on the questionnaires by
Fantuzzo and colleagues (parental involvement) and Adams and Christenson
(trust). Mothers of 454 kindergarten children, 197 first- and second-grade
children, and 94 fourth- to sixth-grade children participated in the study. Four 15
subscales of involvement were differentiated: school-based involvement, home–
school conferencing, home-based academic and home-based general involvement.
Trust was a unitary construct. The psychometric properties of the scales were
good. Differences according to kindergarten and school levels were concordant
with earlier studies – mothers of younger children generally reported higher
involvement and trust than mothers of older children. 20
Keywords: parental involvement; trust; child’s education

AQ2 Introduction
25
The importance of parental involvement in children’s education and sharing responsi-
bilities between home and school in enhancing children’s development and learning
is widely acknowledged (Adams & Christenson, 2000; Waanders, Mendez, & Downer,
2007). Mutual trust has been shown to be one of the most critical factors facilitating
coordination of activities and home–school collaboration (Tschannen-Moran, 2001).
30
As parental involvement activities and levels of trust vary across cultures (see Fantuzzo,
Tighe, & Childs, 2000; Yamamoto, Holloway, & Suzuki, 2006), the development of
culture-specific questionnaires is needed in each country.
Estonia is a small country (with the population of 1.34 million) that has recently
undergone rapid social transformations. Up to 1991, Estonia was part of the Soviet
35
Union where kindergartens and schools were highly authoritarian; families and
kindergartens possessed clearly defined and separate responsibilities and roles.
Home–school conferencing meant one-way communication from school to home,
with teachers being responsible for making contact with parents but parents remaining
rather passive in this process. During the recent years, educational reforms with stron-
40
ger stress on child-centred education and higher parental involvement have been
implemented (see Kikas & Lerkkanen, in press; Ruus et al., 2008). Respectively,
there was a need to examine current practices to further enhance cooperation and

*Corresponding author. Email: eve.kikas@ut.ee

ISSN 0300-4430 print/ISSN 1476-8275 online

© 2010 Taylor & Francis
DOI: 10.1080/03004430.2010.513435
http://www.informaworld.com
 CE: DP QA: DK
GECD_A_513435.fm Page 2 Wednesday, August 25, 2010 6:23 PM

2 E. Kikas et al.

involvement and to evaluate the effectiveness of the recent reforms. Thus, the aim of
this study was to adapt and validate scales for assessing different dimensions of
parental involvement and their trust in Estonian kindergarten and elementary school
teachers. As in the family it is still mainly the mothers who have taken on the respon-
5 sibility of involvement in their child’s education, only mothers were studied.

Parental involvement
There exist various conceptualisations of parental involvement in the literature (for an
10 overview, see Seginer, 2006). Considering Estonian cultural context and age level of
children whose parents were participating in the current study, we relied on the model
proposed by Fantuzzo and colleagues and thus adapted their questionnaires (Fantuzzo
et al., 2000; Fantuzzo, McWayne, Perry, & Child, 2004; Fantuzzo, Perry, & Childs,
2006; Manz, Fantuzzo, & Power, 2004). By using the approach by Epstein (1995),
15 Fantuzzo and colleagues defined the family involvement as a multifaceted construct
with three dimensions: home-based involvement, school-based involvement and
home–school conferencing.
Home-based involvement comprises parental behaviours promoting children’s
learning at home such as providing learning materials, teaching reading, writing and
20 mathematics, as well as setting aside space for learning activities. These activities are
especially valuable during kindergarten and elementary school years when children
develop attitudes toward educational practices. Some of these activities, such as
home reading, are used in many countries (e.g. Sonnenschein & Munsterman, 2002;
Yamamoto et al., 2006). Others vary between cultures and social groups (see
25 Yamamoto et al., 2006).
School-based involvement includes activities and behaviours that parents engage
with their children at school (e.g. going on trips and meeting other parents). In addi-
tion, as Chinese tend to place a high trust in their teachers, they do not feel that they
have to be involved in this process (Hung, 2005). Similarly, Chinese teachers are
30 inclined to exclude parents from the educational process. The same tendency was visi-
ble in Estonia under the Soviet regime when kindergartens and schools were prevail-
ingly authoritarian, and families and kindergartens possessed separate responsibilities
and roles. The family was responsible for socialising, whereas kindergartens and
schools were in charge of academic and ideological development. Today, the situation
35 is different – teachers have started to encourage parents to be involved in school activ-
ities and parents, in turn, are more knowledgeable and interested in participating (for
similar tendency in China, see Hung, 2005). For instance, more frequently than
before, parents help to organise and participate in different events (e.g. class trips,
parties) and take part in the work of governing bodies.
40 The third dimension – home–school conferencing – includes parent–teacher
communication on educationally important topics related to the specific child. For
example, parents and teachers can talk about the child’s difficulties, educational
achievements and methods to learn about rules and discipline. Under the Soviet
regime, home–school conferencing was official but not substantial. In reality, it meant
45 a one-way flow of information – from school to home. Whereas teachers were respon-
sible for making contact with families, parents themselves remained quite passive in
this process. Parents were involved in school activities when the contact was initiated
by teachers (e.g. helping to repair school equipment, to organise trips). In contrast,
nowadays, the value of parental involvement is much more stressed and several steps
 CE: DP QA: DK
GECD_A_513435.fm Page 3 Wednesday, August 25, 2010 6:23 PM

