Parental Involvement Levels: Single Parent Versus Dual Parent Households
Angelica Primmer
Longwood University
November 27, 2019
Abstract
About 3 years ago, researchers did a needs-based assessment for the Farmville/ Prince Edward area. Through this assessment, it was found that parental involvement was not where children or parents need it to be. The purpose of this study is to examine parental involvement through provided activities. The population is Head Start families and the sample is Prince Edward, Nottaway, and Cumberland counties in Virginia. A survey that included open-ended, close-ended, and demographic questions were given to each child whose family participated in the activities. The qualitative data is the open-ended questions at the beginning of the survey gauging which activity was liked best, what the family gained, and what things they might have changed. The quantitative data was gathered for each activity based on provided SMART (Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, and Time-Bound) objectives. We measured completion level, time spent, enjoyment level, and specific SMART objectives. My research question examined: how do the given activities influence parent involvement with single parent households differ from dual parent households? The results from this question showed that there was not a significant difference in the average time spent interacting with their child/children in a single versus dual parent household.
Introduction
When reading through the literature on parental involvement and the importance of it, there was a lack of study on the differences between single and dual parent households. This research is important because if there is one parent in a household then it might impact the level of parental involvement each child receives. Because of this absence of research, I studied Head Start families in rural areas to establish if there was a difference in parental involvement levels between single parent and dual parent households. Family Fun Time activities were sent home with each child for five days straight during a five-day school week with a survey, measuring open-ended, close-ended, and demographic questions, sent home on the fifth day.
Evaluation research was conducted to assess the parental involvement levels. My specific research question that was evaluated through this survey was, how do the given activities influence parent involvement with single parent households differ from dual parent households? Through the quantitative analysis and bivariate analysis, it was found that there was no significant evidence there is a difference in the time spent interacting with children based on the numbers of parents in the household.
Literature Review
There are several ways of defining parental involvement, but a key example is parent involvement in school, community, and home (Ansari & Gershoff, 2016; Stacer & Perrucci, 2012; Bower & Griffin, 2011). School activities can be Parent-Teacher Organization (PTO) meetings or parent teacher conferences, community activities can be watching plays, visiting museums, and attending athletic events. Activities completed in the home can range from arts and crafts to cooking and cleaning to playing games. These activities cultivate parent involvement in the children’s lives. It has been stated throughout literature how important parent involvement is for a child’s well-being and social/ academic success (Ansari & Gershoff, 2016; Arnold, Zeljo, Doctoroff, &Ortiz, 2008; Stacer & Perrucci, 2012; Bower & Griffin, 2011). More studies have been emerging to help find ways for parents who lack the time or available funds to still take an active role in their children’s success. A factor that has added to frustration in parent’s being able to remain involved in the academic side of their child’s life is the change in curriculum. There is a difference in not only the teaching styles but the teaching methods that the parents might not understand (Stacer & Perrucci, 2012; Bower & Griffin, 2011). This frustration can lead to a further decrease in participation through the inability to help in one area of a child’s life and feeling as though they are not equipped to prepare their child if they lack the proper education.
Single Parent Household Verses Dual-Parent Household
A set of statistics that was established was the lack of father involvement of respondents of surveys about parent involvement. Surveys showed that mothers, in some cases specifically biological mothers, had a range of mid 80% to low 90% of type of parent responding to the survey (Ansari & Gershoff, 2016; Stacer & Perrucci, 2012; Ansari, Purtell, & Gershoff, 2016). This can lead researchers to believe that mothers are more involved in more aspects of the child’s life than the father. Also, this number can be affected by the instances where children are raised by a single parent, with that single parent being their mother. Through much of the same research, it was found that of the parents who responded to the surveys, upper 30%s to upper 40% of the respondents were from a single parent household (Ansari & Gershoff, 2016; Arnold, Zeljo, Doctoroff, &Ortiz, 2008; Ansari, Purtell, & Gershoff, 2016). These moderate percentages might account for the differences in the level of involvement for single parent households versus dual-parent households. Stacer and Perrucci (2012) provided that single Black parents are significantly more involved in the home, while single White parents are significantly more involved in the community. Arnold, Zeljo, Doctoroff, and Ortiz (2008) contradict that point by referring to the issue that a single parent household would have a lower socioeconomic status, and therefore influencing a reduced level of parental involvement.
