Title: Overview of Family-School Partnerships The Future of School Psychology Task Force on Family-School Partnerships Jennifer Burt, Ashley Taylor, Katie Magee, Laura Mullaney, Susan Sheridan University of Nebraska-Lincoln
1Overview of Family-School Partnerships The
Future of School Psychology Task Force on
Family-School Partnerships Jennifer Burt,
Ashley Taylor, Katie Magee, Laura Mullaney, Susan
Sheridan University of Nebraska-Lincoln
2Why Family-School Partnerships?
- parents take their child home after
professionals complete their services and parents
continue providing the care for the larger
portion of the childs waking hours No matter
how skilled professionals are, or how loving
parents are, each cannot achieve alone what the
two parties, working hand-in-hand, can accomplish
together -
(Peterson Cooper, 1989
pp. 229, 208). - See Handout 1
3Why Family-School Partnerships?
4What are Family-School Partnerships?
- A relationship involving close cooperation
between parties having joint rights and
responsibilities. - The goals of family-school partnerships include
- (a) enhancing success for students, and
- (b) improving experiences and outcomes for
children, including those that are academic,
social, emotional and behavioral in nature. - (Christenson
Sheridan, 2001) - See Handouts 2, 3,4, and 5
5Who is involved in partnerships?
- School administrators
- Provide leadership at a building level.
- Encourage teachers to engage in partnership
practices with families. - Create conditions within the school that are
conducive to partnership practices. - School psychologists
- Facilitate and support communication between
teachers and families. - Provide information to families regarding how to
support student learning . - Providing support and consultation to parents as
they become involved in student learning
(Christenson, 1995). - Teachers and families
- Engage in relationships where communication is
reciprocal. - Each person is responsive to the ideas and needs
of the other person.
6When is it appropriate to engage in partnerships?
- Current engagement in partnerships
- 20 of families work as partners in education.
- 70 of families believe they would and could
engage in partnerships if provided with support. - 10 of families do not engage in partnerships
because of significant personal problems (Epstein
personal communication 1995, as cited by
Christenson Sheridan, 2001). - Family-school partnerships are seen as a
protective factor - Partnerships should be formed when students enter
school. - Partnerships should be sustained throughout their
education.
7When is it appropriate to engage in partnerships?
- Effective family-school partnerships
- Represent a 13-year contract between families and
schools to provide a quality education for all
students. - (Christenson Sheridan, 2001)
- They are proactive and not reactive to student
concerns. - Families and schools should engage in
partnerships throughout a students education. - Promote an understanding of school policies and
procedures especially when student concerns are
present.
8The M Ms of Parenting and Partnering
- Make sure your child is ready to learn.
- Monitor your child and his or her performance.
- Motivate your child.
- Be a good role Model.
- Maintain a positive relationship with your
childs teacher. - See Activity 1
9Partnership vs. Traditional Orientations to
Family-School Partnerships
- Partnership Approach
- Commitment to working together on behalf of the
childs performance/ achievement is clear. - Communication is frequent, positive,
bi-directional. - Relationship is characterized by cultural
sensitivity cultural differences are respected,
appreciated, and recognized as contributing to
positive learning climates. - See Handouts 6 and 7
- Traditional Approach
- Emphasis on what schools do to promote learning.
- Infrequent, one-directional, or problem-centered
communication (school ? home). - One-size fits all orientation cultural
differences are perceived as challenges to
overcome.
10Partnership vs. Traditional Orientations to
Family-School Partnerships
- Partnership Approach
- Different perspectives are valued as important.
- Roles are clear, mutual, and supportive.
- Goals for students are mutually determined and
shared. - Plans are co-constructed, with agreed upon roles
for all participants.
- Traditional Approach
- Different perspectives are seen as barriers.
- Separate roles that distance participants.