Early Child Development and Care 3

have been undertaken to assimilate parents into their children’s educational process
(see Koolieelse lasteasutuse seadus, 2007; Põhikooli ja gümnaasiumi riiklik õppe-
kava, 2007). For example, annual developmental conferences are held in the majority
of kindergartens and schools. Some schools also use an email exchange.
Other authors have focused on different, albeit overlapping, dimensions of paren- 5
tal involvement. Phillipson and Phillipson (2007) carried out an exploratory factor
analysis on a 10-item questionnaire and found two factors that they labelled as home
and school involvement. The home involvement scale included a wide range of activ-
ities such as talking with the child every day and engaging in sport activities with the
child. In addition, their school involvement scale consisted of items that described 10
parents’ help in children’s academic/learning tasks at home (e.g. enjoy reading with
child), as well as items that assessed home–school conferencing (e.g. call and meet
with teacher). On the basis of the reports provided by parents of first to sixth graders,
Green, Walker, Hoover-Dempsey, and Sandler (2007) differentiated between two
involvement dimensions. Their home-based involvement scale included items about 15
parental behaviours that focus on learning (e.g. helping with homework), whereas the
school-based practices consisted of activities that belonged to Fantuzzo’s school-
based involvement (e.g. volunteering to assist on school trip) and home–school
conferencing (e.g. attending parent–teacher conferences).
Research has consistently shown that parents are more involved in younger than 20
older children’s educational process (Epstein, 1995; Green et al., 2007; Manz et al.,
2004). In addition, parents’ specific activities change when children get older. For
instance, an overview by Seginer (2006) showed that home-based behaviours shift
from facilitating learning the skills in preschool and kindergarten to checking and
helping children with homework in elementary grades to motivational support in older 25
grades. Similarly, when children get older, school-based behaviours change from
parental help with classroom activities to taking part in school initiated programmes
and meetings.

30
Trust
Mutual trust between parents and teacher is a prerequisite of parental involvement and,
in turn, high level of involvement supports building of trust. Although different defi-
nitions of trust can be found in the literature, most authors seem to agree that positive
expectations, willingness to become vulnerable and confidence in another person’s 35
positive intentions and behaviours are critical elements of the trust construct (e.g.
Adams & Christenson, 2000; Blue-Banning, Summers, Frankland, Nelson, & Beegle,
2004; Goddard, Tschannen-Moran, & Hoy, 2001; Tschannen-Moran, 2001). We used
the approach by Adams and Christenson who defined trust in the family–school rela-
tionship as ‘confidence that another person will act in a way to benefit or sustain the 40
relationship, or the implicit or explicit goals of the relationship, to achieve positive
outcomes for students’ (Adams & Christenson, 2000, p. 480). They developed a scale
for assessing trust in parents and teachers, which items seemed culturally relevant to
Estonian cultural context at kindergarten as well as elementary school level.
Trust presumes frequent and satisfying contact between partners (Adams & 45
Christenson, 2000). Trustful relationships, in turn, encourage open and relevant
communication and information exchange (Smith & Barclay, 1997), commitment and
high levels of cooperation (Costa, 2003). Teachers as well as parents stress that mean-
ingful interaction and collaboration is impossible without mutual trust and respect (see
 CE: DP QA: DK
GECD_A_513435.fm Page 4 Wednesday, August 25, 2010 6:23 PM

4 E. Kikas et al.

Keen, 2007; Miretzky, 2004). Thus, mutual parent–teacher trust is considered an impor-
tant prerequisite of home–school collaboration and parental involvement in their chil-
dren’s educational processes, especially with regard to participating in school activities
and conferencing with teachers (e.g. Adams & Christenson, 2000; Blue-Banning et al.,
5 2004; Tschannen-Moran, 2001).
Similarly to parental involvement, the level of parent–teacher trust is higher when
children are younger (Adams & Christenson, 2000). It has been shown both for
parents’ trust in teachers and vice versa (Adams & Christenson, 2000).

10
Aims and hypotheses
The purpose of this study was to adapt and validate scales for assessing mothers’
involvement in their child’s educational process and their trust in teachers in Estonian
kindergartens and elementary schools. This age level was chosen because parental
15 involvement is especially important during these years. This is the time when parents
may create environments and habits for their child which either support the child (e.g.
buying educating materials) or distract the child from (e.g. showing negative attitude
toward academic activities) later learning at school. In addition, parents learn how to
communicate with teachers and other parents, deal with the information they receive
20 from teachers and share responsibilities in the educational area. We adapted the scales
developed by Fantuzzo and colleagues (Fantuzzo et al., 2000; Manz et al., 2004) and
Adams and Christenson (2000). As mothers are the primary caregivers who are most
involved in their children’s school activities in Estonia, only mothers provided infor-
mation about their involvement and trust in this study. In Estonia, children attend
25 kindergarten till the age of seven. Kindergarten education is followed by the six-year
elementary school which in turn is divided into two levels: first stage includes Grades
1–3 (Age 7–9/10 years) and second stage includes Grades 4–6 (Age 10–12/13 years).
These groups are referred to as kindergarten, School Level 1 and School Level 2.
This study addressed four questions:
30
(1) Do the questionnaires show acceptable construct validity at kindergarten and
two elementary school levels? We expected to find three dimensions of paren-
tal involvement (i.e. home-based and school-based involvement and home–
school conferencing) and a unitary dimension of trust (Adams & Christenson,
35 2000; Fantuzzo et al., 2000; Manz et al., 2004).
(2) Is the factor structure of the scales (i.e. factor loadings) invariant across kinder-
garten and elementary school levels? For the parental involvement construct,
different studies have found that a three-factor solution fits the data when using
samples of parents of preschool, kindergarten or elementary school children
40 (cf. Fantuzzo et al., 2000; Manz et al., 2004). However, these studies varied
slightly with regard to what items were used. In addition, none of the studies
directly compared the factor structure invariance across different age groups.
Moreover, the trust scale has only been tested at school level (Adams &
Christenson, 2000).
45 (3) Are there significant differences in mothers’ involvement and trust across
kindergarten and elementary school levels? It was assumed that the levels
of trust and involvement would be higher in the case of younger children
(cf. Adams & Christenson, 2000; Fantuzzo et al., 2000; Manz et al., 2004).
Moreover, we expected that mothers whose children had just started going to
 CE: DP QA: DK
GECD_A_513435.fm Page 5 Wednesday, August 25, 2010 6:23 PM