Parental Activities and Limitations
With relation to parent involvement through school, research has shown types of activities that are developed to assist parents in remaining involved throughout their child’s education. These activities included parent teacher conferences, Parent-Teacher Organization (PTO) meetings, reinforcement activities with kitchen measuring, and volunteering or participating in the classroom (Ansari & Gershoff, 2016; Arnold, Zeljo, Doctoroff, &Ortiz, 2008; Bower & Griffin, 2011). However, a complication to remaining involved in parental involvement is reflected through hours worked by parents. Research has found that as the number of hours worked increases for parents, their level of involvement decreases (Ansari & Gershoff, 2016; Stacer & Perrucci, 2012). Arnold, Zeljo, Doctoroff, and Ortiz (2008) further explains that single parent households may have an even tougher time since the individual parent is supporting the family alone.
Suggestions for Future Research
A topic that was addressed as needing further research is that of quality involvement over quantity involvement (Arnold, Zeljo, Doctoroff, &Ortiz, 2008; Stacer & Perrucci, 2012). This topic demands additional research due to the unavailable level of involvement. The activities were counted per activity rather than per hour spent our achievement encouraged or developed.
Methods
Study Design and Sample
The purpose of evaluation research, “is to evaluate the impact of social interventions: new teaching methods, innovations in parole, and a host of others,” (Babbie, 2014 p. 373). Our population for this evaluation research study is families with children in the Head Start Program. This specific program, “was designed to help break the cycle of poverty, providing preschool children of low-income families with a comprehensive program to meet their emotional, social, health, nutritional and psychological needs,” (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2019). Our specific sample is with 3 rural central Virginia. We sent home five family involvement activities over a one-week period to 86 families. We had a 51% response rate to our survey. A survey was used to measure parental involvement, demographics, and qualitative data. We asked open-ended questions at the beginning of the survey to satisfy our need for qualitative data. Descriptive analyses will be used to examine the results from the survey. A mixed-method analysis will also be used.
Procedure
We received an approval for this research through the Longwood University Institutional Review Board. A pen and paper survey was sent home with the fifth activity on the last day of the week of activities. As incentive for parents to complete and return the survey, we attached a $5 gift card to each of the 86 surveys. The parent was to send the survey back to Head Start with their child, the child was told give it to their teacher at Head Start, and the teacher returned them to our team for examination and coding. We are measuring parent involvement because of a previous needs assessment done for this sample. The needs assessment established that parents want to spend more time with their children but have limitations whether it be time, money, ideas, etc. The activities that were sent home with the children are designed and encouraged to include all members of the family.
Quantitative Measures
Our quantitative data came from multiple-choice questions, scale questions, and demographic questions. Each activity had a set of questions that corresponded to it, and several of the questions were the same throughout each activity measuring time, level of attempt, and enjoyment. The questions being: How long did it take you and your child/children to complete the activity?, From the following choices, please choose the most appropriate level of completion for this activity?, and On a scale of 0-10, how much did your family enjoy this activity? (0=Not at all, 10=Very much). The time question was measured based on 0-10 minutes, 11-20 minutes, 21-30 minutes, and longer than 30 minutes. Each of these activities were designed to take no more than 30 minutes. The level of attempt question was measured by attempted and completed, attempted but did not complete, and did not attempt (If you did not attempt this activity, please skip to the next section of the survey). The demographic measurements that pertained to our research the age of the parent, during a typical day, how many hours do you get to spend interacting with your child/children, relationship to child of the person completing the survey, who lives in your household, and how many people participated in each activity.
Qualitative Measures
Our qualitative data came from four open-ended questions that were at the start of our survey. We placed the questions at the beginning because we are predicting that we will receive more detailed answers if these open-ended questions are presented first. The first question was what was your favorite activity and why? We provided a list of the given activities before the question so the person filling out the survey would have a list to reference. This question is designed to tell us what activities were the best received and validate other data based on their enjoyment level indicated in the scale question. The second open-ended question is Please explain what your family gained from these activities. How will you use what you gained in the future? This question will measure the outcomes from the activities, and help the parents reflect on what the family attained from the parental involvement. Our third question was asking Do you think being provided with pre-planned activities increased the amount of fun time you got to spend with your family after school? Please explain. This question was used to establish if what we were supplying and using to test was reasonable for what we are working to measure. Our fourth and final open-ended question was If you could change at least one thing about these activities for future use, what would it be? We felt this question was necessary because it allowed our activities to receive vital feedback and allowed participants to give advice or recommendation where they viewed it necessary, since we did not participate in the activities.
Quantitative Analysis
The categorical and continuous data was gathered and used to explore relationships between a variety of variables. The two variables in particular that relate to parental involvement levels among single and dual parent households were the following questions: During a typical day, how many hours do you get to spend interacting with your child/children? (Please circle) and who lives in your household? Please check all that apply. The first question was answerable through a 0 to 10 or more hours scale, and the second question included child’s mother, child’s father, child’s grandparent, parent’s significant other, child’s aunt(s), child’s uncle(s), other adult children, and other, not listed. Both of these variables were examined for individual data, and then I conducted a bivariate analysis comparing them both. This test was performed using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS).
