The X-Files of Parental Engagement

PgDip Silvia Breiburd

silviabre@hotmail.com

“So much of what is going on in our lives is seen through our own generational lens”
(Lancaster & Stillman)

Do you want to engage in fruitful home-school partnerships?

Turning parents from critics to collaborators, from spectators to
effective team-players and from external evaluators to partners,
implies developing fruitful bonds between educators and family
members based on mutual empathetic understanding. This is
st
an upgraded call for collaboration that 21 century educators
are urged to answer.

As patterns of collaboration may differ across generations, in

order to create mutually supportive alliances that ‘catalyze and sustain
effective parental engagement’ (Emerson et al, 2012), ELL educators may need
to look-past their own generational barriers (Abrams & von Frank, 2014). ‘The X-Files of
Parental Engagement’ explores concrete ways in which a generational-friendly style approach can
provide tips and solutions for better home-school partnerships and increased academic results.

Briefly, the session revises the tenets and latest research findings on the theory of generations and
reflects upon the specific mindsets of Gen X parents that may motivate their decisions and affect their
degree of involvement or engagement. Cross-generational tips that can easily be applied to any
institutional context ware provided and reference is made to other minor parental groups that also
comprise school demographics at present.
Let’s start at the beginning …

What findings reveal in connection with parental involvement

Educating our young successfully requires the joint, collaborative work of families and parents along
students’ formative years. Not only can the correlation between positive parental engagement and
children achieving their potential be verified in students’ higher grades but also in equally important
collateral aspects such as improved student attendance, increased positive behavior, improved reading
levels and reduced conflict rates.

Join us
The instrumental nature of parental support is undeniable and it extends from kinder to the end of
secondary education. Evidence reveals the correlation between parental engagement and better
academic results (Sanders and Epstein, 2000) and this impact stretches across all social classes and
ethnic backgrounds. Yet, partnering with parents may prove to be an elusive task since ‘there are no
conceptual frameworks, or practical tools, that model how to value parent perspectives and engage
families in productive partnerships’ (Lovely, 2007).

Studies carried out by Fairbank et al (2013) have found parents may express an interest in participating in
their children’s education. As Epstein (2016) states, all families send their children to school to succeed,
so creating an institutional plan for parental involvement ‘solves the problem of the over-involved or
under-involved family’.

First things first: involvement or engagement?

Whereas involvement implies ‘doing to’ engagement implies ‘doing with’. In other words, family
involvement implies schools telling parents how they can contribute (projects, volunteer work, homework
help, etc) while engagement implies a more reciprocal type of bond: listening to them, making joint
decisions and regarding parents as’ partners’ while ensuring that true knowledge about what is more
effective for student learning is not attributed to one in detriment of the other and vice versa. Generational
theory can provide pathways to reaching consensus with the present generation of parents by providing
clues for decoding their ways of perceiving school reality.

What is generational theory and how can it contribute to increased parental engagement?

According to Lovely (2007), parents can be portrayed according to ‘generational trademarks that drive
their behavior and daily interactions with school staff’. This collective form of ‘being with others’ was first
described by Hungarian sociologist Karl Mannheim (1928) who first defined a generation as ‘a group of
individuals of similar ages who have been influenced by the major
historical events of an era’. More recently, American sociologists
Strauss & Howe (1991) rediscovered the theory and reaffirmed the
strong impact of specific life events that may tie a group together
through shared experiences.

Generational experts may not all agree on names or exact birth

years and it is also known that cohort birth dates vary by country
Yet they all identify the same groups in most Western societies.
For them, a generation is a cohort of people born within the
same timeframe who are age-bound in perceptions due to
‘shared life-defining moments’ (Stillman & Stillman, 2017) from
entering school to puberty. The significant life-events shared at
critical developmental stages, lead individuals to develop ‘similar attitudes,
ambitions and synergy’ (Lovely, 2005) that can be identified and attributed to them as
collective traits or footprints.

Join us
This ‘set of attitudes, values, lifestyles, as a result of a common history’ (Molinari, 2013) is called a
‘generational mindset’. At present, the following generations have been identified in workplaces
depending on their birth years: Traditionalists (born before 1945);
Baby Boomers (born between 1945 and 1964);
Generation X (born between1965 and 1976);
Generation Y also known as Millennials (born
between 1977 and 1995) and very recently
Generation Z or Gen Z comprising those individuals
born after 1996 and who are just entering the
workforce (Zemke et al, 2000; Lancaster & Stillman
2007; Behrstock & Clifford, 2009; Tolbize, 2008;
Erickson, 2010; Lovely, 2007; Molinari, 2013;
Shaw, 2013; Edge, 2014, among others)

Moreover, Stillman & Stillman (2017) propound that the

way a generation is raised will be a determinant of how that generation is shaped.
Although some best practices may be adopted, generations tend to parent opposing or reacting to the
household style they were brought up in. Generational theory can therefore throw some light on parents’
perceptions, beliefs and expectations in accordance with their collective identity and their own upbringing.
Furthermore, it may prevent or help overcome ‘generational clashpoints’ (Lancaster & Stillman 2007) or
‘generational sticking points’ (Shaw, 2013) in issues such as communication, respect or feedback.

