NATIONAL CENTER FOR EDUCATION STATISTICS

Statistical Analysis Report October 1997

National Household Education Survey

Fathers’ Involvement in

Their Children’s Schools

U.S. Department of Education

Office of Educational Research and Improvement NCES 98-091
NATIONAL CENTER FOR EDUCATION STATISTICS

Statistical Analysis Report October 1997

National Household Education Survey

Fathers’ Involvement in

Their Children’s Schools

Christine Winquist Nord

Westat, Inc.

DeeAnn Brimhall and Jerry West

National Center for Education Statistics

U.S. Department of Education

Office of Educational Research and Improvement NCES 98-091
U.S. Department of Education

Richard W. Riley

Secretary

Office of Educational Research and Improvement

Ricky Takai

Acting Assistant Secretary

National Center for Education Statistics

Pascal D. Forgione, Jr.

Commissioner

The National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) is the primary federal entity for collecting, analyzing, and

reporting data related to education in the United States and other nations. It fulfills a congressional mandate

to collect, collate, analyze, and report full and complete statistics on the condition of education in the United

States; conduct and publish reports and specialized analyses of the meaning and significance of such

statistics; assist state and local education agencies in improving their statistical systems; and review and

report on education activities in foreign countries.

NCES activities are designed to address high priority education data needs; provide consistent, reliable,

complete, and accurate indicators of education status and trends; and report timely, useful, and high quality

data to the U.S. Department of Education, the Congress, the states, other education policymakers,

practitioners, data users, and the general public.

We strive to make our products available in a variety of formats and in language that is appropriate to a variety

of audiences. You, as our customer, are the best judge of our success in communicating information

effectively. If you have any comments or suggestions about this or any other NCES product or report, we

would like to hear from you. Please direct your comments to:

National Center for Education Statistics

Office of Educational Research and Improvement

U.S. Department of Education

555 New Jersey Avenue NW

Washington, DC 20208-5574

October 1997

Suggested Citation

U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. Fathers' Involvement in Their Children's Schools, NCES 98-091,

by Christine Winquist Nord, DeeAnn Brimhall, and Jerry West, Washington, DC: 1997.

Contact:

Jerry West

(202) 219-1574
iii

AKNOWLEDGMENTS

The authors wish to thank NCES staff members for their comments and suggestions on earlier drafts

of this report, including Paul Planchon, Dan Kasprzyk, Jeffrey Owings, Kathryn Chandler, Marilyn

McMillen, Michael Cohen, Laura Lippman, and Steve Gorman. We also wish to thank Westat staff

members who offered comments and suggestions, including Mary Collins, Mary Jo Nolin, Laura Spencer

Loomis, Nancy Vaden-Kiernan, and Nicholas Zill. The report was also reviewed by V. Jeffrey Evans of the

National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, Linda Mellgren of the Department of Health

and Human Services, Oliver Moles of the At-Risk Institute of the Office of Educational Research and

Improvement of the U.S. Department of Education, and Alan Ginsburg of the Office of the Under Secretary

of the U.S. Department of Education. The thoughtful comments and suggestions provided by all the

reviewers substantially improved the quality of the report. Any errors remaining are the sole responsibility

of the authors. The authors also wish to acknowledge and thank Nina Blecher, a consultant, for her excellent

programming, Susan Gilmore of Westat for her valuable research assistance, Roy Nord for his always sound

statistical and editorial advice, Carol Litman of Westat for her careful editing, and Mary Overacker of

Westat for preparing the final manuscript for publication. 
v

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Policymakers and educators agree that family involvement in children’s education is important in

fostering children’s school success. Indeed, two of the National Education Goals stress the important role

of parents in their children’s education. Goal 1 states that “By the year 2000, all children in America will

start school ready to learn.” The second objective under this goal expands upon it by stating that parents

are to be their children’s first teachers, devoting time each day to helping their preschool children learn.

Goal 8, although aimed at schools and not directly at parents, highlights the widespread belief that parental

involvement in schools is important. This goal states that “By the year 2000, every school will promote

partnerships that will increase parental participation in promoting the social, emotional, and academic

growth of children.”

Extensive research exists on the importance of parental involvement in children’s education, yet

relatively few studies have examined the individual contributions that mothers and fathers make to their

children’s schooling. There is a great deal of interest, however, in the role of fathers in children’s lives.

This interest stems from the fact that until recently fathers were the hidden parent. They were assumed to

be the breadwinners of two-parent families, but of limited importance in non-financial aspects of children’s

well-being and development. Reflecting this bias in research on child development, many federal agencies

and programs that deal with family issues focused almost exclusively on mothers and their children. In

1995, President Clinton issued a memorandum requesting that all executive departments and agencies make

a concerted effort to include fathers in their programs, policies, and research programs where appropriate

and feasible. This new attention devoted to fathers is not intended to lessen the focus on the important role

that mothers play in their children’s lives, but rather to highlight the fact that fathers are important, too.

This report provides a broad overview of the extent to which resident (excluding foster) and

nonresident fathers are involved in their children’s schools and examines the influence their involvement

has on how children are doing in school. Information on involvement in schools was obtained from the

parents of 16,910 kindergartners through 12th graders. Parents were asked which adult in the household,

if any, had participated in four types of school activities since the beginning of the school year: attending

a general school meeting; attending a regularly scheduled parent-teacher conference with the child’s teacher;

attending a school or class event; and volunteering at the school. In addition, for children who had parents

living elsewhere, respondents were asked about the children’s contact with their nonresident parents and,

among children who had seen their nonresident parents in the past year, whether the nonresident parents had

participated in the activities since the beginning of the school year. Of the 6,908 children with nonresident

parents, 5,440 had nonresident fathers. The data were collected from January to April of 1996 as part of the

National Household Education Survey. 
vi

The report emphasizes fathers’ involvement in their children’s schools, but information on mothers’

involvement is also provided. Throughout the discussion of resident fathers’ involvement, a distinction is

made between fathers in two-parent families and fathers who are heads of single-parent families. Two

reasons prompted this approach. First, single-parent and two-parent families differ in many respects that

can affect both how parents spend their time and how their children perform in school. Second, the

NHES:96 data allowed the unusual opportunity to examine how parents in two-parent families share childrearing responsibilities in one important realm: their children’s schooling. 

The major questions addressed by this report are listed below along with a brief summary of the

results for resident and nonresident fathers.

Resident Fathers’ Involvement

How do fathers compare with mothers in their level of involvement in their children’s

schools?

The answer to this question depends upon whether the focus is on two-parent or single-parent

families. Fathers in two-parent families are much less likely than mothers in two-parent families to be

highly involved in their children’s schools, that is, to have participated in at least three of the four activities.

On the other hand, fathers who head single-parent families show levels of high involvement very similar

to those of mothers who head single-parent families. In two-parent families, the proportion of children with

highly involved fathers is about half of the proportion with highly involved mothers, 27 percent and 56

percent, respectively. In single-parent families, however, children living with single fathers or with single

mothers are about equally likely to have highly involved parents, 46 percent and 49 percent, respectively.

