Growing Understanding to Support Family Engagement

A woman wearing glasses and a suit is smiling in front of a flag.

Sim Loh is a family partnership coordinator at Children’s Village, a nationally-accredited Keystone 4 STARS early learning and school-age enrichment program in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, serving about 350 children. She supports children and families, including non-English speaking families of immigrant status, by ensuring equitable access to education, health, employment, and legal information and resources on a day-to-day basis. She is a member of the Children First Racial Equity Early Childhood Education Provider Council, a community member representative of Philadelphia School District Multilingual Advisory Council, and a board member of Historic Philadelphia.


Sim explains, “I ensure families know their rights and educate them on ways to speak up for themselves and request for interpretation/translation services. I share families’ stories and experiences with legislators and decision-makers so that their needs are understood. Attending Leadership Connections will help me strengthen and grow my skills in all domains by interacting with and hearing from experienced leaders in different positions. With newly acquired skills, I seek to learn about the systems level while paying close attention to the accessibility and barriers of different systems and resources and their impacts on young children and their families.”

This document may be printed, photocopied, and disseminated freely with attribution. All content is the property of the McCormick Center for Early Childhood Leadership.

Children succeed in an early childhood program when staff and their families are comfortable with each other. Strong partnerships are based on communication that meets the needs of children, staff, and families. Success comes from a strong partnership based on the type and quality of communication. A program leader sets the tone by providing warm, respectful greetings and timely responses to all those involved in the child’s life. For some teaching staff, this comes naturally; others will learn from role modeling, understanding, and encouragement from the program leader. Family engagement begins with program staff understanding the families they serve while utilizing communication strategies based on mutual respect.


The first reality all program leaders and teaching staff must realize is many families face a variety of pressures daily. From the economic costs of maintaining a household to the cost of child care and additional family responsibilities, life can quickly become expensive and complicated to manage. Due to this, hurried families may come across as unwilling to engage and may not participate in the children’s activities planned by the program. While outward signals may make families appear uninterested, the reality may be that families do not have enough time to stay current with daily notes. Another possibility is that language or reading barriers make program newsletters difficult to access or understand. Rather than make assumptions about families’ abilities and motivation, program leaders and teaching staff must work together to find the best way to approach families. Ongoing relationship-building, observing, and inquiring about how to communicate best to meet their needs can be beneficial. Let us learn more from one program’s experience as they grew their understanding to support an enrolled family.


A couple of months ago, program director Liz enrolled the Perez family. They have two children: one 18-month-old in Rosa and Karli’s class and a 4-year-old who enjoys Maria and Deb’s class. During the enrollment process, Liz learned the mother was the only family member who spoke English, and their busy home life included the mother’s parents, who lived with them, and the father’s parents, who lived nearby. Most days, the staff observed the mother picking up the children. One afternoon, she shared with Deb that her home responsibilities included preparing large family dinners and caring for her ailing father. Karli noticed that the children’s father rarely came to the program. When he did, the teachers in both classrooms tried to engage him. Most responses simply included a nod or smile, but he chattered with the children in Spanish. One evening, when the father picked up the children, Rosa and Karli attempted a conversation in Spanish. During the short conversation, the father appeared hesitant to answer questions about his toddler’s care. Rosa mentioned the recent notes sent home stating they needed diapers and wipes. The father appeared frustrated with the inquiry and stated in broken English, “Talk Mama.” When the mother came in the following day, she was visibly upset and close to tears. She apologized profusely and handed the teachers diapers and wipes with the promise to “try and do better.” Both Rosa and Karli felt terrible that the mother was so upset and began to wonder if they had done the right thing by trying to engage the father in conversation. They contacted Liz immediately to make her aware of the interactions.


Inclusivity and diversity of children and families must be considered in all areas of program development, particularly in family engagement. Many resources encourage program administrators and staff to consider the following when engaging families:


  • Provide inclusive communication opportunities (i.e., in the home languages of families) using voice software or online translation for all forms, paperwork, and electronic communications;
  • Provide continuous teacher training on diversity to include ways to welcome and include all populations;
  • Engage all families to serve in leadership roles, including boards and committees that serve the program; and,
  • Support teaching staff by role-modeling inclusive practices within all program planning.