A little disclaimer, just in case.

No generalization is wholly true- not even this one’ Oliver Wendell Holmes

It must be admitted. Generational explanations have become a trending topic that is spreading quickly
across all social spheres. And although zealous partisans of individualism may object to the nature and
characteristics of the theory and the scientific nature of its tenets, in particular in connection with
generational conflict, the phenomenon cannot be denied. And its presence and influence is even more
vivid in schools and other educational institutions as they are the most generationally diverse work
ambits. Becoming generationally savvy, i.e. recognizing the filters used by our parental interlocutors may
improve home-school collaboration and provide better students’ learning experiences.

It must be borne in mind, though, that generational mindsets describe large numbers of people but they
may fail to predict or explain how any individual person will behave (Shaw, 2013). In other words, all
generations go through similar life stages but ‘they do not approach them the same way’ as Stillman &
Stillman (2017) propound; their collective personality provides a distinctive touch. Coincidentally, Abrams
(2014) explains that generational descriptions provide an overall picture of common group characteristics
without aiming at making individual self-portraits. Even so, the uniqueness of each parent may be better
understood and interpreted within the context of the common socializing influences of his or her formative
years that have been discussed.

Join us
Profiling generation X parents

Generation Xers were born between 1965 and 1976 and are relatively
a small generation due to the impact of birth control methods (the pill,
for instance) and the legalization of abortion in some countries. The
socio-economic context and formative international influences that
affected this cohort were the end of Cold War, the Fall of Berlin
Wall, Pope John Paul II and President R. Reagan’s shootings, the
AIDS pandemic, the Challenger Tragedy, Chernobyl, Jonestown
mass suicide, MTV and Sesame Street, among others.

In Argentina, the socio-economic background could not be more relevant.

Gen Xers faced the social turmoil of the ’70s, the 1976 Coup d’état and its subsequent
military governments, the Beagle conflict and Malvinas/Falklands War. They also witnessed during
their childhood the ’78 and the ’86 World Cups, the return of democracy in 1983 and the creation of the
Mercosur as an attempt to cement a rapproachment with Brazil in terms of economic policies.

Xers learnt from early infancy that there are more options than plain black or white and that even the
strongest institutions or institutional symbols could fail or collapse when under attack or by the passing of
time. To get ready for possible failure, they learnt to develop a B plan, just in case. Even their idols and
youth heroes embodied good and evil and shared positive and negative characteristics at the same time:
Charly Garcia and Maradona were two very strong local referents and Madonna, Bill Gates, Michael
Jackson or Tom Cruise could be mentioned within the international ones. All of them displayed distinct
dark and bright sides.

Xers are profiled as flexible and creative, entrepreneurial, pragmatic and self-sufficient. They feel
comfortable with technology and embraced it for work, communication and pleasure right from the start.
They are generally quick to react with unexpected events and may be ready to start from scratch in case
of failure. On the negative side, Gen Xers are stereotyped as slackers and pessimistic with a tendency to
speak their minds and question authority figures. Individualistic, inherently skeptical and cynical, they
prefer to work solo. These characteristics may be evident in the way parents approach schools.

Besides, the appearance of color and cable TV are symbols and artifacts that marked Xers generational
mindsets contributed to broaden their perspectives to other realities and led them to consider themselves
as world citizens. Portable audio cassette players became a liberating invention that allowed this
generation to move around while listening to their favorite music. And above all, this generation grew up
with the influence of PCs and video games that provided them with a new perspective towards ‘failure’: a
game may be over but there is always a chance to do better in the next one. This so called ‘video game
approach to life’ may impact upon home-school relations.

Join us
Xers grew up in two-earner households in an era of economic uncertainty and they faced a rise in
parental divorce rates and were called latchkey kids. Many couples became D.I.N.Ks (Double Income No
Kids), especially in middle and upper classes, and women chose to have a late maternity option to pursue
a professional career. These self- reliant and autonomous individuals with successful professional
careers may approach schools from an ‘I-know-how-to-do-it’ angle and pose an extra challenge to
teachers and heads.