Early Child Development and Care 5

school would show the highest levels of home-based involvement. This is the
time when children are given their first homework that is often checked by
mothers.
(4) Are there significant associations between involvement and trust? We antici-
pated that trust would show the lowest overlap with home-based involvement 5
and highest overlap with home–school conferencing. Trust is related to higher
levels of open communication that is one of the main aims of conferencing (see
Keen, 2007; Miretzky, 2004; Smith & Barclay, 1997). In contrast, parents’
educational activities are more closely associated with parents’ general parent-
ing practices (cf. Noack, 2004; Waanders et al., 2007), but not so much with 10
teachers’ behaviour.

Method
Participants and procedure 15
Four hundred and fifty-four mothers of five- to seven-year-old kindergarten children
(227 boys and 227 girls), 197 mothers of children at first school level (School Level
1, first and second graders, 101 boys and 96 girls) and 94 mothers of children at second
school level (School Level 2, fourth to sixth graders, 44 boys and 50 girls) participated
20
in the study. Children attended 28 kindergartens and 28 schools across Estonia. The
age of mothers ranged from 23 years to 51 years (M = 33.67, SD = 5.54), and their
educational background was different, ranging from basic school to university level.
The data were collected as part of the two larger projects conducted in Estonian
kindergartens and elementary schools. First, principals of the kindergartens and
25
schools were contacted in order to inform them about the project and invite them to
participate. When principals had agreed, they informed teachers who in turn invited
parents to participate. Informed consent was asked from each parent. Researchers
delivered the questionnaires to the kindergartens and schools. Questionnaires were
placed into the envelopes with a letter explaining the aims of the project and describ-
30
ing the procedure. If the parents wished, they could get more information by telephone
or email. Parents had one week for completing the questionnaires. They returned the
questionnaires in closed envelopes to teachers who then gave these to the researchers.
A reminder was sent to parents who had not returned the questionnaires.
35
Questionnaires
Family involvement
Family involvement was assessed via questionnaire, developed, based on those of
Fantuzzo et al. (2000) and Manz et al. (2004) for kindergartens and elementary 40
schools. The original questionnaires included three scales: school-based involvement,
home-based involvement and home–school conferencing.
First, discussions were held with the team including psychologists, university
lecturers in pre- and elementary school education, and practising teachers. Thirty three
items that were most suitable for various grade levels and relevant to Estonian cultural 45
context were selected for piloting. These described widely used activities at home (e.g.
helping with reading and numbers) and frequent topics of parent–teacher conferencing
(e.g. child’s difficulties, daily routine). Besides these, items describing activities that
have been emphasised during recent years (e.g. supporting creativity, participating in
 CE: DP QA: DK
GECD_A_513435.fm Page 6 Wednesday, August 25, 2010 6:23 PM

6 E. Kikas et al.

class trips and social events with other parents) were also included. Two hundred and
eighty mothers participated in the pilot study. Eighteen items with the highest loadings
to their main factors were retained (six items for each scale). A five-point Likert scale
(1 – never, 2 – rarely, 3 – from time to time, 4 – frequently, 5 – always) was used.
5

Trust
Trust was assessed using a scale developed by Adams and Christenson (2000). The
original measure contained 19 items for parents. The items begin with a sentence stem
10 ‘I am confident that teachers’ followed by statements that described behaviours often
performed by teachers to enhance children’s development (e.g. ‘are doing a good job
teaching my child to follow the rules and directions’, ‘are friendly and approachable’).
Discussions were held with the same team. Fifteen culturally meaningful items
were retained. Responses were provided on a five-point Likert scale (1 – strongly
15 disagree, 2 – disagree, 3 – don’t know, 4 – agree, 5 – strongly agree).

Data analyses
We performed confirmatory factor analyses (CFA-s) using the software Mplus 5.0
20 (Muthén & Muthén, 1998–2007). Throughout the analyses a robust estimator MLR
(normality-based maximum-likelihood estimation with robust standard errors) was
used to correct for the violation of normality assumption (Muthén & Muthén, 1998–
2007). As the Chi-square test is sensitive to sample size and deviations from the
underlying assumptions (e.g. multivariate normality), other fit indexes are considered
25 more adequate to assess the model fit (Hu & Bentler, 1998; Kline, 2005). We used two
other goodness-of-fit indexes to assess the model fit: a root mean square error of
approximation (RMSEA) below .05 (values between .05 and .08 are considered satis-
factory) and comparative fit index (CFI) between .90 and 1.00 (Hoyle & Panter,
1995). Invariance of the factor loadings across the kindergarten and elementary school
30 levels was assessed using a chi-square differences test.
Analyses of variance were conducted to examine the effect of kindergarten
and school level on our study variables. Post-hoc comparisons were made with
Bonferroni test. Associations among the scales were examined with Pearson
correlation coefficients.
35