Indeed, both fathers and mothers who head single-parent families have levels of involvement that are more

similar to mothers in two-parent families than to fathers in two-parent families. This pattern is consistent

with the roles that parents fill in two-parent and in single-parent families. In two-parent families, mothers

generally assume primary responsibility for the children. In single-parent families, the lone parent must fill

that role regardless of whether the parent is the father or the mother.

Does fathers’ involvement increase or decrease as children grow older?

Fathers’ involvement in their children’s schools, like mothers’ involvement, decreases as children

grow older. The decline is due, in part, to schools offering fewer opportunities for parental involvement as

children grow older. The pattern of decline, however, is not the same for mothers and fathers. The

proportion of children with mothers who are highly involved in their schools declines steadily as the grade

level of the children increases whether the children live in two-parent or in single-mother families.

However, the proportion of children who have highly involved fathers does not decline steadily. In two-
vii

parent families, the proportion of children with highly involved fathers drops from 30 percent to 25 percent

between elementary (grades K-5) and middle school (grades 6-8), but then drops only slightly, to 23 percent,

in high school (grades 9-12). Among children living in single-father families, there is no decrease in the

proportion who have highly involved fathers between elementary and middle schools (53 percent at both

grade levels), but a large decrease between middle and high school (to 27 percent). These results are based

on simple tabulations of the data that do not take into account such factors as the parents’ education or

mothers’ employment.

Is the involvement of fathers in schools associated with other parental behaviors at home that

may enhance children’s school success?

Parents who are highly involved in their children’s schools are more likely to be involved at home,

as well. Elementary school children with fathers or mothers who are highly involved in their schools are

more likely to have participated in educational activities with their parents (e.g, to have been told a story by

their parents in the past week or to have visited a museum or historical site with their parents in the past

month) than children whose parents have low levels of involvement in their schools. Children in the 6th

through 12th grade with mothers or fathers who are highly involved in their schools not only have shared

more activities with their parents in the past week than children whose parents have low levels of

involvement in their schools, but their parents are more likely to expect that they will graduate from a 4-year

college and to have discussed future courses with them. Such children are also more likely than other

children to have connections to their communities as measured by the proportion with parents who regularly

attend religious services, belong to community or professional organizations, or regularly volunteer in the

community. Thus, families with high parental involvement in their children’s schools provide their children

with multiple types of resources at home, as well.

What factors are associated with fathers’ involvement after selected child, family, and school

characteristics are taken into account?

In two-parent families, the strongest influence on fathers’ involvement in their children’s schools

is mothers’ involvement. Fathers are more likely to be highly involved in their children’s schools if mothers

are and vice versa. Other factors that are important are the fathers’ education, the presence of a stepmother

as opposed to a biological mother, and the number of activities that families share with their children at

home. As fathers’ education and number of activities increase so does fathers’ involvement. Fathers are

also more likely to be highly involved in their children’s schools if there is a stepmother present. Some of

the factors relating to high father involvement differ by the children’s grade level. Among children in

elementary school, fathers are more likely to be highly involved if the mothers are employed full time as

opposed to part time and if the children attend a private school rather than a public school that is assigned
viii

to them. Among children in the 6th through 12th grades, fathers are more likely to be highly involved if the

children are boys and if the children are in higher grades. 

In single-father families, fewer factors influence high father involvement after controlling for

selected child, family, and school characteristics. Among children in elementary school, the likelihood of

having highly involved fathers increases as fathers’ education increases. Among children in grades 6

through 12, fathers are significantly more likely to be highly involved in the schools of their 6th through 8th

graders than in the schools of their children in high school. Fathers who have discussed future courses with

their children are also more likely to be highly involved in their 6th through 12th graders’ schools. There

is some evidence that attendance at public schools of their choice or private schools increases the likelihood

that single fathers will be highly involved in their 6th through 12th graders’ schools, but this evidence is

weak.

A positive school climate, measured by the parents’ assessment of discipline in their children’s

classrooms and schools, whether students and teachers respect each other, how welcoming the schools are,

and how easy the schools make it for parents to be involved, is significantly associated with high father and

mother involvement in their children’s schools. As school climate becomes more positive, mothers are more

likely to be highly involved, regardless of two-parent or single-parent status or grade level of their children.

Among fathers in two-parent families, there is a weak association between a positive school climate and

fathers’ high involvement at grades 1 through 5, which becomes stronger at grades 6 through 12. As with

mothers, as school climate becomes more positive, the likelihood that fathers will be highly involved in their

children’s schools increases. Single fathers are also more likely to be highly involved in the schools of their

elementary school children as school climate becomes more positive, but school climate has no influence

on their involvement in their 6th through 12th graders’ schools.

Is fathers’ involvement in their children’s schools linked to measures of children’s school

outcomes, such as their class standing, whether they enjoy school, whether they participate

in extracurricular activities, whether they have repeated a grade, or whether they have ever

been suspended or expelled? 

Fathers’ involvement in their children’s schools has a distinct and independent influence on many

of these outcomes, even after controlling for potentially confounding factors such as the parents’ education,

household income, and, in two-parent families, the mothers’ involvement. The relationships often continue

to be important after information on home activities and the parents’ educational expectations for their

children is added to the models. In two-parent families, involvement of both parents in school is

significantly associated with a greater likelihood that their children in 1st through 12th grade get mostly A’s
ix

and that they enjoy school and a reduced likelihood that they have ever repeated a grade. Fathers’

involvement has a stronger influence on the children getting mostly A’s than does mothers’ involvement.

Among children living in single-father families, high father involvement is associated with a greater

likelihood that children in grades 1 through 12 get mostly A’s and is marginally associated with a greater

likelihood of their children enjoying school. High father involvement also reduces the likelihood that

children in the 6th through 12th grade have ever been suspended or expelled from school.

In two-parent families, is there a gain from having both parents involved as opposed to only

one? And, are there particular outcomes for which fathers’ involvement appears to be

especially important?

Results based on cross-tabulations suggest that children fare better when both parents are highly

involved in their schools. Children experience a small, but significant, increase in the likelihood that they

get mostly A’s, enjoy school, and participate in extracurricular activities and a reduced likelihood that they

have ever repeated a grade if both of their parents are highly involved in their schools compared to if only

their mothers are highly involved. They do almost as well if only one parent is highly involved, regardless

of whether that parent is the mother or father. Of course, the number of cases in which only the fathers are

highly involved is small. Children fare the worst when neither parent is involved in their schools. 