- Goals determined by school personnel and
sometimes shared with parents. - Educational plans devised and delivered by
teachers. - (Sheridan,
2004)
11Roles of Families and Schools in Partnership
Models
- There are many roles that can be shared by
parents and teachers
Co- decision makers
Co-teachers
Co-learners
Co-supporters
Co-communicators
See Activity 2
12Theoretical Perspective Ecological Systems
Approach
- An effective, constructive family-school
partnership occurs in an ecological context, with
the student at center - Students, families and schools are all part of
interrelated ecological systems within which a
child resides. - Difficulties occur when there is a mismatch
across one or more subsystems. - Partnership programs and services are focused on
forging a more effective match between the needs
of an individual student, and strengths of the
interfacing home school systems. - Main attention is always on the potential
benefits and outcomes for students.
(Sheridan, 2004)
13Rationale for a Multi-Tiered Approach to
Family-School Partnerships
- Family-school partnerships provide a context for
families and educators to collaboratively
identify and prioritize concerns across a
continuum of opportunities and intensities. - Prevention and intervention efforts and supports
are delivered toward a universal and targeted
audience. - A multi-tiered approach enables families and
educators to provide services based on a
students responsiveness to previous preventions,
interventions, and supports.
14Explanation for a Multi-Tiered Approach to
Family-School Partnerships
- Provides various levels of family-school supports
based on a students identified need and
responsiveness to previous efforts. - Universal Family-school collaboration provided
to support all students and families (e.g., 4 As,
Parent-School Collaboration, Parent Involvement,
Parent Education). - Targeted Family-school collaboration provided
to support identified students and families
unresponsive to previous universal efforts (e.g.,
Parent Education and Intervention, Parent
Consultation). - Intensive Family-school collaboration provided
to students and families unresponsive to previous
targeted efforts (e.g., Parent Consultation
conjoint behavioral consultation and Parent
Intervention). - See Handout 8
15The Multi-Tiered Approach to Family-School
Partnerships
Tier 3 Intensive, Individual Interventions Indivi
dualized supports for families and students
unresponsive to the first two tiers (e.g., Parent
Consultation conjoint behavioral consultation
and Parent Intervention).
Tier 3 1-7
Tier 2 Targeted Group Interventions Specific
preventions and remedial interventions for
targeted groups of families and students
identified as at risk and unresponsive to the
first tier (e.g., Parent Education and
Intervention, Parent Consultation).
Tier 2 5-15
Tier 1 Universal Interventions Engaging all
families as collaborative partners (e.g., 4 As,
Parent-School Collaboration, Parent Involvement,
Parent Education).
Tier 1 80-90
16Theoretical Perspective Family-Centered Approach
- Providing direct support and assistance to
families increases the likelihood these families
can directly mediate their childs behavior and
development more efficiently than can indirect
services aimed toward the child (Dunst, Trivette,
Deal, 1998). - Familys strengths, needs, and priorities along
with the needs of their child guide the provision
of local resources and services (Dunst, 1985
Rappaport, 1981). - Family-centered services strengthen the familys
capacity to meet their needs and the needs of
their child (Dunst, 1985 Rappaport, 1981). - Families are their childs first and best
advocate.
17Defining Characteristics of Family-School
Partnerships
- Interactions among partners are collaborative and
bi-directional. - Relationships across home and school systems are
cooperative, interdependent, and balanced. - Maintenance of a positive relationship is a
priority. - Services are flexible, responsive, and proactive.
- Differences in perspectives are seen as
strengths. - There is a commitment to cultural competence.
- Emphasis is on outcomes and goal attainment.
-
(Sheridan, 2004)
18Rationale for Family-School Partnerships
- There are many systems and settings where
children learn. - In the US, students spend 91 of their time from
birth - 18 outside of school once in school,
they spend 70 of their waking hours outside of
school (Clarke, 1990). - The impact of out-of-school time (e.g., message
about schooling, use of time, congruence with
school environment) must be acknowledged.