Results
Factor structures of the scales
40 Family involvement
First, a confirmatory factor analysis was performed to examine the fit of a three-factor
measurement model (home-based involvement, school-based involvement, home–
school conferencing) to the data. Items were allowed to load only to their main factors.
Each factor had six manifest variables. The first unstandardised loading was fixed to
45 one, whereas the rest of the loadings were always freely estimated. Covariances
between the latent factors were also freely estimated. The model did not fit the
data. The values of the fit indices were χ2 (132) = 726.47, p < .001, CFI = .92,
RMSEA = .08. On the basis of the size of the factor loadings, modification indices
and values in the residual correlation matrix, we decided to estimate the model with
 CE: DP QA: DK
GECD_A_513435.fm Page 7 Wednesday, August 25, 2010 6:23 PM

Early Child Development and Care 7

four factors. In the four-factor model, two new latent variables were created from the
home-based involvement scale. One of the scales included items describing specific
activities supporting academic development (referred to as home-based academic
involvement), the other scale included items describing more general educational
activities that support child’s development (referred to as home-based general 5
involvement). The fit indices were better χ2 (129) = 360.28, p < .001, CFI = .97,
RMSEA = .05. The standardised factor loadings are presented in Table 1.
Cronbach’s alpha values for the original three scales were .78 (school-based
involvement), .85 (home-based involvement) and .93 (home–school conferencing).
The reliabilities for the two new parcels were .93 (academic activities) and .73 10
(general activities).

Trust
A separate confirmatory analysis was performed to examine the fit of a one-factor 15
model with 15 indicators. The fit indexes suggested a poor fit, χ2 (90) = 687.528, p <
.001, CFI = .89, RMSEA = .09. Modification indexes suggested allowing covariances
between some of the residuals. However, to prevent many error covariances and lessen
the number of indicators, we used an item parcelling technique that is a common
approach in SEM analyses (Hau & Marsh, 2004; West, Finch, & Curran, 1995). In 20

Table 1. Items for assessing family involvement and their standardised loadings.
Standardised
Item loading
25
School-based involvement
1. I volunteer in my child’s classroom .54
2. I participate in parent and family social activities .53
3. I participate in planning classroom activities with the teacher .77
4. I go on class trips with my child .60 30
5. I talk with other parents about kindergarten/school events .51
6. I participate in planning kindergarten/school trips .72
Home-based involvement Academic
1. I spend time working with my child on number skills .84
2. I spend time working with my child on reading skills .94
35
3. I spend time working with my child on writing skills .94
General
1. I talk to my child about how much I love learning new things .66
2. I bring home learning materials for my child (books, videos, etc.) .66 40
3. I spend time with my child working on creative activities .75
Home-school conferencing
1. I talk to the teacher about how my child gets along with his/her classmates .84
2. I talk with my child’s teacher about classroom rules .85
45
3. I talk to my child’s teacher about his/her difficulties in kindergarten/school .83
4. I talk with my child’s teacher about work to practice at home .84
5. I talk to my child’s teacher about my child’s accomplishments .86
6. I talk to my child’s teacher about his/her daily routine .77
 CE: DP QA: DK
GECD_A_513435.fm Page 8 Wednesday, August 25, 2010 6:23 PM

8 E. Kikas et al.

Table 2. Items for assessing trust and their parcels.

Standardised
Item loading

5 I am confident that teachers …

Parcel 1 .85
… are doing a good job teaching my child academic subjects
… are doing a good job teaching my child follow rules and directions
… are doing a good job helping my child resolve conflicts with peers
10 … are doing a good job disciplining my child
Parcel 2 .84
… are doing a good job keeping me well informed of my child’s progress
… are doing a good job encouraging my participation in my child’s education
15 … keep me aware of all the information I need related to school
… are easy to reach when I have a problem or a question
Parcel 3 .87
… are doing a good job encouraging my child’s self-esteem
… are doing a good job encouraging my child to have a positive attitude
20 toward learning
… are doing a good job helping my child understand his/her moral and ethical
responsibilities
Parcel 4 .74
… are friendly and approachable
25 … are easy to reach when I have a problem or question
… are receptive to my input and suggestions

addition, we eliminated one item (‘I am confident that teachers are sensitive to cultural
30 differences’) with a low factor loading (standardised loading = .37). Four parcels were
created on the basis of the content of the items. Items for each parcel and loadings
for parcels are provided in Table 2. The fit of this new one-factor model with four
indicators was good, χ2 (2) = 9.40, p < .01, CFI = 1.00, RMSEA = .07.
Cronbach’s alpha for the original scale with 15 items was .92. For the four new
35 parcels, reliabilities were .82, .81, .85 and .74.

Invariance of the factor loadings across kindergarten and elementary school levels
Next, we tested whether unstandardised loadings were invariant across kindergarten
40 and two school levels. For that purpose, we compared the model where all unstandar-
dised loadings, except for the first one (the first loading was always fixed to 1) were
constrained to be equal across different age groups to the model where the loadings
were freely estimated. The same procedure was done for the family involvement and
trust scales.
45 Regarding the involvement scale, a chi-square difference test indicated that the
factor-structure varied across age groups (chi-square difference = 735.988–642.700 =
93.288, df = 415–387 = 28, p < .001). Next, we estimated the four-factor model for
each age group separately. For the kindergarten group, the fit of the model was
satisfactory. Although modification indices suggested that we would covary several
 CE: DP QA: DK
GECD_A_513435.fm Page 9 Wednesday, August 25, 2010 6:23 PM

Early Child Development and Care 9

manifest variables, we did not find a good justification to do so. However, we did allow
covariances among three items (c4 to c6) which improved the fit of the model (see
Table 3). Whereas items c1 to c3 measure communication about child’s behaviour and
problems in kindergarten/school, items c4 to c6 are more related to child’s activities
at home. At two school levels, the fit of the original models was good. Few inter-item 5
covariances could have improved the fit but we decided not to allow the overlap
between the residuals. Standardised factor loadings and reliabilities by kindergarten
and school levels are provided in Table 4.
With regard to the trust scale, unstandardised loadings were invariant across
kindergarten and school levels (chi-square difference = 23.177–17.309 = 5.868, df = 10
12–6 = 6, p = ns). Thus, a factor loading invariance was found across age groups.