Although in a cross-sectional survey such as the NHES it is not possible to disentangle the direction

of causality, it appears that fathers’ involvement may be particularly important to children’s academic

standing, especially among children in the 6th through 12th grade. In two-parent families, fathers’

involvement, but not mothers’ involvement, is associated with an increased likelihood that children in the

1st through 5th grade get mostly A’s. Among children in the 6th through 12th grade, after controlling for

a variety of resources that parents offer at home, fathers’ involvement, but not mothers’ involvement,

remains a significant influence on the likelihood that children get mostly A’s. In single-parent families

headed by a father, fathers’ involvement in their children’s schools is a significant influence on the

likelihood that their 6th through 12th graders get mostly A’s. However, the influence diminishes once

fathers’ educational expectations for their children and the number of activities they share at home with their

children are included in the model.

Nonresident Fathers’ Involvement

To what extent are nonresident fathers involved in their children’s schools?

Nonresident fathers are much less likely than fathers in two-parent families to be involved in their

children’s schools. Of children in contact with their nonresident parents, 69 percent have fathers who have

not participated in any of the school activities since the beginning of the school year. In contrast, 25 percent
x

of children living in two-parent families have fathers who have not participated in any of the school

activities. However, 31 percent of children who have had contact with their nonresident fathers in the past

year have nonresident fathers who have participated in at least one of the four activities, 18 percent have

nonresident fathers who have participated in at least two of the four activities, and 9 percent have

nonresident fathers who have participated in three or more of the school activities. Like resident fathers in

two-parent families, nonresident fathers are most likely to attend school or class events, such as sports

events, and general school meetings. The proportion of children whose nonresident fathers have participated

in each of these activities is 22 percent and 18 percent, respectively, compared to just over half of children

in two-parent families whose fathers have participated in each of these activities.

What factors influence the involvement of nonresident fathers in their children’s schools?

Children’s grade level, household income, mothers’ education, family configuration (single-parent

family or step family), mothers’ level of involvement in their children’s schools, and fathers’ payment of

child support in the previous year are all important influences on nonresident fathers’ involvement in their

kindergarten through 12th graders’ schools. Nonresident fathers are more likely to be involved if their

children are in kindergarten through 5th grade than if they are in grades 6 through 12. Nonresident fathers

are also more likely to be involved as household income, mothers’ education, and mothers’ involvement in

their children’s schools increase and if the fathers have paid any child support. When influences on

nonresident fathers’ involvement are examined separately for children in kindergarten through 5th grade

and those in 6th through 12th grade, the specific factors that are important differ somewhat by grade level.

Among children in kindergarten through 5th grade, the strongest influences on the involvement of

nonresident fathers are mothers’ education and involvement in the children’s schools. Involvement of

nonresident fathers is also higher if the fathers have paid any child support in the last year. Among children

in grades 6 through 12, the strongest influences on nonresident fathers’ involvement are whether the

children live in mother-only families, household income, and mothers’ involvement in their schools.

Do children with an involved nonresident father do better in school than children with a less

involved or uninvolved nonresident father?

The involvement of nonresident fathers in their children’s schools appears to be particularly

important for children in grades 6 through 12, reducing the likelihood that the children have ever been

suspended or expelled from school or repeated a grade. This association remains even after controlling for

resident mothers’ involvement in the schools, education, household income, and other potentially

confounding factors. Nonresident fathers’ involvement is also associated with a greater likelihood that

children in grades 1 through 5 and in grades 6 through 12 participate in extracurricular activities. There is

also evidence that the involvement of nonresident fathers increases the likelihood that children in grades 6
xi

through 12 get mostly A’s and that they enjoy school, though these associations are weakened after

controlling for the resident mothers’ level of involvement in the children’s schools.

Summary

This report provides additional support to the already large body of literature that suggests that

parental involvement in their children’s schools is beneficial for children’s school success. First, it

demonstrates that the involvement of both mothers and fathers is important in contributing to children’s

school success. Second, it shows that parents who are involved in school are involved in other ways that

promote their children’s school success. Third, it shows that single mothers and single fathers are involved

in their children’s schools, even though they do not have a second parent to help them with their other

obligations. Fourth, it suggests that there may be certain aspects of children’s school performance and

certain stages in the children’s academic careers where fathers’ involvement is particularly important.

The report also adds to the large body of literature on nonresident fathers by demonstrating that

nearly one-third of nonresident fathers who have had contact with their children in the past year continue

to play an important role in their children’s lives by participating in school activities. Moreover, their

participation in school activities makes a difference in their children’s lives. The analyses suggest that more

discriminating measures of nonresident fathers’ involvement in their children’s lives are needed in order

to more fully understand the relationship between nonresident fathers’ involvement and children’s wellbeing. Inconsistencies about the benefits of nonresident fathers’ continued contact with their children in

extant studies may be due in large part to the fact that the simple measure frequency of contact is often used

to measure involvement. This report shows that it is not contact, per se, that is associated with student

outcomes, but rather active participation in their children’s lives through involvement in their schools that

makes a difference in school outcomes. 
xiii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS .................................................. iii

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................. v

LIST OF TABLES ........................................................ xv

LIST OF FIGURES ....................................................... xxi

INTRODUCTION ........................................................ 1

Why Focus on Fathers? .............................................. 1

The Role of Fathers in Children’s Lives ................................. 3

The Salience of Fathers to Children’s Lives .............................. 5

Factors Associated with Parental Involvement ............................ 7

Data Source ....................................................... 10

Measuring Parental Involvement ....................................... 10

Organization of the Report ............................................ 13

FINDINGS .............................................................. 17

Involvement of Resident Parents ....................................... 17

Types of Activities in Which Fathers and Mothers Participate .......... 17

Levels of Involvement in School Activities by Fathers and Mothers ..... 19

Changes in Involvement with Grade Level ......................... 21

Familial Resources and Parental Involvement in Schools .............. 24

School Resources and Parental Involvement ........................ 35

Influences on Parent Involvement in School ........................ 40

Parental Involvement and Student Outcomes ....................... 52

Involvement of Nonresident Fathers .................................... 61

Children’s Contact with Nonresident Fathers and Mothers ............. 62

Types of Activities in Which Nonresident Fathers and Mothers Participate 63

Levels of Involvement in School Activities by Nonresident Fathers and 

Mothers .................................................... 64

Influences on the Involvement of Nonresident Fathers ................ 65

Involvement of Nonresident Fathers and Student Outcomes ............ 72

SUMMARY AND DISCUSSION ............................................ 77

Major Conclusions .................................................. 77

Limitations of the Data .............................................. 79

Suggestions for Future Research ....................................... 80
xiv

TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)

Page

METHODOLOGY AND DATA RELIABILITY ................................ 83

Survey Methodology ................................................ 83

Response Rates .................................................... 83

Data Reliability .................................................... 85

Nonsampling Errors ........................................... 85

Sampling Errors and Weighting .................................. 87

Derived Variables .................................................. 88

Parent Involvement Variables ................................... 88

Family Characteristic Variables .................................. 91

Student Outcome Variables ..................................... 92

School Climate Variable ....................................... 93

Adjusted Odds Ratios ............................................... 93

References .............................................................. 95

Appendix A Detailed Tables on Parental Involvement by Student Grade Level ........ 101