During the experience with this family, Rosa and Karli tried to connect by providing written and spoken communication. However, the attempts resulted in frustration and hurt feelings for everyone involved. The day after the upsetting interaction with the father, Liz brought the teachers in both classrooms together during naptime to discuss the next steps to rebuild the relationship with the family. During the shared conversation of observations and conversations that had taken place over the past few months in both classrooms, everyone became aware of the mother’s enormous responsibilities in caring for her family. They also discussed the father’s infrequent visits, which meant he was not familiar with his children’s day-to-day program routines. The mother’s response demonstrated how much she cared for her children and her respect for the teachers who cared for them each day. As they talked as a team, they decided to address the issue by doing the following:


  • Schedule a time for Liz to meet with the mother sooner rather than later;
  • Provide reassurance to the mother and discuss strategies together to best meet the family’s needs;
  • Gain further insights on family dynamics; and,
  • Establish effective communication strategies to support the family.


Right after the teacher meeting, Liz contacted the mother, and they met that afternoon before she picked up the children. Liz apologized and reassured the mother that she was doing an excellent job as the children’s mother, including gently reminding her she was her children’s first expert and was highly valued in the ongoing relationship to care for them. Liz asked the mother what communication strategies would support her to address the children’s needs. Was it text messages, conversations, notes, or something else they had not considered? The mother agreed that text messages were the best solution for her due to the ease of translation for the father.


Liz then approached the subject of communication with the father. The mother shared men rarely cared for children’s specific needs in her culture, so he was confused by the teachers’ attempts to talk with him that afternoon. Due to this, he was frustrated and could not understand why the need had not already been taken care of. The mother also said she wanted him to be more involved, but it would take time. During the conversation, Liz also learned that the father had conversations utilizing an app on his phone. The mother expressed her gratitude for the teaching staff and agreed that the meeting together was helpful and appreciated.


Liz learned so much from the conversation and shared insights with both teaching teams the next morning. The teachers were relieved and pleased to know how to support the mother best and continue building a communication bridge with the father. From that day forward, the teachers engaged him by talking through the app when communication was needed. Over time, the father became more engaged, and the mother became more involved in program activities. This included her support of the teachers’ program planning by working with other parents. Friendships with other families began to bloom, including play times at the local park. The teachers noticed the mother was able to grow a support network of other mothers, and the father began participating in more program events.


What did Liz and her teaching staff learn from this situation? First, programs providing enrollment information in the home languages of enrolling families should ask about the best way to communicate at the beginning of their relationship to avoid circumstances such as this. Second, rather than allowing the situation to spiral out of control or, worse, lack any resolve, strategies were quickly discussed and implemented to rebuild the relationship. Finally, Liz and the teaching staff decided it was important to share what took place so that others in the program could learn from their experience. Because the program valued family engagement, sharing with others at the next staff meeting helped the entire staff learn more about the continued commitment to building an inclusive program environment.


All families deserve to be a part of a warm and welcoming environment. Liz and her teaching staff took a negative interaction and completely turned it around by engaging in positive strategies to understand the dynamics and needs of the Perez family. When program leaders are role models and provide appropriate strategies to teaching staff, everyone learns more about families’ unique and diverse needs. Family engagement becomes possible when interactions between staff and families are respectful, meaningful, and focused on supporting children’s development in the early childhood program environment.


Did you know that Aim4Excellence™ has a module devoted to learning more about family engagement? Module eight of the program series will show you how to enhance family engagement as you transform your program’s effectiveness and impact children’s learning and development. Explore the role of linguistically and culturally responsive practice that energizes relationship-based teaching and fosters continuous quality improvement. Find out more by accessing this link!


Jane Humphries, Ed.D., serves as the Aim4Excellence™ Program Specialist and curriculum developer for the McCormick Center for Early Childhood Leadership at National Louis University. She has written curriculum and facilitated online learning in graduate and undergraduate level courses since 2004. The Aim4Excellence program is the online National Director Credential recognized by the National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC) accreditation and is incorporated in multiple state quality rating and improvement systems.