Differences between groups and associations among scales

Means and standard deviations for the study variables at kindergarten and two school 15
levels are presented in Table 5. In all three groups, mothers reported the highest levels
of home-based involvement (specifically, academic involvement). The main effect
for kindergarten/school levels was revealed for all scales: trust, F(2,690) = 26.21,
p < .001, school-based involvement, F(2,690) = 10.18.21, p < .001, home–school
conferencing, F(2,690) = 44.82, p < .001, home-based academic involvement, 20
F(2,690) = 45.92, p < .001 and home-based general involvement F(2,690) = 19.92,
p < .001. All the constructs were significantly lower in the second school level as
compared with the first level. Whereas school-based involvement, home-based
involvement/general activities and trust did not differ between kindergarten and first
school level, home–school conferencing became less common when children got 25
older. Home-based academic involvement was reported most frequently by mothers
of first and second graders (i.e. at first school level).
Bivariate correlations between the involvement subscales are shown in Table 6. As
expected, all scales were interconnected. The highest overlap existed among two
home-based involvement scales, and between school-based involvement and home– 30
school conferencing. The lowest correlations were determined between home-based
academic involvement and school-based involvement.
In addition, all bivariate correlations between trust and involvement subscales were
significant (see Table 7). The highest overlap was between trust and home–school
conferencing (r =.46). However, partial correlations (when three other involvement 35

Table 3. Fit indices of models at different school levels.

Model χ2 df CFI RMSEA
Kindergarten 40
Four-factor model 289.039*** 129 .96 .05
Cov (c4, c5), Cov (c5, c6), Cov (c4, c6) 228.486*** 123 .98 .04
School Level 1
Four-factor model 169.058* 129 .98 .04
45
School Level 2
Four-factor model 184.603** 129 .95 .07
*p < .05; **p < .01; ***p < .001.
Note: School Level 1 and School Level 2 refer to Grades 1–2 and Grades 4–6, respectively.
 CE: DP QA: DK
GECD_A_513435.fm Page 10 Wednesday, August 25, 2010 6:23 PM

10 E. Kikas et al.

Table 4. Standardised factor loadings and reliabilities for four involvement scales by grade
level.
Kindergarten School Level 1 School Level 2

5 Factor Factor Factor

Items for each scale loading α loading α loading α
School-based involvement
s1 .62 .35 .50
s2 .53 .42 .70
10 s3 .75 .81 .80
s4 .59 .60 .70
s5 .53 .44 .52
s6 .70 .80 .63
.78 .74 .80
15
Home-based involvement – academic
h1 .84 .88 .75
h2 .93 .91 .98
h3 .92 .94 .93
20 .92 .93 .91
Home-based involvement – general
h4 .70 .61 .46
h5 .66 .69 .50
25 h6 .76 .73 .81
.75 .72 .66
Home-school conferencing
c1 .87 .73 .85
c2 .87 .80 .89
30 c3 .84 .81 .84
c4 .78 .86 .92
c5 .76 .90 .90
c6 .69 .76 .76
.92 .92 .95
35
Note: School Level 1 and School Level 2 refer to Grades 1–2 and Grades 4–6, respectively.

scores were controlled for when computing a partial correlation between one of the
involvement variables and trust variable) were significantly smaller, with three out of
40 four correlations ranging from −.03 to .10. In contrast, there remained a moderately
strong overlap between trust and home–school conferencing (pr = .36).

Discussion
45 The purpose of this study was to analyse the psychometric properties of the question-
naires that assess mother’s involvement in her child’s educational process and trust in
teachers. We used the sample of Estonian mothers whose child attended kindergarten
or elementary school. With regard to the involvement scale, we found that a four-
factor solution fits the data better than the original three-factor solution (cf. Fantuzzo
 CE: DP QA: DK
GECD_A_513435.fm Page 11 Wednesday, August 25, 2010 6:23 PM

Early Child Development and Care 11

Table 5. Means and standard deviations for study variables.

School
Kindergarte Level 1 School Level Differencesbetween
n (N = 454) (N = 197) 2 (N = 94) Fa school levels
5
Scale M SD M SD M SD
School-based involvement 2.60 .75 2.63 .68 2.26 .63 9.87 1 = 2>3
Home-based involvement 3.84 .80 4.41 .81 3.31 1.11 59.49 1 < 2; 1 > 3; 2 > 3
(Academic activities)
Home-based involvement 3.71 .77 3.64 .76 3.12 .84 22.61 1=2>3 10
(General activities)
Home-school conferencing 3.12 .88 2.72 .86 2.26 .84 44.20 1>2>3
Trust 4.08 .57 4.01 .55 3.60 .56 28.41 1=2>3
a
Significant at level p < .001.
Note: School Level 1 and School Level 2 refer to Grades 1–2 and Grades 4–6, respectively. 15

Table 6. Correlations between involvement subscales.