Appendix B Adjusted Odds Ratios for All Factors Included in Models 

of Student Outcomes ...................................................... 147
xv

LIST OF TABLES

Page

Text Tables

Table 1.— Living arrangements of children: Students in grades K-12, 1996 .......... 15

Table 2.— Adjusted odds ratios of fathers’ and mothers’ high involvement in their 

children’s schools, by child, family, and school characteristics: Students in 

grades 1-5 living in two-parent families, 1996 ........................ 42

Table 3.— Adjusted odds ratios of fathers’ and mothers’ high involvement in their children’s 

schools, by child, family, and school characteristics: Students in grades 6-12 

living in two-parent families, 1996 ................................. 43

Table 4.— Adjusted odds ratios of fathers’ and mothers’ high level of involvement in their 

children’s schools, by child, family, and school characteristics: Students in grades 

1-5 living in single-parent families, 1996 ............................ 50

Table 5.— Adjusted odds ratios of fathers’ and mothers’ high level of involvement in their 

children’s schools, by child, family, and school characteristics: Students in grades 

6-12 living in single-parent families, 1996 ........................... 51

Table 6.— Adjusted odds ratios of selected student outcomes, by fathers’ and mothers’ level 

of involvement in their schools and grade level: Students in grades 1-12 living 

in two-parent families, 1996 ...................................... 57

Table 7.— Adjusted odds ratios of selected student outcomes, by fathers’ and mothers’ level 

of involvement in their schools and grade level: Students in grades 1-12 living 

in single-parent families, 1996 .................................... 60

Table 8.— Adjusted odds ratios of nonresident fathers’ contact with their children in the last 

year, by child and resident family characteristics and whether nonresident fathers 

paid any child support in the last year: Students in grades K-12, 1996 ..... 68

Table 9.— Adjusted odds ratios of nonresident fathers’ moderate to high involvement 

in their children’s schools, by child and resident family characteristics and 

whether nonresident fathers paid any child support in the last year: Students 

in grades K-12, 1996 ............................................ 71

Table 10.— Adjusted odds ratios of selected student outcomes, by nonresident fathers’ 

contact and level of involvement in their children’s schools: Students in 

grades 1-12, 1996 .............................................. 73
xvi

LIST OF TABLES (Continued)

Page

Appendix A tables

Table 1a.— Percent of children whose parents are involved in their schools, by type 

of activity participated in, who participated, and family type: Students in 

grades K-12, 1996 .............................................. 103

Table 1b.— Percent of children whose parents are involved in their schools, by type 

of activity participated in, who participated, and family type: Students in 

grades K-5, 1996 ............................................... 105

Table 1c.— Percent of children whose parents are involved in their schools, by type 

of activity participated in, who participated, and family type: Students in 

grades 6-8, 1996 ............................................... 107

Table 1d.— Percent of children whose parents are involved in their schools, by type 

of activity participated in, who participated, and family type: Students in 

grades 9-12, 1996 .............................................. 109

Table 2a.— Percent of children whose parents are involved in their schools, by level of 

involvement, family type, and selected child, parent, and family characteristics: 

Students in grades K-12, 1996 .................................... 111

Table 2b.— Percent of children whose parents are involved in their schools, by level of 

involvement, family type, and selected child, parent, and family characteristics: 

Students in grades K-5, 1996 ..................................... 113

Table 2c.— Percent of children whose parents are involved in their schools, by level of 

involvement, family type, and selected child, parent, and family characteristics: 

Students in grades 6-8, 1996 ...................................... 115

Table 2d.— Percent of children whose parents are involved in their schools, by level of 

involvement, family type, and selected child, parent, and family characteristics: 

Students in grades 9-12, 1996 ..................................... 117

Table 3b.— Percent of children with selected sources of social capital in their homes, by 

level of parental involvement in their schools and family type: Students in grades 

K-5, 1996 .................................................... 119
xvii

LIST OF TABLES (Continued)

Page

Table 3c.— Percent of children with selected sources of social capital in their homes, by 

level of parental involvement in their schools and family type: Students in 

grades 6-8, 1996 ............................................... 120

Table 3d.— Percent of children with selected sources of social capital in their homes, by 

level of parental involvement in their schools and family type: Students in 

grades 9-12, 1996 .............................................. 121

Table 4a.— Percent of children whose parents are involved in their schools, by level 

of involvement, family type, and selected school and community characteristics: 

Students in grades K-12, 1996 .................................... 122

Table 4b.— Percent of children whose parents are involved in their schools, by level 

of involvement, family type, and selected school and community characteristics: 

Students in grades K-5, 1996 ..................................... 123

Table 4c.— Percent of children whose parents are involved in their schools, by level of 

involvement, family type, and selected school and community characteristics: 

Students in grades 6-8, 1996 ...................................... 124

Table 4d.— Percent of children whose parents are involved in their schools, by level of 

involvement, family type, and selected school and community characteristics: 

Students in grades 9-12, 1996 ..................................... 125

Table 5a.— Percent of children with selected student outcomes, by level of parental 

involvement in their schools and family type: Students in grades K-12, 

1996 ......................................................... 126

Table 5b.— Percent of children with selected student outcomes, by level of parental 

involvement in their schools and family type: Students in grades K-5, 1996 127

Table 5c.— Percent of children with selected student outcomes, by level of parental 

involvement in their schools and family type: Students in grades 6-8, 1996 . 128

Table 5d.— Percent of children with selected student outcomes, by level of parental 

involvement in their schools and family type: Students in grades 9-12, 1996 129

Table 6a.— Percent of children with selected student outcomes, by combined parental 

involvement in their schools: Students in grades K-12 in two-parent 

families, 1996 ................................................. 130
xviii

LIST OF TABLES (Continued)

Page

Table 6b.— Percent of children with selected student outcomes, by combined parental 

involvement in their schools: Students in grades K-5 in two-parent 

families, 1996 ................................................. 131

Table 6c.— Percent of children with selected student outcomes, by combined parental 

involvement in their schools: Students in grades 6-8 in two-parent 

families, 1996 ................................................. 132

Table 6d.— Percent of children with selected student outcomes, by combined parental 

involvement in their schools: Students in grades 9-12 in two-parent 

families, 1996 ................................................. 133

Table 7a.— Percent of children who have had contact with their nonresident parents 

and whose nonresident parents are involved in their schools, by level of 

involvement, type of nonresident parent, and selected child, resident parent, 

and resident family characteristics: Students in grades K-12, 1996 ....... 134

Table 7b.— Percent of children who have had contact with their nonresident parents 

and whose nonresident parents are involved in their schools, by level of 

involvement, type of nonresident parent, and selected child, resident parent, and 

resident family characteristics: Students in grades K-5, 1996 ............ 136

Table 7c.— Percent of children who have had contact with their nonresident parents 

and whose nonresident parents are involved in their schools, by level of 

involvement, type of nonresident parent, and selected child, resident parent,

and resident family characteristics: Students in grades 6-8, 1996 ......... 138

Table 7d.— Percent of children who have had contact with their nonresident parents 

and whose nonresident parents are involved in their schools, by level of 

involvement, type of nonresident parent, and selected child, resident parent,

and resident family characteristics: Students in grades 9-12, 1996 ........ 140

Table 8a.— Percent of children with selected student outcomes, by recency of contact with

their nonresident parents, level of involvement of the nonresident parents in their

schools, and type of nonresident parent: Students in grades K-12, 1996 ... 142

Table 8b.— Percent of children with selected student outcomes, by recency of contact with

their nonresident parents, level of involvement of the nonresident parents in their

schools, and type of nonresident parent: Students in grades K-5, 1996 .... 143
xix