The first variable I examined was the number of hours the parent was able to spend interacting with their child/children. Table 1 shows the percentages of each group of options. Group 1 includes all answer choices between 1-2 hours, group two includes 3-4 hours, group three includes 5-6 hours, group four includes 7-8 hours, and group 5 includes 9-10 or more hours. For the use of SPSS, I used 10 anytime 10 or more hours was circled. No respondent answered this question by circling 0. The mean, median, and mode for the data set were all 6 hours. Which can be further seen in Table 1 as it is in the largest group based on percentage.
Table 1
Hours spent interacting with child/children
| Group | Percentage |
| 1 (1-2 hours) | 8.8% |
| 2 (3-4 hours) | 17.6% |
| 3 (5-6 hours) | 38.2% |
| 4 (7-8 hours) | 17.6% |
| 5 (9-10 or more hours) | 17.6% |
| Total | 100% |
Note. These percentages were based off of the 34 respondents who completed this question.
The second variable I examined was the breakdown of household occupancy. Table 2 shows the count and percentage of the breakdown. After examining the breakdown and comparing each individual respondent, I found, of the 31 respondents that completed this question, 18 of them have a dual parent household and 12 of them have a single parent household, see Figure 1. Since there is a spilt between dual and single parent households, this allowed me to further analyze the data since both types were represented within our sample.
Table 2
Breakdown of household occupancy
| Family Member | Count | Percentage |
| Child’s Mother | 27 | 42.2% |
| Child’s Father | 16 | 25.0% |
| Child’s Grandparent | 2 | 3.1% |
| Parent’s Significant other | 6 | 9.4% |
| Child’s Aunt(s) | 3 | 4.7% |
| Child’s Uncle(s) | 2 | 3.1% |
| Other adult children | 1 | 1.6% |
| Other, not listed | 7 | 10.9% |
| Total | 64 | 100% |
Note. This data is gathered from 31 survey responses. The variable is not independent of itself because respondents could select more than one category.
After studying the two variables, I conducted a bi-variate analysis to compare them. I used the household type as the independent variable which explains the dependent variable of hours spent interacting with child/children. By doing this test, I was able to find the means for each household type, see table 3.
Table 3
Average time interacting per household type
| Household Type | Average Time Interacting |
| Single | 3.58 hours |
| Dual | 2.94 hours |
Note. This sample was based off 30 respondents because SPSS automatically excluded one respondent that belonged to the single parent household type but did not answer the question on time spent interacting with child/children.
I used these variables to test if there was a difference in the amount of time a parent from a single parent household was able to spend with their child/children was different from that of a dual parent household. Due to the closeness of the averages of time spent, it would be hard to justify the claim that these counts are different.
Qualitative Analysis
The open-ended data was gathered and used to explore themes related to parental involvement. Throughout the qualitative coding process, we found there are three reoccurring themes. These were enjoyment through education, togetherness through activities, and considerations for improvement. The responses allowed the parents to elaborate on their favorite activity, things gained, and advice for future use of these activities.
The first predominate theme that was established is the concept of enjoyment through education. The activities given were designed to prompt learning and that message was received by the parents and family members while completing the activity with their child. Many of the respondents mentioned their children enjoying the activities and classified them by discussing the way they enjoyed them. Respondent 1 stated “he likes making animal noises… he likes making [expressions].” Respondent 5 went further to consider that they were able to learn “that we can learn and have fun at the same time.” This conclusion helps us to know that while the activities were educational, the set up and instructions still permitted for amusement. Respondent 6 was able to articulate that “the sugar tray was my favorite because it helped [my child] with writing her name.” Additionally, Respondent 19 explained that the activities “helped my child understand things about his feelings and what to be thankful for.” The respondents consistently tied the activities back to their educational component, and they showed either their joy from participating with their child or the joy from the child’s involvement in the activity.
The second apparent theme throughout the responses was togetherness through activities. This theme was recognized with respondents mentioning things like “our family was able to bond” (Respondent 5), “it had the whole [family] engaged and moving” (Respondent 10), or “my family gained quality time” (Respondent 19). This theme ties directly into the parental involvement them, and they also represent the ability for family involvement in single and dual parent households. Respondent 5 and Respondent 10 both indicated that their household includes the child’s mother and the child’s father, while Respondent 19 indicated their household included the child’s mother and other adolescent children. Both types of households’ place value on family time, and they talk about how these provided activities facilitated for additional family time and family bonding.