Home-school Home-based academic Home-based general
Subscale conferencing involvement involvement 20
School-based involvement .43 .18 .32
Home-school conferencing .24 .44
Home-based academic involvement .50
Home-based general involvement
25
Note: Pearson correlation coefficients. All the correlations are significant at level p < .001.

Table 7. Bivariate and partial correlations between involvement subscales and trust.
r pr
30
1. School-based involvement .29*** .10*
2. Home-school conferencing .46*** .36***
3. Home-based academic involvement .12*** −.03
4. Home-based general involvement .27*** .07
*p < .01; ***p < .001. 35
Note: Three other involvement scores were always controlled for when computing a partial correlation
between one of the involvement variables and trust variable.

et al., 2000; Manz et al., 2004). As expected, the trust was a unitary construct (Adams
& Christenson, 2000). 40
We assessed family involvement using the questionnaires developed by Fantuzzo
and colleagues (Fantuzzo et al., 2000; Manz et al., 2004) because their items described
specific behaviours that were relevant to Estonian cultural context both at the kinder-
garten and elementary school. In addition, these questionnaires were developed in line
with the idea that involvement is a multidimensional construct (see Epstein, 1995), 45
and the same scales have been used in several studies (e.g. Anderson & Minke, 2007).
Whereas in earlier studies, different (although overlapping in their content) question-
naires were used to assess the involvement at the kindergarten and school, we used the
items that were applicable to all studied ages.
 CE: DP QA: DK
GECD_A_513435.fm Page 12 Wednesday, August 25, 2010 6:23 PM

12 E. Kikas et al.

The questionnaire for assessing involvement by means of 18 items differed from

the original structure. In contrast to the original three-factor solution, our results
showed that the four-factor solution fits the data better. What was different from the
original version was that the home-based involvement had two subscales: academic
5 and general. The items of the academic subscale describe specific time that the mother
works together with her child on math or language tasks. In contrast, the items of the
general subscale measure diverse behaviours, such as buying books, talking with the
child and doing different creative activities. The first subscale describes the activities
that parents engage in on a regular basis (at least in school), whereas the activities
10 assessed by the latter subscale may occur relatively infrequently and irregularly. Our
findings might reflect cultural differences in educational values. In Estonia, as parents
generally place a high value on academic achievement, they also understand the need
to support their child in his/her school studies. Therefore, academic activities might
have a special place not only at school but at home too. This finding is in accordance
15 with a study by Phillipson and Phillipson (2007) who found a distinct factor that was
similar to our general subscale (e.g. talking with child every day, spending time with
child in sport activities). Their other factor – labelled school involvement – included
items from our academic subscale (e.g. enjoy reading with child) and home–school
conferencing (e.g. call and meet with teacher). Some studies (e.g. Green et al., 2007)
20 have measured specific academically related activities as the sole indicators of home-
based involvement. However, activities that encourage children’s involvement in
different learning activities support the development of their learning skills, motiva-
tion and values, which, in turn, have a role in their later learning at school and in their
academic achievement. The four-factor solution had an adequate fit in kindergarten as
25 well as at school. Still, it seems that at least some items may have different meaning
(or importance) in different age groups. For instance, while working with reading
skills is important in kindergarten and first grade, it has lost its significance for the
vast majority of children in higher grades. Instead, supporting a child in text compre-
hension and discussion may be needed in these years. However, the questionnaire
30 included only a general question on reading skills. In addition, the sample size for the
second school level (Grades 4–6) was relatively small which could have influenced
the stability of parameter estimates.
As expected, the trust scale was a unitary construct. From the original 15 items,
we had to remove an item about cultural diversities. In Estonia, cultural diversities may
35 be thought mainly as related to Russian-speaking population. However, Estonian and
Russian-speaking children are usually taught in separate kindergartens. As this study
was carried out in kindergartens where the vast majority of children were Estonian,
mothers might not think about the necessity to take into account cultural diversities in
these groups. The factor loadings of the trust scale were invariant across kindergarten
40 and elementary school levels.
As we used the same items at the kindergarten and school level, we were able to
make direct comparisons between different types of involvement and levels of trust
across wider age groups. In line with earlier studies (e.g. Anderson & Minke, 2007),
mothers reported differences across the involvement types, showing considerably
45 more involvement at home than at kindergarten or school. In line with earlier studies
(Epstein, 1995; Green et al., 2007; Manz et al., 2004), mothers were less involved
(across different types) in higher (Grades 4–6) than in lower school level (Grades 1–
2). The same was true for trust (cf. Adams & Christenson, 2000). At the second school
level (Grades 4–6), students are taught by subject teachers instead of the homeroom
 CE: DP QA: DK
GECD_A_513435.fm Page 13 Wednesday, August 25, 2010 6:23 PM