LIST OF TABLES (Continued)

Page

Table 8c.— Percent of children with selected student outcomes, by recency of contact 

with their nonresident parents, level of involvement of the nonresident parents in 

their schools, and type of nonresident parent: Students in grades 6-8, 1996 . 143

Table 8d.— Percent of children with selected student outcomes, by recency of contact 

with their nonresident parents, level of involvement of the nonresident parents in 

their schools, and type of nonresident parent: Students in grades 9-12, 1996 144

Appendix B tables

Table B1.— Adjusted odds ratios of student outcomes, by child and family characteristics of 

children living in two-parent families: Students in grades 1-12, 1996 ..... 149

Table B2.— Adjusted odds ratios of student outcomes, by child and family characteristics, 

children living in two-parent families: Students in grades 1-5, 1996 ...... 150

Table B3.— Adjusted odds ratios of student outcomes, by child and family characteristics, 

children living in two-parent families: Students in grades 6-12, 1996 ..... 151

Table B4.— Adjusted odds ratios of student outcomes, by child and family characteristics, 

children living in single-parent families: Students in grades 1-12, 1996 .... 152

Table B5.— Adjusted odds ratios of student outcomes, by child and family characteristics, 

children living in single-father families: Students in grades 1-5, 1996 ..... 153

Table B6.— Adjusted odds ratios of student outcomes, by child and family characteristics, 

children living in single-mother families: Students in grades 1-5, 1996 .... 154

Table B7.— Adjusted odds ratios of student outcomes, by child and family characteristics, 

children living in single-father families: Students in grades 6-12, 1996 .... 155

Table B8.— Adjusted odds ratios of student outcomes, by child and family characteristics, 

children living in single-mother families: Students in grades 6-12, 1996 ... 156
xx

LIST OF TABLES (Continued)

Page

Table B9.—Adjusted odds ratios of selected student outcomes, by child and resident family

characteristics, nonresident fathers’ involvement in their children’s schools, and

whether nonresident fathers paid any child support: Students in grades 1-12, 

1996 ......................................................... 157

Table B10.—Adjusted odds ratios of selected student outcomes, by child and resident family 

characteristics, nonresident fathers’ involvement in their children’s schools, and 

whether nonresident fathers paid any child support: Students in grades 1-5,

1996. ........................................................ 158

Table B11.—Adjusted odds ratios of selected student outcomes, by child and resident family 

characteristics, nonresident fathers’ involvement in their children’s schools, 

and whether nonresident fathers paid any child support: Students in grades 

6-12, 1996 .................................................... 159
xxi

LIST OF FIGURES

Page

Figure 1.— Percent of children whose fathers and mothers participated in each school 

activity, by family type: Students in grades K-12, 1996 ................ 18

Figure 2.— Level of fathers’ and mothers’ involvement in school, by family type: Students 

in grades K-12, 1996 ............................................ 20

Figure 3.— Level of fathers’ and mothers’ involvement in school, by grade grouping and

family type: Students in grades K-12, 1996 .......................... 22

Figure 4.— Percent of children whose fathers and mothers attended a school or class 

event and volunteered at school, by grade level: Students in grades K-12, 1996

........................................................... 23

Figure 5.— Percent of children whose fathers and mothers have high involvement in school, 

by household income and family type: Students in grades K-12, 1996 ..... 25

Figure 6.— Percent of children whose fathers and mothers have high involvement in school, 

by poverty status, receipt of federal assistance, home ownership, and family type: 

Students in grades K-12, 1996 .................................... 26

Figure 7.— Percent of children whose fathers and mothers have high involvement in school, 

by education of parents and family type: Students in grades K-12, 1996 ... 28

Figure 8a.—Percent of children with selected types of social capital, by level of fathers’ and 

mothers’ involvement in school: Students in grades K-5 in two-parent 

families, 1996 ................................................. 30

Figure 8b.—Percent of children with selected types of social capital, by level of fathers’ and 

mothers’ involvement in school: Students in grades K-5 in single-parent 

families, 1996 ................................................. 31

Figure 9a.—Percent of children with selected types of social capital, by level of fathers’ 

and mothers’ involvement in school: Students in grades 6-12 in two-parent 

families, 1996 ................................................. 32

Figure 9b.—Percent of children with selected types of social capital, by level of fathers’ 

and mothers’ involvement in school: Students in grades 6-12 in single-parent 

families, 1996 ................................................. 33
xxii

LIST OF FIGURES (Continued)

Page

Figure 10.—Percent of children whose parents have ties to the community, by level of fathers’ 

and mothers’ involvement in school: Students in grades 6-12, 1996 ...... 36

Figure 11.—Percent of children whose fathers and mothers have high involvement in school, 

by school characteristics and family type: Students in grades K-12, 1996 . . 37

Figure 12.—Percent of children whose parents strongly agree with statements about school 

climate, by level of fathers’ and mothers’ involvement in school: Students in 

grades 1-12, 1996 .............................................. 39

Figure 13.—Student outcomes, by fathers’ and mothers’ involvement in school and family type: 

Students in grades K-12, 1996 .................................... 54

Figure 14.—Student outcomes, by level of parental involvement in school and which parent is 

involved: Students in grades K-12 in two-parent families, 1996 .......... 55

Figure 15.—Percent of children whose nonresident fathers and mothers participated in 

each school activity: Students in grades K-12, 1996 ................... 64

Figure 16.—Level of involvement in school of nonresident fathers and mothers who have seen 

their children within the last year: Students in grades K-12, 1996 ........ 65

Figure 17.—Percent of children who have had contact with their nonresident father in the 

previous year, by payment of child support and selected family characteristics: 

Students in grades K-12, 1996 .................................... 66

Figure 18.—Percent of children whose nonresident fathers have high involvement in their 

schools, by payment of child support and selected family characteristics: 

Students in grades K-12, 1996 .................................... 69
1

INTRODUCTION

Policymakers and educators agree that family involvement in children’s lives is

closely linked to children’s school success (Riley, 1994; U.S. Department of Education,

1994). Indeed, two of the National Education Goals stress the important role of parents in

their children’s education. Goal 1 states that “By the year 2000, all children in America will

start school ready to learn.” The second objective under this goal expands upon it by stating

that parents are to be their children’s first teachers, devoting time each day to helping their

preschool children learn. Goal 8, although aimed at schools and not directly at parents,

highlights the widespread belief that parental involvement in schools is important. This goal

states that “By the year 2000, every school will promote partnerships that will increase

parental involvement and participation in promoting the social, emotional, and academic

growth of children.”

