Parental involvement theory development has had a rather unique history and trajectory (Henderson & Mapp, 2002). Much of the reason why it is distinctive is because the theories of parental involvement developed well before a sophisticated body of quantitative research had emerged. There are clearly certain risks in basing major theories on one’s unpublished observations or anecdotal evidence (Bakhurst, 2007; Egan, 2002; Van Der Veer, 2007; Webster, 1995). Admittedly, part of the reason this pattern evolved is because parental involvement, as a practice, has been embraced for centuries (Jeynes, 2005b, 2011b). It is hardly new. Within the American context, the Pilgrims and Puritans, as well as other early settlers, emphasized parental engagement to levels that would be difficult to fathom in contemporary minds (Greaves, 1969; Hiner, 1988; Jeynes, 2007a, 2018). Parental involvement and support continued to have a place of centrality in American education throughout the 1700s, 1800s, and 1900s (Bronstein et al., 1994; Cherlin, 2013). It experienced some degree of decline as industrialization progressed, but really did not experience a steep decline until divorce rates began to surge from 1963 to 1980 (Cherlin, 2013; Jeynes, 2001, 2002). On the basis of all of this historical antecedent regarding family engagement, perhaps some hypothesized that a high degree of quantitative research was not necessary on which to base parental involvement theory (Jeynes, 2005a; Wallerstein & Lewis, 1998).

A second justification for propounding parental engagement theories without a substantial amount of research on which to base it is the fact Freud developed his psychoanalytic theory based primarily on personal clinical experiences that he had witnessed (Bakhurst, 2007; Egan, 2002; Van Der Veer, 2007; Webster, 1995). His theory was indubitably sophisticated, but it also was based on largely anecdotal evidence and therefore predictably reached many dubious conclusions (Bakhurst, 2007; Egan, 2002; Van Der Veer, 2007; Webster, 1995). Freud’s theories used to dominate college textbooks, with three or four chapters often dedicated to his conclusions. Over the last few decades, however, most of his theories have been disapproved (Bakhurst, 2007; Egan, 2002; Van Der Veer, 2007; Webster, 1995). Consequently, social scientists generally do not give his theories much attention, except as part of a historical overview of psychoanalytic theory (Bakhurst, 2007; Egan, 2002; Webster, 1995). This prior trend should provide a sufficient degree of warning of the quandary that can develop when academics or practitioners attempt to develop theories before there is sufficient evidence on which to base them (Bakhurst, 2007; Egan, 2002; Van Der Veer, 2007; Webster, 1995).

To be sure, many ideas developed first at the theoretical level, before being tested. Moreover, common principles and teachings that have been around for centuries are more often than not quite correct (Jeynes, 2000). However, especially when new theories contradict these common principles and teachings, quantitative analysis can often determine the extent to which the new theories are right or wrong.

Particularly, over the last 40 years, academic research has established that parental involvement is associated with higher academic outcomes among children (Belsky, 2005; Epstein & Becker, 1982; Hoover-Dempsey & Sandler, 1997). Some theorists proposed rubrics that sought to identify specific aspects of this family involvement that were important for teachers to be cognizant of in order to promote parental participation (e.g., Epstein & Becker, 1982). However, much of the actual practical research data that have emerged over the past 18 years, in particular, have indicated that the most powerful components of parental involvement were often subtle and often overlooked by previous theories of parental participation (Jeynes, 2018; Lee & Bowen, 2006; Vangelisti, 2004).

This chapter will present a very practical paradigm that will encourage school educators to more fully support parental involvement in their schools. This model is based on six meta-analyses that have been conducted over the last 18 years. A meta-analysis statistically combines all the relevant existing studies on a given subject in order to determine the aggregated results of said research. In other words, a meta-analysis quantitatively summarizes the existing body of research. The fact that meta-analyses give such an extensive summary of the existing body of research makes them extremely powerful and meaningful. They generally include a number of studies using nationwide data sets, many randomized studies, and high-quality studies, the collective results of which are difficult to explain away (Jeynes, 2019a, 2020).

Therefore, meta-analyses tend to be driven by facts and data rather than opinions (Greenhouse & Iyengar, 1994). It is often the case that contemporary opinions are not confirmed by the facts. When this is the case in academics and in the polemic landscape of any modern debate, this is disheartening, to say the least. Clearly, statistics do not capture everything. However, if common beliefs totally contradict factual numbers, this is the basis for much concern.

Fortunately, there have been a sufficient number of parental involvement studies that have been done to permit a series of meta-analyses to have been done examining not merely the overall effects of this engagement, but also the specific components of parental involvement. This will help construct a data-based theory of parental involvement rather than one that is based more on observations and, at times, conjecture.

The six meta-analyses considered in this chapter examine the influence of many manifestations of parental involvement (Jeynes, 2007b, 2010). From these meta-analyses, one can procure an overall panoramic awareness of what each of the various primary components of involvement contributes (Jeynes, 2012, 2017). Virtually all of the studies that researchers have undertaken on this topic include a small number of the entire gamut of the relevant variables and therefore have limited utility in ascertaining what components of family participation have the greatest impact. This chapter will not only attempt to distinguish between the various parental involvement components, but also separate out between more home-based and school-based elements of that participation. The goals in doing this are to not only help parents and schools maximize the efficacy of parental involvement, but also to more completely embrace the effectiveness of certain aspects of parenting that often are not fully appreciated.

This model, which will be referred to as the Dual Navigation Approach (DNA), will go well beyond the prevalent theories of parental involvement that were constructed before most sophisticated quantitative studies were completed. The meta-analyses point to a need for a broader approach that more fully incorporates the results of recent research which: 1) identifies the most efficacious expressions of parental involvement and 2) more fully distinguishes and elaborates on the two primary branches of parental participation (the school-based component and the home-based aspects). This is the reason the paradigm is referred to as the DNA. A greater identification of home-based parental involvement factors has been called for by a number of researchers (Desforges & Abouchaar, 2003; Sylva, Melhuish, Sammons, Siraj-Blatchford, & Taggart, 2008).

Six meta-analyses were published since 2003 that serve as the quantitative undergirding of this chapter. The meta-analyses that have been done on parental involvement serve to give some guidance in understanding which aspects of those family commitments are most helpful and in which context they are each developed, home-based or school-based.