19Rationale for Family-School Partnerships
- Federal policy recognizes the need to address
students time spent out of school and mandates
schools to engage in partnerships with parents
to meet the increasing academic, behavioral, and
social needs of students. - In 1975, PL 94-142 established the foundations
for parental involvement in education. It
required - (a) notification of parents when the school
proposed or refused to - initiate or change an educational
placement, - (b) parent consent prior to evaluation and
special education - placement,
- (c) parental participation in the development
of the Individualized - Education Plans (IEPs), and
- (d) parental rights to challenge special
education decisions.
20Rationale for Family-School Partnerships
- In 1986, P.L. 99-457 mandated Free and
Appropriate Public Education (FAPE) to children
ages 0-3 and instituted the Individualized Family
Service Plan (IFSP). This required that for
educational planning purposes, young children
should be considered within the context of their
family. Services should be provided not
exclusively to the child but also to the family. - IDEA 1997 included more meaningful parent
participation, including establishing regulations
for including parents on school-based teams, and
increasing parental responsibility in the special
education process.
21Rationale for Family-School Partnerships
- The No Child Left Behind Act of 2002 specifically
calls for local education agencies to assist
school personnel to reach out to, communicate
with, and work with parents as equal partners
implement and coordinate parent programs and
build ties between parents and the school (P.L.
107-111,1118). - IDEA 2004 includes
- Part B Programs for children 3 to 21 years
which provide requirements in the areas of, but
not limited to, parental rights and involvement,
related educational services, multidisciplinary
assessments, etc. - Part C Programs for infants and toddlers
(birth to 3 years) which - emphasizes the notion of family involvement
in the screening and evaluation of young children
and in the programming for early intervention and
IFSPs.
22Research Findings
- In the presence of effective family-school
partnerships, students have been shown to
demonstrate - improvement in grades (Fehrman, Keith, Reimers,
1987) - test scores (Epstein, 1991)
- attitudes (Kellagahen et al., 1993)
- self-concept, behavior, social skills (Hickman,
Greenwood, Miller, 1995) - greater study habits and homework completion
rates (Clark, 1993 Hoover-Dempsey et al., 2001) - more engagement in classroom learning activities
(Collins, Moles, Cross, 1982 Sattes, 1985)
and - higher attendance rates and a reduction in
suspension rates and discipline problems (Sheldon
Epstein, 2004). - See Handout 9
23Benefits for Students
24Research Findings
- In the presence of effective family-school
partnerships, teachers have been shown to - become more proficient in professional
activities, - allocate more time to instruction,
- become more involved with curriculum,
- develop more student-oriented rather than
task-oriented activities (Hoover-Dempsey, Walker,
Jones, Reed, 2002), - receive higher ratings on teaching performance
evaluations by principals (Christenson, 1995),
and - indicate greater satisfaction with their jobs and
request fewer transfers (Christenson Cleary,
1990).
25Research Findings
- In the presence of effective family-school
partnerships, parents have been shown to - demonstrate greater understanding of the work of
schools and positive attitudes about school
(Epstein, 1986) - report increased contacts and communication with
educators, and a desire for more involvement
(Hoover-Dempsey Sandler, 1997) - improve their communication with their children,
report improved parent-child relationships, and
develop effective parenting skills (Becher,
1984) and - become more involved in learning activities at
home (Epstein, 1995).
26Research Findings
- In the presence of effective family-school
- partnerships, schools have been shown to
- receive higher effectiveness ratings, and
- implement more successful school programs.
- (Christenson
Sheridan, 2001)
27Benefits to Schools
28Research Findings
- Generalization of school programs occurs more
readily when families are involved. - Consultation with teachers alone is effective at
promoting school success (Sheridan,1997), but
generalization to home occurs only when parents
are involved (Sheridan et al., 1990). - Family process variables (specific things
families do) facilitate learning educational
success more than status variables (who families
are). - Social class or family configuration predicts up
to 25 of variance in achievement family process
variables predict up to 60 of variance
(Kellaghan et al., 1993).