Extensive research exists on the importance of parental involvement in children’s

education (see Henderson and Berla, 1994, and Henderson, 1987, for reviews of the

research), yet relatively few studies have discussed the individual contributions that mothers

and fathers make to their children’s schooling. Psychologists, however, are increasingly

reaching the conclusion that fathers, as well as mothers, influence children’s social,

emotional, and cognitive development. The contribution of fathers to children’s development

over and above that of mothers is not yet well documented (Parke, 1995), but it is known that

the roles that fathers and mothers assume in the family are not identical, nor are the ways in

which they interact with their children (Parke, 1995; Lamb, 1997; Lamb, 1981). The impact

that these differences have on children’s development and well-being needs further

examination. 

Why Focus on Fathers?

Although information on the involvement of both fathers and mothers will be

presented in this report, the primary focus will be on the involvement of fathers. For several

decades, researchers in children’s issues have tended to focus on mothers and children. In

a similar vein, many federal agencies and programs have also focused almost exclusively on

mothers and their children. In 1995, President Clinton issued a memorandum requesting that

all executive departments and agencies make a concerted effort to include fathers in their

programs, policies, and research programs where appropriate and feasible (Clinton, 1995).

The new attention devoted to fathers is not intended to lessen the focus on the important role

that mothers play in their children’s lives, but rather to highlight the fact that fathers are

important, too.

One set of fathers has received a large amount of research attention: nonresident

fathers (Nord and Zill, 1996; Furstenberg, 1988). Such research has tended to focus
2

primarily on their payment or lack of payment of child support and on the extent to which

they see their children. Much less is known about the types of activities that nonresident

fathers share with their children and about their involvement in their children’s schools.

This report describes in greater detail than heretofore has been possible fathers’

involvement in their children’s schools and examines the relationship between their

involvement and each of five measures of how children are doing in school using a nationally

representative data set—the 1996 National Household Education Survey (NHES:96). Two

main areas of research questions are addressed: resident fathers’ involvement and

nonresident fathers’ involvement. 

Resident Fathers’ Involvement

! How do fathers compare with mothers in their level of involvement in their

children’s schools?

! Does fathers’ involvement increase or decrease as children grow older?

! Isthe involvement of fathers in school associated with other parental behaviors

at home that may enhance children’s school success? 

! What factors are associated with fathers’ involvement after related child,

family, and school characteristics are controlled?

! Is fathers’ involvement in their children’s schools linked to measures of

children’s school outcomes, such as their class standing, whether they enjoy

school, whether they participate in extracurricular activities, whether they have

repeated a grade, and whether they have ever been suspended or expelled? 

! In two-parent families, is there a gain from having both parents involved as

opposed to only one? And, are there particular outcomes for which fathers’

involvement appears to be especially important?

Nonresident Fathers’ Involvement

! To what extent are nonresident fathers involved in their children’s schools?

! What factors influence the involvement of nonresident fathers?

! Do children with involved nonresident fathers do better in school than children

with less involved or uninvolved nonresident fathers?
3

Appendix A to this report contains detailed tables on the involvement of both mothers

and fathers in their children’s schools. These tables are intended to serve as a resource for

persons interested in learning more about the extent of involvement of parents in their

children’s schools and the factors that are associated with such involvement for different

grade levels. The tables provide data for all children in kindergarten through 12th grade as

a group and by kindergarten through 5th grade, 6th through 8th grade, and 9th through 12th

grade. 

The Role of Fathers in Children’s Lives

The role of fathers in children’s lives varies over time and across cultures (Lamb,

1997). During the colonial period, fathers were the primary parent and had ultimate say in

matters of the child; in the rare case of divorce, the law awarded custody to the father

(Demos, 1986). As the primary parent, fathers had multiple roles: provider, moral overseer,

disciplinarian, companion, and teacher, to name a few. Although mothers were responsible

for the day-to-day care of children, especially young children, they were assumed to be too

emotional and too indulgent to properly raise children (Demos, 1986). The advent of

urbanization and industrialization in the 19th century redefined the roles of mothers and

fathers. The role of fathers became predominantly that of “provider,” while the role of

mothers expanded in some respects and narrowed in others. Mothers became the parent with

primary responsibility for children, including their moral development, and for ensuring the

smooth operation of the household (Demos, 1986). As “homemaker” she became

increasingly isolated from life outside the family. The contributions that she had previously

made to the economic well-being of the family through such activities as assisting in the

raising of crops, weaving, and the production of household goods decreased (Scott and Tilly,

1975). This pattern survived through much of this century and was particularly evident

during the 1950s (Cherlin, 1992). 

In recent decades, shifts in our society are once again transforming the roles of fathers

and mothers. Important forces in altering the roles have been the increasing labor force

participation of mothers, including mothers with young children, and the high levels of

divorce and nonmarital childbearing (Demos, 1986). The entry of a large number of mothers

into the labor force has contributed to a marked decline in the strict gender division of labor

within a family to an arrangement where the roles of mothers and fathers overlap to a great

extent (Furstenberg, 1988). Nowadays, fathers, like mothers, have multiple roles: provider,

protector, nurturer, companion, disciplinarian, teacher, and instiller of societal norms to name

just a few (Lamb, 1997; Marsiglio, 1993). The term “co-parents” is often used to describe

the situation where mothers and fathers share equally the responsibilities of maintaining a

family. In reality, however, most families do not divide all household and child rearing tasks

equally between mothers and fathers, but rather work out their own acceptable divisions of

labor within the family (Pleck and Pleck, 1997). More often than not, this division of labor
 Some single parents may have another adult in the household who can assist them. In 1990, approximately 18 percent of 1

children in mother-only families and 20 percent of children in father-only families also had a grandparent living with them

(Hernandez, 1996). Some of these grandparents may need assistance, but others are probably able to contribute to raising the

children. In addition, some single parents have unmarried partners living with them (Garasky and Meyers, 1996). It appears that

single fathers are more likely than single mothers to have partners (Garasky and Meyers, 1996). The non-custodial parent may

also provide help, such as doing home or car repairs, taking the child to a doctor’s appointment, providing transportation, or

helping with finances. Even with such assistance, however, the single parent remains the adult with primary responsibility for

raising the children.

4

falls along traditional lines with mothers assuming more responsibility for raising the

children and fathers taking primary responsibility for providing for the economic well-being

of the family (Lamb, 1997; Parke, 1995; Becker, 1981). This division of labor may be due

in large part to the fact that men continue to earn more than women in the labor force (U.S.