The X generation expresses a strong desire for work-life balance and so

they tend to put time with family above challenging work or other
priorities, such as school calendar or school timetables. They started a
new conception of work relations with a very pragmatic approach using
institutions to build their own ‘portable’ careers and being skeptical
about social organizations of all types. Product-focused, they tend to
demand for flexible work schedules and structures and to value
freedom as the best reward.

Gen Xers’ view of feedback, -a necessary requirement for change or form of positive
reinforcement-, makes them solicit it on a regular basis. Conversely, they may be prone to give their own
feedback, even when it is unwanted, generating resent and uneasiness in certain ambits. Do not get
surprise if this generational trait becomes evident in your institution.

All in all, these traits will affect Gen X parents’ approach to schools and what they expect from them.
Understanding generational patterns may help educators build stronger school-family bonds in favor of
students’ learning.

Building home-school partnerships that work

Implementing successful home-school partnerships requires developing an institutional engagement

strategy based on extensive planning and empathetic generational understanding. This planning might
include deciding upon the nature and degree of parental collaboration in accordance with key institutional
issues, implementing the strategy throughout the schools or educational institution, creating paths to
effective communication with families, ensuring parents understand and take on their crucial social role
and last, enhancing parents’ chances to participate by lowering barriers and providing families with tools
or guidance to help more effectively.

Gen X parents do not want to repeat ‘the mistakes’ their ‘workaholic parents’ made while they were
growing up, so they are protective of their children and family time. Besides, they may find it difficult to
engage with schools because of work hours. Therefore, promoting family involvement acknowledging
diversity and differences in occupations through a flexible approach, is a school’s best way to create a
generational inclusive climate. A mix of real and virtual encounters may provide opportunities for
channeling parental interests and needs successfully.

Join us
Gen Xers may be skeptical of traditional school activities or interventions and may approach parents’
conferences with distrust. They may also expect easy and direct access to teachers and school
administrators on the most varied aspects such as school curricula or teachers credentials. Modern
communication systems may help keep parents informed, engaged and up to date via email, SMS texts,
voice messages and even whatsapps while indirectly supporting children’s learning. It is important to
note, though, that parental engagement strategies, either face to face or through e-communication
software, need to provide families with a two-way dialogue, thus helping X parents learn more about what
is going on in their child’s education and giving them a voice.

Gen Xers tend to behave as ‘helicopter parents’ or ‘drone parents’, may be stereotypically profiled as fly-
overs and swoop-ins. They may be inclined to be ultra-protective and plan the lives of their children to the
smallest details. At times, they find it hard to strike a balance between excess and defect. In other words,
parents might either micromanage what kids can do on their own or completely delegate their parental
tasks to a panel of experts (psychologists, psychopedagogist or tutors to mention but a few) who are
hired to cater for their kids’ most varied needs. Being explicit
about the expected degree of involvement builds healthier
home-school bonds.

The premature maturity of Z children is encouraged by Gen X

parents who want their offspring to act, have parties, dress
and use cosmetics like miniature adults. However, parents
have ‘shielded children from the consequences, negative
emotions and the realities of life’ (McQueen, 2014) and
allowed them to influence their decisions at a level never
known before. Children’s voice may impact upon a wide variety
of adult plans, such as activities to be carried out during the weekend, a
family dinner or even a vacation destination. Conversely, children have been led to
decide on aspects that, in the past, were domain of adult life, thus being exposed to the pressure and
consequences of decision-making processes from early age. Again, creating opportunities for frank and
honest conversation may put parents on schools’ side.

The video game mentality, a typical generation X trait, may lead parents to interpret school difficulties and
even failure as something that requires a quick reaction. And if events do not unfold as expected within a
short term, Xers’ natural reaction may be to reboot and start all over again, as they used to do with video
games. They may prefer to change their children’s schools or institutions or ask for a change of teachers
without further ado if results do not turn up to be as expected.

Join us
In conclusion
‘The way we see the problem is the problem’
(Stephen Covey)

Partnering with parents implies walking the path from involvement to engagement on a daily basis. It is a
continuum that involves the planning of different pedagogic agreements while imagining different learning
scenarios that may imply the systematical implementation of inclusive, participatory measures and co-
constructed activities.