29Cultural Considerations
- Many children from diverse cultural backgrounds
do not speak English when they enter school and
have not attended preschool or daycare. - For example, the number of non-English speaking
children has doubled since 1979. - Parents have different levels of education,
socioeconomic status, English competency, and
acculturation. - There is a scarcity of research in the area of
family-school partnerships with children and
families from diverse cultural backgrounds. - (Sheridan,
Vazquez-Nuttall, Li, 2005)
30Cultural Considerations
- Parents, regardless of educational level, income
status, or ethnic background want their children
to be successful in school (Christenson, 1995). - Across groups, parents want information about how
schools function, childrens development/learning,
parents roles in supporting their children. - School practices are a stronger predictor of
parent involvement than parents educational
level, income status, or ethnic background
(Epstein, 1991). - See Creating Partnerships with Culturally Diverse
Families PowerPoint
31Building Shared Responsibility
- Garner Administrative Support
- Practice Systems Advocacy
- Build Family-School Teams
- Increase Effective Problem Solving and Solution
Finding - Keep a Focus on Goals and Outcomes
- But Recognize the Importance of Process
- Foster Positive Home Learning Environments
- Focus on Communication as the foundation for all
family involvement - Collaboration with families is key!
- See Handout 10
32Developing Pathways to Partnerships
- Prerequisite Conditions
- These 3 As must be in place for Actions
- to be accepted and effective
Approach
Actions Communicating a tone of partnership
through bidirectional home-school communication
and fostering family involvement in learning at
home
Successful learning opportunities and outcomes
for children
Atmosphere
Attitude
(Christenson Sheridan, 2001 Sheridan
Kratochwill, in press)
See Handout 11 and Creating Conditions for
Family-School Partnerships PowerPoint
33Approach
- Approach The framework for interaction with
- families.
- Central to the partnership model is a belief in
shared responsibility for educating and
socializing children both families and
educators are essential for childrens growth and
development inside and out of school. - Emphasis is placed on relationships, rather than
separate roles how families and educators work
together to promote the academic and social
development of students.
34Atmosphere
- Atmosphere The climate in schools for families
and educators. - The affective climate in interactions among
families and schools. - The physical climate in schools that make them
inviting and family-friendly. - All families must feel welcome!
- Differences in parent backgrounds experiences
must be recognized. - Personal difficulties in school or previous
conflicts may be prominent. - Ethnic, linguistic, religious, class differences
can widen the gap.
35Attitude
- Attitude The values and perceptions held about
family-school - relationships.
- All families have strengths.
- Parents can help their children succeed in school
-- they must be provided with the opportunity and
necessary information and support. - Schools and families influence each other.
- Parents have important information and
perspectives that we need to help educate their
children. - Parents and educators each bring unique and
important perspectives and expertise to the table
as co-equals. - See Handouts 12 and 13
36Actions
- Actions What schools do to build partnerships
and shared responsibility for education between
families and schools. - Actions must be distinguished from activities
- Activities represent a narrow focus on how to
involve families in education (e.g., curriculum
night, parent-teacher conferences) - Actions focus on more broadly on the relationship
or connection between families and school
relative to childrens school performance - See Handout 14
37Actions Evidence-Based Interventions
- Practices that are informed by research, in
which characteristics and consequences of
environmental variables are empirically
established and the relationship directly informs
what a practitioner can do to produce a desired
outcome (Dunst, Trivette, Cutspec, 2002, p.
3). - The label of evidence-based interventions should
be used when programs have successfully
demonstrated efficacy under the conditions of
implementation and practice (Kratochwill
Shernoff, 2004, p. 35).