By McCormick Center May 13, 2025
Leaders, policymakers, and systems developers seek to improve early childhood programs through data-driven decision-making. Data can be useful for informing continuous quality improvement efforts at the classroom and program level and for creating support for workforce development at the system level. Early childhood program leaders use assessments to help them understand their programs’ strengths and to draw attention to where supports are needed.  Assessment data is particularly useful in understanding the complexity of organizational climate and the organizational conditions that lead to successful outcomes for children and families. Several tools are available for program leaders to assess organizational structures, processes, and workplace conditions, including: Preschool Program Quality Assessment (PQA) 1 Program Administration Scale (PAS) 2 Child Care Worker Job Stress Inventory (ECWJSI) 3 Early Childhood Job Satisfaction Survey (ECJSS) 4 Early Childhood Work Environment Survey (ECWES) 5 Supportive Environmental Quality Underlying Adult Learning (SEQUAL) 6 The Early Education Essentials is a recently developed tool to examine program conditions that affect early childhood education instructional and emotional quality. It is patterned after the Five Essentials Framework, 7 which is widely used to measure instructional supports in K-12 schools. The Early Education Essentials measures six dimensions of quality in early childhood programs: Effective instructional leaders Collaborative teachers Supportive environment Ambitious instruction Involved families Parent voice A recently published validation study for the Early Education Essentials 8 demonstrates that it is a valid and reliable instrument that can be used to assess early childhood programs to improve teaching and learning outcomes. METHODOLOGY For this validation study, two sets of surveys were administered in one Midwestern city; one for teachers/staff in early childhood settings and one for parents/guardians of preschool-aged children. A stratified random sampling method was used to select sites with an oversampling for the percentage of children who spoke Spanish. The teacher surveys included 164 items within 26 scales and were made available online for a three-month period in the public schools. In community-based sites, data collectors administered the surveys to staff. Data collectors also administered the parent surveys in all sites. The parent survey was shorter, with 54 items within nine scales. Rasch analyses was used to combine items into scales. In addition to the surveys, administrative data were analyzed regarding school attendance. Classroom observational assessments were performed to measure teacher-child interactions. The Classroom Assessment Scoring System TM (CLASS) 9 was used to assess the interactions. Early Education Essentials surveys were analyzed from 81 early childhood program sites (41 school-based programs and 40 community-based programs), serving 3- and 4-year old children. Only publicly funded programs (e.g., state-funded preschool and/or Head Start) were included in the study. The average enrollment for the programs was 109 (sd = 64); 91% of the children were from minority backgrounds; and 38% came from non-English speaking homes. Of the 746 teacher surveys collected, 451 (61%) were from school-based sites and 294 (39%) were from community-based sites. There were 2,464 parent surveys collected (59% school; 41% community). About one-third of the parent surveys were conducted in Spanish. Data were analyzed to determine reliability, internal validity, group differences, and sensitivity across sites. Child outcome results were used to examine if positive scores on the surveys were related to desirable outcomes for children (attendance and teacher-child interactions). Hierarchical linear modeling (HLM) was used to compute average site-level CLASS scores to account for the shared variance among classrooms within the same school. Exploratory factor analysis was performed to group the scales. RESULTS The surveys performed well in the measurement characteristics of scale reliability, internal validity, differential item functioning, and sensitivity across sites . Reliability was measured for 25 scales with Rasch Person Reliability scores ranging from .73 to .92; with only two scales falling below the preferred .80 threshold. The Rasch analysis also provided assessment of internal validity showing that 97% of the items fell in an acceptable range of >0.7 to <1.3 (infit mean squares). The Teacher/Staff survey could detect differences across sites, however the Parent Survey was less effective in detecting differences across sites. Differential item functioning (DIF) was used to compare if individual responses differed for school- versus community-based settings and primary language (English versus Spanish speakers). Results showed that 18 scales had no or only one large DIF on the Teacher/Staff Survey related to setting. There were no large DIFs found related to setting on the Parent Survey and only one scale that had more than one large DIF related to primary language. The authors decided to leave the large DIF items in the scale because the number of large DIFs were minimal and they fit well with the various groups. The factor analysis aligned closely with the five essentials in the K-12 model . However, researchers also identified a sixth factor—parent voice—which factored differently from involved families on the Parent Survey. Therefore, the Early Education Essentials have an additional dimension in contrast to the K-12 Five Essentials Framework. Outcomes related to CLASS scores were found for two of the six essential supports . Positive associations were found for Effective Instructional Leaders and Collaborative Teachers and all three of the CLASS domains (Emotional Support, Classroom Organization, and Instructional Support). Significant associations with CLASS scores were not found for the Supportive Environment, Involved Families, or Parent Voice essentials. Ambitious