In the overlapping spheres of influence of family, school, and community, students have a powerful role to play.

On a blustery St. Patrick’s Day in March 2023, we entered the halls of a midwestern high school, excited to present at a student leadership conference. In developing our remarks on the student role in family-school partnerships, we had initially created one program for educators and another for students. Then, it dawned on us — if students have a leadership role to play in the partnership between home and school, both students and educators should have a similar understanding of what those roles can be.

On the day of the conference, we gave each group some background on the links between strong family-school partnerships and positive student academic outcomes. We followed with some examples of partnerships in practice. The main event, however, provided time for the attendees to share their expectations of students in the partnership between home and school, as well as what skills and knowledge students might need to meet these expectations. What emerged throughout these conversations was a noteworthy mismatch between the students and their teachers regarding students’ roles as leaders. For example, when asked to describe students’ role in the relationship between home and school, educators responded, “The role of a student is to serve as a liaison [between home and school].” Students said, “The role of a student between home and school is to communicate needs and practice leadership.” The differences are subtle, but significant.

This experience motivated us to dig deeper into the role of students in family-school partnerships, which took us back to 1995 when Joyce Epstein published an article in Kappan that moved the modern conversation about family-school partnerships from the realm of research to practice. In this article, she elaborated on her theory of overlapping spheres of influence (Epstein, 1987), which posits that students are uniquely positioned as full members of their family, school, and community, and are thus influenced by all three simultaneously (Epstein, 1995). Paying close attention to this theory (as illustrated in Figure 1), we noticed that students also influence adults in each of these domains.

The research literature and Epstein’s ideas, as well as our experiences with middle and high school students, help us understand the influences students have on adults at home, school, and in the community, and the relationships between these groups. Middle and high school students, in particular, can effectively contribute to the relationship between home and school.

Considering student influence

The divergent perceptions students and their teachers have about students’ role in the relationship between home and school is no surprise. Students and teachers have different experiences, roles, and information that shape their ideas. We are not interested in defending or promoting either of their perspectives. In fact, both may be valid. But, over time, these differing perceptions could lead to mismatches in expectations between educators and students.

Positive student perceptions of family engagement in their education have been linked to student achievement and well-being (Epstein & Sheldon, 2023; Thomas et al., 2020). For this reason, developing positive student leadership experiences in family-school partnerships can enhance student perceptions and achievement.

To accomplish this, we must begin with understanding the complex relationships between school, family, and community. Epstein (1995) points out that the spheres of influence include both institutional relationships, as in the ongoing interactions between schools and families, as well as individual relationships, like interactions between a teacher and parent. While schools have institutional plans and policies that influence family-school partnerships, relationships among individual educators and families also are influential.

Students possess valuable data and insights into home, community, and school experiences that only they can convey to their families and teachers.

At the center of all these relationships (illustrated in Figure 2) is the child (Epstein et al., 2019). Much has been discussed about the relationship between schools and families and their collective influences on students, but as Epstein (1995) rightly points out, “The inarguable fact is that students are the main actors in their education, development, and success in school” (p. 702).

As the “main actors” in their education, students are also “often the main source — sometimes the only source — of information for parents about school and community activities” (Epstein & Sheldon, 2023, p. 57). Students possess valuable data and insights into home, community, and school experiences that only they can convey to their families and teachers. Students also have their own perceptions about the relationship between their home and school and how well it aids their learning and growth (Connors & Epstein, 1994; Pomerantz, Moorman, & Litwask, 2007). These student perceptions are linked to students’ academic achievement (Barwegen et al., 2004; DePlanty, Coulter-Kern, & Duchane, 2007; Thomas et al., 2020) and well-being (Liu et al., 2021; Thomas et al., 2020). Responsiveness to student voice has been shown to be related to positive outcomes for both the school and the students (Kahne et al., 2020).

Given the importance of student perceptions, we propose that schools nurture both:

• Specific opportunities for student leadership regarding family-school partnerships.
• Broader student collaboration and input in school decision making and planning for students, with specific attention to family-school partnerships.