38The Use of Evidence-Based Interventions
- There has been a current paradigm shift in school
psychology toward the implementation of
empirically validated interventions among
children, families, and schools. - Likewise, the increased accountability within
the educational systems, as mandated by multiple
federal accountability initiatives (e.g., IDEA
and NCLB), have required these systems to report
the efficacy of interventions as well as provide
effectiveness data on child and family outcomes.
39Identifying Evidence-Based Interventions
- Goal A of the Family-School Task Force was to
identify evidence based models of effective
family-school partnerships. - These programs were examined and coded for
evidence- based outcomes related to their
produced intended effects using the following
criteria - empirical/theoretical foundation, design
qualities, statistical treatment of the
interventions - the implementation of key evidence components
which promote internal validity and the necessary
features for home and school-based implementation
of these interventions and - factors of interest, as identified by the
consumer, in the evaluation of the external
validity and utility of these interventions
(Kratochwill Stoiber, 2002).
40Goals of Evidence-Based Interventions
- After identifying numerous evidence-based
interventions, the goal was to - influence practitioners selection and
implementation of family-school interventions
through a systematic dissemination of the
research evidence and - narrow the research to practice gap related to
the practice feasibility, acceptability, social
validity, fidelity, and sustainability of these
service delivery models when working with
families (Sheridan, 2005).
41Actions Examples of Evidence-Based Interventions
- Numerous evidence-based models have been
identified which utilize and promote
family-school partnerships. - These models have been separated into the
following areas - 1. Family-School Interventions with
Preschool Children - 2. Parent Consultation
- 3. Parent Education, Training, and Intervention
- 4. Family-School Collaboration
- 5. Parent Involvement Interventions
- See Creating Conditions for Family-School
Partnerships PowerPoint
42Actions Evidence-Based Interventions
- Interventions with Preschool Children
- Incredible Years Training Series
- PARTNERS Parent Education Program
- Parent Child Interaction Therapy
- Dialogic Reading
- See Handouts 15, 16, 17, and 18
43Actions Evidence-Based Interventions
- Parent Consultation
- Conjoint Behavioral Consultation
- Parent Behavioral Consultation
- Parent Education, Training, and Intervention
- Problem-Solving Skills Training plus Parent
Management Training - Aware Parenting
- Reading Made Easy
- See Handouts 19, 20, 21, 22, and 23
44Actions Evidence-Based Interventions
- Interventions Using Family-School Collaboration
- School-Based Literacy Program/Family Literacy
Program - Parent-Teacher Action Research Teams plus Social
Skills Instruction - School-Home Notes and Family Problem Solving
Board Game - Parent Involvement
- Parent Tutoring
- Parents Encourage Pupils
- Reciprocal Peer Tutoring and Parent Involvement
- See Handouts 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, and 29
45Challenges and Solutions to Family-School
Partnerships
- Structural
- Shape the collaborative dialogue and working
relationships between families and schools - Psychological
- Influence an individuals motivation to
personally engage with families or educators - (Christenson, 2004)
- See Opportunities, Challenges, and Solutions
PowerPoint
46References
- Blechman, E. A., Taylor, C. J., Schrader, S. M.
(1981). Family problem solving versus home notes
as early intervention with high-risk children.
Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology,
49, 919-926. - Bronstein, P., Duncan, P., Clauson, J., Abrams,
C. L., Yannett, N., Ginsburg, G. et al. (1988).
Preventing middle school adjustment problems for
children from lower income families A program
for aware parenting. Journal of Applied
Developmental Psychology, 19, 1299-1352. - Brown, T. L., Henggeler, S. W., Schoenwald, S.
K., Brondino, M. J., Pickrel, S. G. (1999).
Multisystemic treatment of substance abusing and
dependent juvenile delinquents Effects on school
attendance at posttreatment and 6-month follow
up. Childrens Services Social Policy, Research,
and Practice, 2, 81-93. - Christenson, S. L. (1995). Families and schools
What is the role of the school psychologist?
School Psychology Quarterly, 10, 118-132. - Christenson, S. L., Carlson, C., Valdez, C. R.