Early Child Development and Care 13

teacher who teaches almost all the subjects in lower grades. This can, at least partly,
explain why the school–home contact becomes less frequent and intimate. For
instance, Anderson and Minke (2007) found that invitations from teachers had the
strongest relationship with different parental involvement behaviours. The homeroom
teacher of first and second graders is more likely to encourage parents to participate 5
in school activities than different subject teachers in higher grades. Less frequent
contact and fewer possibilities to exchange information and engage in meaningful
interaction may, in turn, prevent the building of trust (e.g. Keen, 2007; Miretzky, 2004;
Smith & Barclay, 1997). Alternatively, parental involvement with academic activities
may also decrease in higher grades because parents might be less knowledgeable about 10
some subject areas.
As expected, home-based academic involvement was most frequent at the begin-
ning of school years. It is the time when children start receiving homework (at least in
Estonia), and mothers probably not only check their children’s homework but also
teach them. The beginning of school is the time when a base for further achievement 15
is built. The levels of school-based and home-based general involvement were similar
among younger children (i.e. kindergarten and first school level). However, home–
school conferencing was reported more frequently by kindergarten children’s moth-
ers. It may be related to the fact that parents meet teachers on the daily basis when
they take their child to (and from) the kindergarten. 20
As expected, the highest associations were found between trust and home–school
conferencing. Home–school conferencing includes exchanging information about
different child-related topics between teachers and parents. These topics may be
related to child’s achievements as well as problems. It captures the idea of two-way
communication and collaborative nature of home–school interaction. In the case of 25
mutual trust, people are more open, they disclose more accurate, relevant and complete
information about their problems. However, it is not only limited to talking about the
problems. People who trust each other are overall more willing to talk about their
thoughts, ideas and feelings (see Keen, 2007; Miretzky, 2004; Smith & Barclay, 1997).
In contrast, when interacting with a distrusted person, the partner may hide important 30
information. This might be especially pronounced if this person holds more power (i.e.
with a teacher) and in case of problems (e.g. when a child has learning or behaviour
problems). Thus, the importance of building trust in cooperating with parents should
be emphasised in teacher training courses.
Although bivariate correlations showed a modest overlap between the rest of the 35
involvement subscales (home- and school-based) and trust, the size of associations
could be further reduced when controlling for the overlap among the involvement
subscales. As mothers who were more involved with activities at school and home
tended to communicate more frequently with teachers, zero-order correlations between
involvement (at school or home) and trust are likely to be due to their overlap with 40
home–school conferencing.
Other factors, such as parent’s self-efficacy (e.g. Anderson & Minke, 2007; Green
et al., 2007; Waanders et al., 2007), their time and energy (Green et al., 2007), parent-
ing style and the number of children in the family (cf. Waanders et al., 2007), might
me more predictive of involvement at home. In addition, home-based academic activ- 45
ities include specific teaching behaviours (supporting children’s development and
learning, e.g., teaching reading). In addition, even if parents do not trust their teacher,
they are likely to acknowledge the importance of their child’s education and their role
in facilitating the learning process.
 CE: DP QA: DK
GECD_A_513435.fm Page 14 Wednesday, August 25, 2010 6:23 PM

14 E. Kikas et al.

Conclusions and limitations

Although there exists evidence that the parental involvement construct consists of
three dimensions in kindergarten and elementary school (Fantuzzo et al., 2000; Manz
et al., 2004), studies have not yet tested the structural invariance of the scales across
5 different age groups. In addition, different studies have used slightly different items,
thereby making the comparison across the studies more difficult. Moreover, the trust
scale has been used only at the school level (Adams & Christenson, 2000). In this
study, we used the same items across kindergarten and elementary school levels, and
employed a multigroup analysis to test the factor loading invariance. Home-based
10 involvement scale differentiated into two subscales including academic and general
activities. The extent to which mothers engaged in academic versus general activities
differed across age groups. In addition, these scales had distinct associations with
other involvement scales and trust. These subscales differed between kindergarten and
school levels and their associations with other involvement scales and trust. A more
15 stringent examination of the development of these constructs over time is needed
using longitudinal designs. Few limitations of the current study should be highlighted.
First, only self-reports of mothers were collected. However, nowadays, fathers are
more involved in their child’s education than before. In addition, the roles in the
family may be divided. For example, fathers may be more involved in certain activi-
20 ties with their child. Moreover, fathers might spend their time differently depending
on their own educational background as well as their child’s gender. Second, there can
be differences between two- and single-parent families (e.g. differences in how much
time a parent can spend on activities with the child). Thus, future studies would bene-
fit from collecting information from both parents, studying different types of families,
25 as well as obtaining teachers’ opinion about parental involvement.

AQ3 Notes on contributors

30

35

References
Adams, K., & Christenson, S. (2000). Trust and the family–school relationship examination
40 of parent–teacher differences in elementary and secondary grades. Journal of School
Psychology, 38, 477–497.
Anderson, K., & Minke, K. (2007). Parent involvement in education: Toward an understand-
ing of parents’ decision making. Journal of Educational Research, 100, 311–323.
Blue-Banning, M., Summers, J., Frankland, H., Nelson, L., & Beegle, G. (2004). Dimensions
of family and professional partnerships: Constructive guidelines for collaboration.
45 Exceptional Children, 70, 167–184.
Costa, A. (2003). Work team trust and effectiveness. Personnel Review, 32, 605–623.
Epstein, J. (1995). School/family/community partnerships. Phi Delta Kappan, 76, 701–713.
Fantuzzo, J., McWayne, C., Perry, M., & Child, S. (2004). Multiple dimensions of family
involvement and their relations to behavioral and learning competencies for urban, low-
income children. School Psychology Review, 33, 467–480.
 CE: DP QA: DK
GECD_A_513435.fm Page 15 Wednesday, August 25, 2010 6:23 PM