While this proposal is seemingly intuitive, there has been little writing on the influence students have on family-school partnerships. Further, because many schools and districts around the country use Epstein’s partnership model to guide their family engagement efforts (more than 5,000 since 1995), it is important the students’ influence not get overlooked in implementation and practice (Epstein & Boone, 2022).

When we look again at Figure 2, we see the interactions between individuals and institutions affecting students are connected by bidirectional arrows. In these interactions, “information is exchanged, respect is built, and ties develop between and among teachers, parents, students, and others in the community” (Epstein & Sanders, 2002, p. 449). Further research on how students’ perceptions influence adults, as well as the relationships between these adults, may help us identify strategies for reducing the gap in perceptions between students, parents, and educators and uncover ideas for home-school communication and student leadership activities that support these relationships.

We can imagine a school in which students are able to clearly articulate what they need to be successful and how adults at home and school can support them (Zhang, Boone, & Anderman, in press). Accordingly, we can imagine these exchanges between students and adults generating student leadership opportunities that build on student interests and knowledge. The research suggests that schools should give students an active role in family-school partnerships, and we offer actionable suggestions for how schools can do this.

Practical strategies to engage students

To elevate the voices of students in family-school partnerships, schools can utilize different levels of strategies (Mitra, 2006):

• The most accessible and common form of student voice is to listen to students as they share experiences with, and opinions about, how their schools and families work together.
• The second level is to create opportunities for students to collaborate with adults in the school to improve partnership practices and programs.
• The third level is to enable students to play leadership roles in planning for, designing, implementing, and evaluating family-school partnerships.

We encourage school administrators and teachers to reflect on which levels are consistent with their schools’ current practices and to consider potential steps to include more levels or strengthen their existing practices.

Level 1. Solicit and respond to student voice

Students have preferences and opinions about how their families and schools can best support their education, and many students are willing and eager to share their opinions with adults (Connors & Epstein, 1994; Xu, 2002). Therefore, a good starting point for planning and improving family-school partnerships is to develop processes to seek students’ feedback on present partnerships and wishes for future partnerships (Epstein, 1995). Listening and responding to student input is an initial, necessary step toward giving students influence.

There are a variety of strategies to solicit and encourage student input. Questionnaires and writing assignments can help schools efficiently gather and analyze responses from a large number of students, while one-on-one interviews and focus groups allow schools to obtain more detailed, individualized opinions from a portion of students (Epstein, 1995). In addition, inviting students to a panel at a school council meeting or to events like a breakfast with the principal enables students to share their views directly with school administrators, teachers, parents, and fellow students (Epstein, 1995).

Schools should use multiple means for collecting information, to reach as many students as possible and to avoid paying disproportionate attention to any specific group of privileged or outspoken students (Mager & Nowak, 2012; Rudduck, 2007). Most importantly, schools must create a plan for analyzing student input with students, responding to or following up with students, and translating student input into actual changes and improvements.

Level 2. Engage students as equal participants and collaborators

Students’ roles in family-school partnerships and parent-teacher relationships can be more proactive and influential than merely getting their ideas heard. Students can be the leaders of their own educational experiences and regular and active participants in the interactions between their own parents and teachers.

A wealth of research from the special education field has found that active engagement in their own individualized education program (IEP) meetings is associated with positive academic and social-emotional outcomes (e.g., Barnard-Brak & Lechtenberger, 2010; Martin et al., 2006). Learning from special education, schools should collaborate with and actively engage students in partnerships with students’ families. For example, instead of leaving students out of parent-teacher interactions, some schools organize student-parent-teacher conferences, where students, instead of adults, lead conversations by presenting their own work; reflecting on their accomplishments, progress, challenges, and needs; and directing their teacher and parents to the type of support they need (Epstein, 1995).

When including students as leaders in school councils and planning teams, there must be a consensus that students’ voices will be heard, respected, and valued.

Schools should also work with students in the planning, promotion, and implementation of family-facing events and resources (Mitra, 2006). Invitations from students often encourage parents to communicate and partner with the school (Hoover-Dempsey et al., 2005). Students, with appropriate support and resources from the school, are well-
positioned to help their families and schools better understand each other’s values, beliefs, cultures, and customs (Mitra, 2006).