The third theme presented was considerations through involvement. One of the questions we asked was centered around improvements to be made for future uses of these activities. Many of the respondents left this question blank or put things like nothing or none. However, some respondents expressed concerns for the activities themselves with ways that would accommodate or elevate stress during future uses. Respondent 11 stated a change they would make is “something not as heavy for the animal dice.” Additionally, Respondent 5 further discussed for us to “be mindful that kids [my child’s] age like to put the items in his mouth.” Both of these particular responses allowed us to view our activities more closely, and understand that while they may have seemed convenient or simple to us, actually performing these specific activities with children could have their own issues. Another consideration that we discovered, through the parental involvement, was future activities or ways for activities that are direct suggestions from the respondents. Specifically, Respondent 6 stated, “I would like more activities about learning to write and how to hold a pencil correctly.” This helped validate one of the activities, the Thankful Turkey Activity, and it allows for growth through future research. Respondent 19 also elaborated that “I would change some of the materials for more creativity to be used.” These suggestions may lead from the families have creativity built into their households or they are seeking ways to include more imagination. Each of these considerations would not have necessarily been found had the surveys not been produced with the open-ended question about improvements.
Each one of these themes was evident throughout many of the survey responses. Enjoyment through education allowed the respondents to see that not all activities centered around school are completely tedious or dull. With the right activities, the children can learn without even noticing that they are learning or practicing lessons they learn in their Head Start program. The togetherness through activities theme qualitatively established the level of parental and family involvement. The majority of the respondents discussed how the activities helped their family gain quality time together. The final code about considerations through involvement can help lead the families and experimenters to better establish activities that can cater to the needs of the families. These considerations were only able to be recognized because the respondents attempted the activities with their families. Our lack of attempting each activity with children ages 3 to 5 limited our ability to predict what issues may have risen.
Conclusion
This research paper addressed parental involvement through Head Start programs in rural areas. I specifically looked at parental involvement in single parent versus dual parent households. I found that this research was needed due to the lack of research found in the literature on this topic. The specific research question that I developed was, how do the given activities influence parent involvement with single parent households differ from dual parent households? I utilized evaluation research to examine the quantitative and qualitative data retrieved from the survey sent home to the children. This survey was sent home after five days of activities were sent home.
The quantitative data was pulled from the multiple-choice questions, scale questions, and demographic questions. This specific data used to answer the presented question was the respondents number of hours spent interacting with their child/children in a typical day and the type of parental household, single or dual. After establishing the spread of the data, I found that, through a bivariate analysis of these two variables, that there was not significant evidence to support that there is a difference in the level of involvement in a single parent versus a dual parent household.
The qualitative data was gathered through the open-ended questions strategically placed at the beginning of the survey. We arranged the questions like this in hopes to receive the best comments before the respondent felt too tired to elaborate further. The themes that were found throughout were enjoyment through education, togetherness through activities, and considerations for improvement. These themes were found among many of the survey responses, and this allowed me to conclude that parents can be more involved with pre-planned activities that are catered towards education. I also found that such activities will have concerns until they are tested on the age group they are designed for. This limitation as well as the limitation of not receiving every survey response timely was found during the process of conducting this research.
Upon further contemplation of these findings, I was able to tie them to a bigger picture. Parental involvement is a widespread issue in the United States and is being addressed for low-income households with the Head Start program. An important aspect to consider is the limitations that are placed on parents that cause constraints to their level of involvement. These limitations can be time, ability to develop activities, money, and energy. If these restrictions could be eliminated or reduced, parental involvement may improve and therefore improve early childhood development. These considerations could be examined further in additional research that is still needed to be conducted to add additional analysis to this topic.
References
Ansari, A., & Gershoff, E. (2016). Parent involvement in head start and children’s development: indirect effects through parenting. Journal of Marriage and Family. 78, (April 2016), 562-579.
Ansari, A., & Purtell, K. M., & Gershoff, E. T. (2016). Parenting gains in head start as a function of initial parenting skill. Journal of Marriage and Family, 78, (October 2016), 1195-1207.
Arnold, P. H., & Zeljo, A., & Doctoroff, G. L., & Ortiz, C. (2008). Parent involvement in preschool: predictors and the relation of involvement to preliteracy development. School Psychology Review, 37, 74-90.
Babbie, E. R. (2014). Basics of Social Research – 6th Edition. Wadsworth, Inc.
Bower, H. A., & Griffin, D. (2011). Can the Epstein model of parental involvement work in a high-minority, high-poverty elementary school? a case. Professional School Counseling, 15, (December 2011), 77-87.
Stacer, M. J., & Perrucci, R. (2012). Parental involvement with children at school, home, and community. Journal of Family and Economic Issues, 34, (2013), 340-354.
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (2019, June 4). History of Head Start. Retrieved from An Office of the Administration for Children & Families: https://www.acf.hhs.gov/ohs/about/history-of-head-start