All in all, it is clear that to cement healthy, profitable home-school connections, educators need to look
past their own generational filters in search of increased parental engagement. Becoming generationally
savvy in interpersonal dealings or communicating styles, seems to be crucial to integrate parents to their
children’s education and to make each class a profitable learning opportunity for participants from all
generations alike. After all, parents are schools’ first and most important partners when aiming at student
success.
PgDip SILVIA A. BREIBURD

Bibliography
Abrams J. & von Frank, V. (2014) Multigenerational Workplace: Communicate, Collaborate, and Create
Community Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin
Arsenault P. (2004). ‘Validating generational differences: A legitimate diversity and leadership issue’,
Leadership & Organization Development Journal nº 2, vol.25, pp.124-14.
Behrstock, E. & Clifford, M. (2009) ‘Leading Gen Y teachers: Emerging strategies for school leaders’.
Available at: https://goo.gl/q1e49n [accessed Juned 2017]
Berk, R. (2009). ‘Teaching strategies for the net generation. Transformative Dialogues’ Teaching &
Learning Journal, nº 2, vol. 3, pp. 1–23. Available at: http://goo.gl/KivlSy [accessed June 2017]
Breiburd, S. (2016). ‘El liderazgo generacional en la escuela’ en Durand, J.; Corengia, A.; Daura, Florencia
(Directores) y Urrutia, M. (Coordinadora), ‘Aprender a enseñar: el desafío de la formación docente inicial y
continua’, 1 ed. Teseopress, colección Austral educacion [online] Available at: https://goo.gl/xcmzgQ
[accessed July 2017]
Coggshall, J. G., Ott, A., Behrstock, E., & Lasagna, M. (2009). ‘Retaining teacher talent: The view from
Generation Y’. Naperville, IL & Washington, DC: Learning Point Associates & Public Agenda; Hill, Jeffrey,
McWalters, Paliokas, Seagren, & Stumbo. Available at: http://goo.gl/gWVqn4 [accessed June 2017]
Deal J. (2007). Retiring the Generation Gap: How Employees Young and Old Can Find Common Ground
Center For Creative Leadership. San Francisco: John Wiley & Sons Inc. Jossey-Bass.

Join us
Edge, K. (2014) ‘A review of the empirical generations at work research: implications for school leaders and
future research’. School Leadership and Management, nº 2, vol. 34. Available at: http://goo.gl/40eIAt
[accessed June 2017]
Emerson el al (2012). Parental engagement in Learning and Schooling: Lessons from Research. Available
at: https://goo.gl/ebehtK [accessed July 2017]
Erickson, T. (2010) What is Next, Gen X? Harvard Business Press, Boston, Ma.
Fox A., et al (2014) ‘Cross-Generational Differences: Benefits and Challenges among Teaching
Professionals’. The Texas Forum of Teacher Education, vol. 4 pp. 42-62. Available at:
https://goo.gl/FfYm5Q [accessed June 2017]
Lancaster L. and Stillman, D. (2002). When Generations Collide: Who They Are. Why They Clash. How to
solve the Generational Puzzle at Work. Collins Mobipocket Reader. NY: Harper Collins
Lovely, S. (2005). ‘Creating synergy in the schoolhouse: changing dynamics among peer cohorts will drive
the work of school systems’. School Administrator, nº 8, vol.62, p. 30, septiembre 2005. Available at:
http://goo.gl/DxP5pk [accessed May 2016]
Lovely, S. & Buffum, A. (2007). Generations at School: Building an Age-Friendly Learning Community.
California: Corwin Press.
Mannheim, K. (1952). ‘The Problem of Generations’ Essays on the sociology of Knowledge. London:
Routledge & Kegan. Available at: https://goo.gl/7O7cr3 [accessed May 2016]
Martin, M. (2008). ‘La Teoría de las generaciones de Ortega y Gasset: una lectura del siglo XXI’ .Tiempo y
Espacio, año 17, vol. 20, pp. 98-110 Available at: http://goo.gl/uotNCz [accessed May 2016]
Molinari, P. (2013). Turbulencia Generacional (3ra edición). Bs Aires Temas Grupo Editorial
Ortega y Gasset, J. (1983). El tema de nuestro tiempo. Revista de Occidente. Madrid:Alianza Editorial.
Shaw, H. (2013). Sticking Points: How to Get 4 Generations Working Together in the 12 Places They Come
Apart, IL.: Tyndale House Publishers
Stillman, D. & Stillman J. (2017). Gen Z @ Work. NY: Harper Collins
Strauss, W. & Howe, N. (1991). Generations: The History of America’s Future. 1584 to 2069. New York:
Harper Perennial
Tolbize, A. (2008) ‘Generational differences in the workplace’. Research and Training Center on
Community Living, University of Minnesota. Available at: http://goo.gl/zNHxQG [accessed June 2016]
Zemke, R., Raines, C., & Filipczak, B. (2000). Generations at Work: Managing the Clash of Veterans,
Boomers, Xers, and Nexters in your workplace. New York, NY: AMA Publications.

PgDip SILVIA A. BREIBURD

Join us