Level 3. Prepare and support students to lead

Schools can further promote student leadership and influence by supporting students to lead at the institutional level. Epstein (1995), for example, suggests school teams that plan and lead school-family engagement activities should include at least two students. When including students as leaders in school councils and planning teams, there must be a consensus that students’ voices will be heard, respected, and valued. Their mere presence should not be considered enough.

In addition, students should also have the opportunity to run their own councils or start their own initiatives to cultivate positive partnerships between their families and schools. For example, students may propose and organize an after-school event designed specifically for students, families, and school staff to showcase their family cultures (e.g., food, music, dance, clothes, holiday traditions, languages).

Developing leadership skills requires not only opportunities but also guidance and practice. Schools should provide students with the necessary support (e.g., on organization or communication skills) by collaborating with student leadership organizations, so that students can develop skills and capacity to become effective leaders both in school and later in their lives (Mitra, 2006).

A real-world example

The Mansfield City School District, an urban school district in central Ohio, provides a great example of student voice and leadership in school processes, including school-family partnerships.

To solicit student input (a Level 1 practice), school buildings in Mansfield send all students an annual survey on building climate and culture in multiple, accessible formats. To promote family engagement and Positive Behavior Interventions and Supports (PBIS), school buildings in Mansfield host an annual after-school event called PBIS-Fests, where students and their families visit stations that display student projects, community organizations, school events, athletic and club opportunities, and PBIS-related resources. Every year, the district creates opportunities for students to play active roles and practice leadership skills on different levels throughout the various stages of the event, demonstrating what high-quality Level 2 and Level 3 practices may look like.

Because high school student representatives are on the school PBIS teams, students’ voices are included from the very beginning. Students engage in the planning process as leaders and key collaborators with the adults. For example, as a great example of a Level 2 practice, students take the lead on brainstorming and deciding on themes for “family engagement” baskets for raffles, community partners they would like to invite to the event, food that will be served, and the advertisement of the event.

During preparation for the events, students are engaged in diverse, creative ways that capitalize on their strengths and skill sets. For instance, students with significant disabilities who work in the community’s job training program make and bag hundreds of bags of cotton candy for multiple PBIS-Fests throughout the district. These students not only complete assigned tasks, they also set goals, plan time and resources to meet the goals, and solve problems with fellow students and school staff.

On the day of the Fests, middle and high school students are responsible for running stations at the PBIS-Fest events that they planned. Students work collaboratively to serve free meals to families, make snow cones and popcorn for attendees, interact with community members, and highlight their talents. For example, students from the career and technical courses display items they made; students speak about the benefits they have gained from participating in after-school opportunities; and athletes present on the benefits of organized sports.

High school students also have led stations for elementary students. While engaging in this community service opportunity, high school students develop their social and communicative skills by interacting positively with both students and families. Their sense of belonging and responsibility is bolstered as they help encourage and guide younger students and reinforce and promote the district’s PBIS expectations.

Refocusing on the student

Much has changed in the education landscape and beyond in the nearly 30 years since Epstein (1995) explored her overlapping spheres of influence in Kappan. However, her broad vision is still relevant to how we think about family-school partnerships and how students lead within them.

In Ohio, we have a flourishing network of partnership schools, including 96 schools from 48 districts supported by The Ohio Statewide Family Engagement Center (Epstein & Boone, 2022). But even where these partnerships are thriving, it’s important to continually refocus our work on the child’s influence on adults and on the relationships between adults (see Figure 2). This renewed focus centers students as actors and leaders in the relationship between home and school.

Understanding the different levels of student leadership in partnership work may help educators identify the state of their current practice and envision what improved practice might look like. At each level, educators can implement practices to promote the student role in these partnerships. Enhancing the student role in family-school partnerships emerges from the research as an important and promising practice. Supporting students in this role may be a pathway to improving family-school partnerships and student achievement and well-being.

References

Barnard-Brak, L. & Lechtenberger, D. (2010). Student IEP participation and academic achievement across time. Remedial and Special Education, 31 (5), 343-349.