(2002). Evidence-based intervention in school
psychology Opportunities, challenges, and
cautions. Journal of School Psychology, 17,
466-474. - Christenson, S. L., Cleary, M. (1990).
Consultation and the parent-educator partnership
A perspective. Journal of Educational and
Psychological Consultation,1, 219-241 - Christenson, S. L., Sheridan, S. M. (2001).
Schools and families Creating essential
connections for learning. New York Guilford
Press. - Clark, R.M. (1990). Why disadvantaged students
succeed What happens outside school is critical.
Public Welfare (17-23). - Clark, R. M. (1993). Homework-focused parenting
practices that positively affect student
achievement. In N.F. Chavkin (Ed.). Families and
schools in a pluralistic society (pp. 85-105).
Albany State University of New York Press.
47References
- Collins, C. H., Moles, O., Cross, M. (1982).
The home-school connections Selected partnership
programs in large cities. Boston, MA Institute
for Responsive Education. - Dunst, C. J. (1985). Rethinking early
intervention. Analysis and Intervention in
Developmental Disabilities, 5, 59-71. - Dunst, C. J., Trivette, C. M., Cutspec, P. A.
(2002). Toward an operational definition of
evidence-based practices. Centerscope, 1, 1-10. - Dunst, C. J., Trivette, C. M., Deal, A. (1988).
Enabling empowering families. Cambridge, MA
Brookline Books, Inc. - Duvall, S. F., Delquadri, J. C., Elliot, M.,
Hall, R. V. (1992). Parent-tutoring procedures
Experimental analysis and validation of
generalization in oral reading across passages,
settings, and time. Journal of Behavioral
Education, 2, 281-303. - Epstein, J. L. (1991). Paths to partnership What
we can learn from federal, state, district, and
school initiatives. Phi Delta Kappan, 72 (5). - Goff, G. A., Demetral, G. D. (1983). A
home-based program to eliminate aggression in the
classroom. Social Work in Education, 5-14. - Fehrmann, P. G., Keith, T. Z., Reimers, T. M.
(1987). Home influences on school learning
Direct and indirect effects of parent involvement
on high school grades. Journal of Educational
Research, 80, 330-337. - Heller, L. R., Fantuzzo, J. W. (1993).
Reciprocal peer tutoring and parent partnership
Does parent involvement make a difference? School
Psychology Review, 22, 517-535. - Hembree-Kigin, T. L. McNeil, C. B. (1995).
Parent-child interaction therapy. New York
Plenum Press.
48References
- Hickman, C. W., Greenwood, G., Miller, M. D.
(1985). High school parent involvement
Relationships with achievement, grade level, SES,
and gender. Journal of Research and Development
in Education, 28, 287-294. - Hogue, A., Liddle, H. A., Becker, D.,
Johnson-Leckrone, J. (2002). Family-based
prevention counseling for high-risk young
adolescents Immediate outcomes. Journal of
Community Psychology, 30, 1-22. - Hook, C. L., DuPaul, G. J. (1999). Reciprocal
peer tutoring for student with attention-deficit/h
yperactivity disorder Effects on reading
performance at home and at school. School
Psychology Review, 28, 60-75. - Hoover-Dempsey, K. V., Battiato, A. C., Walker,
J. M. T., Reed, R. P., DeJong, J. M., Jones, K.
P. (2001). Parent involvement in homework.
Educational Psychologist, 36 , 195-209. - Hoover-Dempsey, K.V., Sandler, H. (1997). Why
do parents become involved in their childrens
education? Review of Educational Research, 67,
3-42. Retrieved on November 27, 2005 from
http//www.vanderbilt.edu/Peabody/family-school/pa
pers.html - Hoover-Dempsey, K.V., Walker, J.M.T, Jones, K.P.,
Reed, R.P. (2002). Teachers Involving Parents
(TIP) Results of an in-service teacher education
program for enhancing parental involvement.