Instruction was not associated with any of the three domains of the CLASS scores. Table 1. HLM Coefficients Relating Essential Scores to CLASS Scores (Model 1) shows the results of the analysis showing these associations. Outcomes related to student attendance were found for four of the six essential supports . Effective Instructional Leaders, Collaborative Teachers, Supportive Environment, and Involved Families were positively associated with student attendance. Ambitious Instruction and Parent Voice were not found to be associated with student attendance. The authors are continuing to examine and improve the tool to better measure developmentally appropriate instruction and to adapt the Parent Survey so that it will perform across sites. There are a few limitations to this study that should be considered. Since the research is based on correlations, the direction of the relationship between factors and organizational conditions is not evident. It is unknown whether the Early Education Essentials survey is detecting factors that affect outcomes (e.g., engaged families or positive teacher-child interactions) or whether the organizational conditions predict these outcomes. This study was limited to one large city and a specific set of early childhood education settings. It has not been tested with early childhood centers that do not receive Head Start or state pre-K funding. DISCUSSION The Early Education Essentials survey expands the capacity of early childhood program leaders, policymakers, systems developers, and researchers to assess organizational conditions that specifically affect instructional quality. It is likely to be a useful tool for administrators seeking to evaluate the effects of their pedagogical leadership—one of the three domains of whole leadership. 10 When used with additional measures to assess whole leadership—administrative leadership, leadership essentials, as well as pedagogical leadership—stakeholders will be able to understand the organizational conditions and supports that positively impact child and family outcomes. Many quality initiatives focus on assessment at the classroom level, but examining quality with a wider lens at the site level expands the opportunity for sustainable change and improvement. The availability of valid and reliable instruments to assess the organizational structures, processes, and conditions within early childhood programs is necessary for data-driven improvement of programs as well as systems development and applied research. Findings from this validation study confirm that strong instructional leadership and teacher collaboration are good predictors of effective teaching and learning practices, evidenced in supportive teacher-child interactions and student attendance. 11 This evidence is an important contribution to the growing body of knowledge to inform embedded continuous quality improvement efforts. It also suggests that leadership to support teacher collaboration like professional learning communities (PLCs) and communities of practice (CoPs) may have an effect on outcomes for children. This study raises questions for future research. The addition of the “parent voice” essential support should be further explored. If parent voice is an essential support why was it not related to CLASS scores or student attendance? With the introduction of the Early Education Essentials survey to the existing battery of program assessment tools (PQA, PAS, ECWJSI, ECWES, ECJSS and SEQUAL), a concurrent validity study is needed to determine how these tools are related and how they can best be used to examine early childhood leadership from a whole leadership perspective. ENDNOTES 1 High/Scope Educational Research Foundation, 2003 2 Talan & Bloom, 2011 3 Curbow, Spratt, Ungaretti, McDonnell, & Breckler, 2000 4 Bloom, 2016 5 Bloom, 2016 6 Whitebook & Ryan, 2012 7 Bryk, Sebring, Allensworth, Luppescu, & Easton, 2010 8 Ehrlich, Pacchiano, Stein, Wagner, Park, Frank, et al., 2018 9 Pianta, La Paro, & Hamre, 2008 10 Abel, Talan, & Masterson, 2017 11 Bloom, 2016; Lower & Cassidy, 2007 REFERENCES Abel, M. B., Talan, T. N., & Masterson, M. (2017, Jan/Feb). Whole leadership: A framework for early childhood programs. Exchange(19460406), 39(233), 22-25. Bloom, P. J. (2016). Measuring work attitudes in early childhood settings: Technical manual for the Early Childhood Job Satisfaction Survey (ECJSS) and the Early Childhood Work Environment Survey (ECWES), (3rd ed.). Lake Forest, IL: New Horizons. Bryk, A. S., Sebring, P. B., Allensworth, E., Luppescu, S., & Easton, J. Q. (2010). Organizing schools for improvement: Lessons from Chicago. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press. Curbow, B., Spratt, K., Ungaretti, A., McDonnell, K., & Breckler, S. (2000). Development of the Child Care Worker Job Stress Inventory. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 15, 515-536. DOI: 10.1016/S0885-2006(01)00068-0 Ehrlich, S. B., Pacchiano, D., Stein, A. G., Wagner, M. R., Park, S., Frank, E., et al., (in press). Early Education Essentials: Validation of a new survey tool of early education organizational conditions. Early Education and Development. High/Scope Educational Research Foundation (2003). Preschool Program Quality Assessment, 2nd Edition (PQA) administration manual. Ypsilanti, MI: High/Scope Press. Lower, J. K. & Cassidy, D. J. (2007). Child care work environments: The relationship with learning environments. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 22(2), 189-204. DOI: 10.1080/02568540709594621 Pianta, R. C., La Paro, K. M., & Hamre, B. K. (2008). Classroom Assessment Scoring System (CLASS). Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes Publishing Co. Talan, T. N., & Bloom, P. J. (2011). Program Administration Scale: Measuring early childhood leadership and management (2 nd ed.). New York, NY: Teachers College Press. Whitebook, M., & Ryan, S. (2012). Supportive Environmental Quality Underlying Adult Learning (SEQUAL). Berkeley, CA: Center for the Study of Child Care Employment, University of California.
Show More