Early Child Development and Care 15

Fantuzzo, J., Perry, M., & Childs, S. (2006). Parent satisfaction with educational experiences
scale: A multivariate examination of parent satisfaction with early childhood education
programs. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 21, 142–152.
Fantuzzo, J., Tighe, E., & Childs, S. (2000). Family involvement questionnaire: A multivari-
ate assessment of family participation in early childhood education. Journal of Educa-
tional Psychology, 92, 367–376. 5
Goddard, R.D., Tschannen-Moran, M., & Hoy, W.K. (2001). A multilevel examination of the
distribution and effects of teacher trust in students and parents in urban elementary
schools. Elementary School Journal, 102, 3–17.
Green, C., Walker, J., Hoover-Dempsey, K., & Sandler, H. (2007). Parents’ motivations for
involvement in children’s education: An empirical test of a theoretical model of parental
involvement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99, 532–544. 10
Hau, K.-T., & Marsh, H. (2004). The use of item parcels in structural equation modelling:
Non-normal data and small sample sizes. British Journal of Mathematical Statistical
Psychology, 57, 327–351.
Hoyle, R., & Panter, A. (1995). Writing about structural equation models. In R. Hoyle (Ed.),
Structural equation modeling: Concepts, issues and applications (pp. 158–176). Thou-
sand Oaks, CA: Sage. 15
Hu, L., & Bentler, P. (1998). Fit indices in covariance structure modeling: Sensitivity to
underparameterized model misspecification. Psychological Methods, 3, 424–453.
Hung, C.-L. (2005). Family background, parental involvement and environmental influences
on Taiwanese children. Alberta Journal of Educational Research, 51, 261–276.
Keen, D. (2007). Parents, families, and partnerships: Issues and considerations. International
Journal of Disability, Development and Education, 54, 339–349. 20
Kikas, E., & Lerkkanen, M.-K. (in press). Education in Estonia and Finland. In M. Veisson,
E. Hujala, M. Waniganayake, P. Smith, & E. Kikas (Eds.), Global perspectives in early
childhood education: Diversity, challenges and possibilities (pp. Xx). Frankfurt am Main:
AQ4 Peter Lang.
Kline. R.B. (2005). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (2nd ed.).
New York: Guilford Press. 25
Koolieelse lasteasutuse seadus [Law on Pre-School Child Institutions] (2007). Riigi Teataja I,
45, 3206. Retrieved November 21, 2009, from https://www.riigiteataja.ee/ert/act.jsp?id=
AQ5 2851232
Lagace-Seguin, D., & Case, E. (2010). Extracurricular activity and parental involvement
predict positive outcomes in elementary school children. Early Child Development and
Care, 180, 453–462. 30
Manz, P., Fantuzzo, J., & Power, T. (2004). Multidimensional assessment of family involve-
ment among urban elementary students. Journal of School Psychology, 42, 461–475.
Miretzky, D. (2004). The communication requirements of democratic schools: Parent–
Teacher perspectives on their relationships. Teachers College Record, 106, 814–851.
Muthén, L., & Muthén, B. (1998–2007). Mplus user’s guide (5th ed.). Los Angeles, CA:
Muthén & Muthén. 35
Noack, P. (2004). The family context of preadolescents’ orientations toward education:
Effects of maternal orientations and behavior. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96,
714–722.
Phillipson, S., & Phillipson, S. (2007). Academic expectations, belief of ability, and involve-
ment by parents as predictors of child achievement: A cross-cultural comparison. Educa-
tional Psychology, 27, 329–348. 40
Põhikooli ja gümnaasiumi riiklik õppekava [The National Curriculum of Basic and Gymna-
sium Education] (2007). Riigi Teataja I 2007, 40, 294. Retrieved November 21, 2009,
AQ5 from https://www.riigiteataja.ee/ert/act.jsp?id=802290
Powell, D., Son, S.-H., File, N., & San Juan, R. (2010). Parent–school relationships and chil-
dren’s academic and social outcomes in public school pre-kindergarten. Journal of School
Psychology, 48, 269–292. 45
Ruus, V., Henno, I., Eisenschmidt, E., Loogma, K., Noorväli, H., Reiska, P., & Rekkor, S.
(2008). Reforms, developments and trends in Estonian education during recent decades.
In J. Mikk, M. Veisson, & P. Luik (Eds.), Reforms and innovations in Estonian esduca-
tion (pp. 11–26). Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.
 CE: DP QA: DK
GECD_A_513435.fm Page 16 Wednesday, August 25, 2010 6:23 PM

16 E. Kikas et al.

Seginer, R. (2006). Parents’ educational involvement: A developmental ecology perspective.

Parenting: Science and Practice, 6, 1–48.
Smith, J., & Barclay, W. (1997). The effects of organizational differences and trust on the
effectiveness of selling partner relationships. Journal of Marketing, 61, 3–21.
Sonnenschein, S., & Munsterman, K. (2002). The influence of home-based reading interac-
5 tions on 5-year-olds’ reading motivations and early literacy development. Early Childhood
Research Quarterly, 17, 318–327.
Tschannen-Moran, M. (2001). Collaboration and the need for trust. Journal of Educational
Administration, 39, 308–331.
Waanders, C., Mendez, J., & Downer, J. (2007). Parent characteristics, economic stress and
neighborhood context as predictors of parent involvement in preschool children’s educa-
10 tion. Journal of School Psychology, 45, 619–636.
West, S., Finch, J., & Curran, P. (1995). Structural equation models with nonnormal variables:
Problems and remedies. In R. Hoyle (Ed.), Structural equation modeling: Concepts,
issues, and applications (pp. 56–75). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Yamamoto, Y., Holloway, S., & Suzuki, S. (2006). Maternal involvement in preschool chil-
dren’s education in Japan: Relation to parenting beliefs and socioeconomic status. Early
15 Childhood Research Quarterly, 21, 332–346.

20

25

30

35

40

45

View publication stats