Department of Commerce, 1996). It may also be due, in part, to societal pressures to

conform to expected roles. Society in many ways dictates the roles that mothers play and has

clear expectations about the appropriate behavior of mothers. Societal expectations of how

fathers are supposed to behave, beyond being a good provider, are not as clear (Parke, 1995),

and thus the pressure to behave in specific ways is not as strong.

The rise in divorce and nonmarital childbearing has meant that more and more

children are spending at least part of their childhoods living with only one parent. Estimates

are that at least half of all children today will spend some time in a single-parent family

before they reach age 18 (Furstenberg and Cherlin, 1991). In most cases this parent is the

mother, though the proportion of custodial fathers has increased over the last several decades

(Meyer and Garasky, 1993). In 1994, 3.4 percent of all children under 18 lived in father-only

families and 24.5 percent lived in mother-only families (Saluter, 1996), up from 1.1 percent

and 10.7 percent, respectively, in 1970 (U.S. House of Representatives, 1983). The lone

parent, of necessity, must often fill all roles within the family. It has been suggested that the

1

structural constraints of being the sole parent in the household diminishes traditional gender

role differences, making single fathers and single mothers more similar when it comes to

parenting than mothers and fathers in two-parent families (Thomson, McLanahan, and

Curtin, 1992; Risman, 1987). Even with the need to assume aspects of the other parent’s

role, however, at least one study has found evidence that single fathers and single mothers

behave differently in at least one respect: the types of resources that they invest in their

children (Downey, 1994). Single fathers are more likely to provide economic resources,

which may in part reflect their greater economic well-being compared to single mothers,

while single mothers are more likely to provide what Downey termed “interpersonal”

resources, including being involved in their children’s schools, sharing in-home activities,

and knowing their children’s friends. 

Because many divorced parents remarry, a large proportion of children also

experience step families (Cherlin, 1992). Step families have an economic advantage over

single-parent families, but it is not clear that the children in such families enjoy other
5

advantages. Like children in single-parent families, children in step families show elevated

risks of maladjustment and school failure compared to children living with both their

biological parents (Zill, 1988). It may be that the stepparent is competing with the children

for the biological parent’s time and attention (McLanahan and Sandefur, 1994). It is also

possible that stepparents are less committed to their stepchildren than are the children’s

biological parents or that they are actively discouraged by the biological parent or by the

children from becoming very involved in the children’s lives (McLanahan and Sandefur,

1994). Whatever the combination of reasons, there is no doubt that the relationship between

stepparents and their stepchildren is different than the relationship between biological parents

and their children.

The role of parents who do not live with their children has been a source of confusion

to parents and policymakers alike. Because mothers are more likely than fathers to retain

custody of the children when parents separate, most nonresidential parents are fathers.

According to data from the 1990 Survey of Income and Program Participation, 88 percent

of custodial parents are mothers and 12 percent are fathers (Nord and Zill, 1996).

Policymakers have emphasized the provider role of nonresident fathers and have formulated

laws and policies to encourage or enforce the payment of child support and, to a lesser extent,

visitation. Increasingly, however, observers are arguing that like resident fathers, nonresident

fathers have more roles than that of provider in their children’s lives. 

The Salience of Fathers to Children’s Lives

For many years, research on children’s development and well-being focused on the

dynamics between mothers and their children. Fathers were usually omitted from the picture.

This bias in the research was in part a reflection of the prevailing roles of mothers and fathers

described above. Fathers were often assumed to be on the periphery of children’s lives and,

therefore, of little direct importance to children’s development (Lamb, 1997). However, the

same demographic forces that prompted changes in men’s and women’s roles also stimulated

research on fathers (Marsiglio, 1993). Research, and the popular media, developed two

images of fatherhood: what the sociologist Frank Furstenberg termed “Good Dads” and

“Bad Dads” (Furstenberg, 1988). Such research, however, progressed unevenly. The Bad

Dads received more and more attention as policymakers searched for ways to reduce

childhood poverty and to increase children’s well-being (Harris and Marmer, 1996; Crowell

and Leeper, 1994). Recently, however, a portrayal of fathers incorporating more nuances has

begun to emerge in the research (Lamb, 1997; Parke, 1996, 1995). 

Existing research on the salience of fathers to children’s lives has provided a mixed

picture. The importance of the economic contribution of fathers is widely acknowledged.

Numerous studies on single-parent families have highlighted the difficulties that children and

families face when fathers fail to provide economic support (McLanahan and Sandefur,
6

1994; Crockett, Eggebeen, and Hawkins, 1993). Studies on the importance of fathers for

children’s lives, beyond their economic contributions, have not been as consistent (Amato,

1994). One reason for the mixed results about the importance of fathers to children is the

focus of the research and the outcomes used differ across studies. One vein of research

focuses on the well-being of children who do not live with their fathers. Two different

approaches are often used. In one, children who do not live with their fathers are compared

to children living in two-parent families. Differences between the two populations are

assumed to be due to the influence of not living with fathers or to the process that led to the

fathers not living with their children (e.g., McLanahan and Sandefur, 1994). In the second

approach, only children who do not live with their fathers are studied. Information about the

behavior of nonresident fathers (for example, whether they pay child support or the amount

of contact they have with their children) is added to statistical models that examine the

factors that are associated with children’s well-being (e.g., King, 1994). If the variables

measuring the behavior of the nonresident fathers are not statistically significant, the

researchers conclude that the involvement of nonresident fathers is not important for

children’s well-being. Another vein of research focuses on the influence that resident fathers

have on their children and the patterns of interaction between resident fathers and their

children (see Lamb, 1987, and Radin, 1981, for reviews of this research). Studies that focus

on what is often referred to as father absence yield the most ambiguous results, with some

studies finding nonresident fathers important to children’s well-being (Amato, 1994;

Peterson and Zill, 1986), and others finding no influence of continued paternal involvement

(King, 1994; Furstenberg, Morgan, and Allison, 1987). Studies based on resident fathers,

on the other hand, often find that fathers are important for children’s development and wellbeing (Lamb, 1987). 

Researchers are in agreement that mothers and fathers interact differently with their

children (Parke, 1995). Fathers spend proportionately more time playing with their children,

while mothers spend a greater proportion of their total time with their children in caretaking

activities (Lamb, 1986). Because mothers spend a greater amount of time overall with their

children, they may actually spend more time playing with them than do fathers, yet caretaking

is still what best characterizes their time, while play best characterizes the fathers’ overall

time with their children. Fathers and mothers also play differently with their children, with

fathers much more likely to be rough and tumble (Parke, 1995; Hetherington and Parke,

1993). Summarizing a wide range of studies, Parke concluded, “Fathers are tactile and

physical and mothers tend to be verbal, didactic, and toy mediated in their play. Clearly,

infants and young children experience not only more stimulation from their fathers, but a

qualitatively different stimulatory pattern” (1995, p. 33). It is not only fathers’ stimulation

of their children, however, that influences them. Radin, in her review of the importance of

fathers to children’s lives, concluded that there are many channels through which a father

may influence his children’s cognitive development, including “through his genetic

background, through his manifest behavior with his offspring, through the attitudes he holds
7

about himself and his children, through the behavior he models, through his position in the

family system, through the material resources he is able to supply for his children, through

the influence he exerts on his wife’s behavior, through his ethnic heritage, and through the

vision he holds for his children” (1981, p. 419).