Teaching and Teacher Education, 18, 1-25.
Retrieved on November 27, 2005 from
http//www.vanderbilt.edu/Peabody/family-school/pa
pers/Teachers_involving_parents.doc/ - Kazdin, A. E., Esveldt-Dawson, K., French, N H.,
Unis, A. S. (1987). Effects of parent management
training and problem solving skills training
combined in the treatment of antisocial child
behavior. Journal of the American Academy of
Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 26, 416-424. - Kellaghan, T, Sloane, K., Alvarez, B., Bloom,
B. S. (1993). The home environment and school
learning Promoting parental involvement in the
education of children. San Francisco
Jossey-Bass Publishers. - Kratochwill, T. R. Shernoff, E. S. (2003).
Evidence-based practice Promoting evidence-based
interventions in school psychology. School
Psychology Review, 33, 34-48.
49References
- Kratochwill, T. R. Stoiber, K. C. (2002).
Evidence-based interventions in school
psychology Conceptual foundations of the
procedural and coding manual of Division 16 and
the Society for the Study of School Psychology
task force. School Psychology Quarterly, 17,
341-389. - McConaughy, S. H., Kay, P.J., Fitzgerald, M.
(1999). The achieving, behaving, caring project
for preventing ED Two-year outcomes. Journal of
Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 7, 224-239. - Mehran, M., White, K. R. (1988). Parent
tutoring as a supplemental compensatory education
for first-grade children. RASE, 9, 35-41. - Morrow, L. M., Young, J. (1997). A family
literacy program connecting school and home
Effects on attitude, motivation, and literacy
achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology,
89, 736-742. - No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, Pub. L. No.
107-110, 115 Stat. 1425. (2002). - Rappaport, J. (1981). In praise of paradox A
social policy of empowerment over prevention.
American Journal of Community Psychology, 9,
1-25. - Sayger, T. V., Horne, A. M., Walker, L. M.,
Passmore, J. L. (1988). Social learning family
therapy with aggressive children Treatment
outcome and maintenance. Journal of Family
Psychology, 1, 261-285. - Sattes, B. (1985). Parent involvement A review
of the literature (Report No. 21). Charleston,
WV Appalachia Educational Laboratory. - Sheldon, S. B., Epstein, J. L. (2004). Getting
students to school Using family and school
community involvement to reduce chronic
absenteeism. School Community Journal, 14, 39-56.
50References
- Sheridan, S. M. (2005). Commentary on
evidence-based parent and family interventions
What we do in the future? School Psychology
Quarterly, 20, 518-524. - Sheridan, S. M. (2004, September). Family-school
partnerships Creating essential connections for
student success. Keynote presented at the
Resource Teacher Learning and Behaviour
Conference, Chistchurch, New Zealand. - Sheridan, S.M. (1997). Conceptual and empirical
bases of conjoint behavioral consultation.
School Psychology Quarterly, 12, 119-133. - Sheridan, S. M., Kratochwill, T. R., Bergan, J.
R. (1996). Conjoint behavioral consultation A
procedural manual. New York Plenum Press. - Sheridan, S. M., Kratochwill, T. R., Elliott,
S. N. (1990). Behavioral consultation with
parents and teachers Delivering treatment for
socially withdrawn children at home and school.
School Psychology Review, 19, 33-52. - Sheridan, S. M., Vazquez, E., Li, C. (2005,
April). The future of home-school partnerships
Update on the work of a future task force. - Webster-Stratton, C. (1998). Preventing conduct
problems in head start children Strengthening
parenting competencies. Journal of Consulting and
Clinical Psychology, 66, 715-730. - Webster-Stratton, C., Reid, M. J., Hammond, M.
(2001). Preventing conduct problems, promoting
social competence A parent and teacher training
partnership in head start. Journal of Clinical
Child Psychology, 30, 283-302.