Barwegen, L.M., Falciani, N.K., Putnam, S.J., Reamer, M.B., & Stair, E.E. (2004). Academic achievement of homeschool and public school students and student perception of parent involvement. School Community Journal, 14 (1), 39-58.

Connors, L.J. & Epstein, J.L. (1994). Taking stock: Views of teachers, parents, and students on school, family, and community. (Partnerships in High Schools, Rep. No. 25). Johns Hopkins University, Center on Families, Communities, Schools, and Children’s Learning.

DePlanty, J., Coulter-Kern, R., & Duchane, K. A. (2007). Perceptions of parent involvement in academic achievement. Journal of Educational Research, 100 (6), 361-368.

Epstein, J.L. (1987). Toward a theory of family-school connections. Social Intervention: Potential and Constraints, 1, 121-136.

Epstein, J.L. (1995). School/family/community partnerships: Caring for the children we share. Phi Delta Kappan, 76 (9), 701-712.

Epstein, J.L. & Boone, B.J. (2022). State leadership to strengthen family engagement programs. Phi Delta Kappan, 103 (7), 8-13.

Epstein, J.L. & Sanders, M.G. (2002). Family, school, and community partnerships. In M.H. Bornstein (Ed.), Handbook of parenting: Vol. 5. Practical issues in parenting (pp. 407-437). Erlbaum.

Epstein, J.L., Sanders, M.G., Sheldon, S.B., Simon, B.S., Salinas, K.C., Jansorn, N.R., . . . & Williams, K.J. (2019). School, family, and community partnerships: Your handbook for action. Corwin Press.

Epstein, J.L. & Sheldon, S.B. (2023). School, family, and community partnerships: Preparing educators and improving schools (3rd ed.). Routledge.

Hoover‐Dempsey, K.V., Walker, J.M.T., Sandler, H.M., Whetsel, D., Green, C.L., Wilkins, A.S., & Closson, K. (2005). Why do parents become involved? Research findings and implications. The Elementary School Journal, 106 (2), 105-130.

Kahne, J., & Bowyer, B., & Marshall, J., & Hodgin, E. (2022). Is responsiveness to student voice related to academic outcomes? Strengthening the rationale for student voice in school reform. American Journal of Education, 128 (3), 389-415.

Liu, K., Yang, Y., Li, M., Li, S., Sun, K., & Zhao, Y. (2021). Parents’ and adolescents’ perceptions of parental involvement and their relationships with depression among Chinese middle school students during the COVID-19 pandemic. Children and Youth Services Review, 129.

Mager, U. & Nowak, P. (2012). Effects of student participation in decision making at school. A systematic review and synthesis of empirical research. Educational Research Review, 7 (1), 38-61.

Martin, J.E., Van Dycke, J.L., Christensen, W.R., Greene, B.A., Gardner, J.E., & Lovett, D.L. (2006). Increasing student participation in IEP meetings: Establishing the self-directed IEP as an evidence-based practice. Exceptional Children, 72 (3), 299-316.

Mitra, D.L. (2006). Youth as a bridge between home and school: Comparing student voice and parent involvement as strategies for change. Education and Urban Society, 38 (4), 455-480.

Pomerantz, E.M., Moorman, E. A., & Litwack, S.D. (2007). The how, whom, and why of parents’ involvement in children’s academic lives: More is not always better. Review of Educational Research, 77 (3), 373-410.

Rudduck, J. (2007). Student voice, student engagement, and school reform. In D. Thiessen & A. Cook-Sather (Eds.), International handbook of student experience in elementary and secondary school (pp. 587-610). Springer.

Thomas, V., Muls, J., Backer, F.D., & Lombaerts, K. (2020). Middle school student and parent perceptions of parental involvement: Unravelling the associations with school achievement and wellbeing. Educational Studies, 46 (4), 404-421.

Xu, J. (2002). Do early adolescents want family involvement in their education? Hearing voices from those who matter most. School Community Journal, 12 (1), 53-72.

Zhang, J., Boone, B.J., & Anderman, E.M. (in press). Students at the center: Student voice in parental involvement and school-family partnerships. School Community Journal, 34 (1).

This article appears in the May 2024 issue of Kappan, Vol. 105, No. 8, p. 20-25.