The extent of fathers’ involvement with their children changes as the children grow

older and also varies by whether the children are boys or girls. Regardless of the child’s age,

studies often find that fathers are more likely to be involved with their sons than with their

daughters (Marsiglio, 1991; Lamb, 1986; Radin, 1981). It also appears that the nurturance

of fathers is associated with the cognitive abilities of boys, but less so of girls (Radin, 1981).

Close father-son relationships appear to encourage the development of analytic skills.

Fathers (and mothers) spend less time with their children as the children grow older,

in part because children themselves desire to spend more time with peers. However, even

though they spend less time together, the importance of fathers to children’s development

increases as children grow older, especially for sons (Thompson, 1986). There is tantalizing

evidence from smaller scale and observational studies that children and youth rely upon their

fathers to provide factual information and that children, at least in middle-class families, tend

to believe that with respect to family goals, the most important one for fathers is that “every

one learn and do well in school,” while children are more likely to say that mothers think it

is more important to make “everyone feel special and important” (Ramey, 1996). According

to this research, fathers are “highly engaged” in providing information to their children.

Mothers, on the other hand, tend to provide more day-to-day care and emotional support and

companionship. Plausible hypotheses that stem from this research are that maternal

involvement is beneficial for the social and emotional adjustment of children to school,

particularly young children, but that paternal involvement may be most important for

academic achievement. 

It is evident that the roles of both resident and nonresident fathers in their children’s

lives are in flux. It is also evident that research on the contributions of fathers and mothers

to their children’s lives will continue. This report provides new information on how both

resident and nonresident parents of school-aged children are sharing the important task of

involvement in their children’s schools. It also presents information on the contribution that

fathers’ involvement in schools makes to children’s school success net of the influence of

mothers’ involvement.

Factors Associated with Parental Involvement

Existing studies have identified a number of factors that are associated with parental

involvement, many of which are also associated with how children do in school. Among

these are a child’s grade (or age), family structure, parental education and socioeconomic
 The concept of community is difficult to pin down. The areas where family members live, work, and go to school may be 2

separated by large physical distances and, in a real sense, represent different communities. Yet, in spite of this fact, each of these

important realms (neighborhood, school, workplace) can influence individual family members and therefore the family as a

whole, regardless of whether they occur in the same community.

8

status, and maternal employment. Studies find that parental involvement in schools tends to

decrease as children move from elementary to middle to high school (Zill and Nord, 1994;

Vaden-Kiernan and Davies, 1993; Epstein, 1990). The decrease may be due to parents

believing that involvement is not as important as children grow older. It may also be due to

children and youth exerting their independence or discouraging the involvement of their

parents, or to schools offering fewer opportunities for parents to become involved as children

become older (Stevenson and Baker, 1987). Two-parent families tend to be more involved

than single-parent families. The difference may be due partly to differences in

socioeconomic status, but also because there is an extra parent available to become involved

(Scott-Jones, 1984). More highly educated parents and parents with higher socioeconomic

status are more likely to be involved in their children’s schooling than less educated parents

and parents with lower socioeconomic status (Zill and Nord, 1994; Vaden-Kiernan and

Davis, 1993; Stevenson and Baker, 1987). It is possible that less educated parents feel more

intimidated by the school setting or that they have had bad experiences with school that make

them reluctant to become involved. Mothers who work full time and those who are looking

for work tend to be less involved in schools than mothers who work part time (Zill and Nord,

1994), at least in part because maternal employment competes for time that could be used

participating in school activities.

In addition to the above demographic factors, parental involvement in children’s

education is higher if parents are confident that they can be of assistance to the child, if they

believe that the child is capable of doing well in school, and if they have high educational

aspirations for the child (Eccles and Harold, 1996). School policies and teacher practices

also have a strong influence on the level of parental involvement in children’s education

(Eccles and Harold, 1996; Epstein, 1990). Parental involvement also varies by other

characteristics of the schools; for example, it tends to be higher in smaller as opposed to

larger schools and in private as opposed to public schools (Loomis, Vaden-Kiernan, and

Chandler, forthcoming; Zill and Nord, 1994). 

One framework that can be used to draw these diverse factors together is to think of

involvement as the result of resources available to the family. Drawing on the insights from

psychology, economics, sociology, and education, these resources can be divided into social

capital, human capital, and physical (or financial) capital (Lee, 1993; Coleman, 1991;

Becker, 1981). Each of these forms of capital, in turn, has dimensions that can describe the

capital of the family and the capital of the community in which the family resides. Social 2

capital encompasses the quality of the relationships within the family, the way that parents

interact with their children and each other, the educational aspirations parents have for their
9

children, the home environment (e.g., rules, routine, order, harmony of household), and even

the time that family members have to devote to each other. In essence, social capital is the

quality and the density of interpersonal relationships that families can draw upon. Parental

involvement itself, whether in the home or in the school, is a form of social capital (Lee,

1993). It is facilitated by the presence of other forms of capital. Social capital outside the

household includes the links that family members have with individuals and institutions

outside the household such as neighbors, religious institutions, and schools. It also includes

the extent of social capital within each of these institutions. For example, schools that are

harmonious and that have a high level of student-teacher respect can be described as having

greater levels of social capital than schools without these characteristics. Similarly, school

policies and teacher practices that encourage parental involvement may be viewed as a form

of social capital. 

Human capital within the family includes parental education levels and the skills and

abilities that parents and other family members have. Within the community, it encompasses

the education, skills, and abilities of those in the community and of those who work in

important institutions, such as schools.

Physical capital includes such things as family income, the assets in the home

including computers and books, and the resources of the local community, including

community institutions such as schools, libraries, parks, and recreation centers. 

This framework is useful because it provides plausible explanations for why some of

the factors described above may influence both parental involvement and children’s

outcomes. For example, parental education is probably a proxy for several forms of capital.

It not only measures the acquired skills of an individual, but it also indicates something about

the educational aspirations, expectations, and beliefs of that individual. Although those with

lower educational levels do not necessarily value education less than those with higher

educational levels, it is likely that those with higher levels of education have the wherewithal

(such as more flexible jobs so that they can become involved and the confidence in their

ability to help the child) to ensure that their expectations are met. Similarly, as income

increases, it allows a family to live in a better neighborhood, to send their children to better

schools, and to provide educational materials in the home. At the same time, if that income

derives from long work hours, it may actually reduce some of the social capital available in

the household even as it increases the physical capital.

Using the framework briefly described above, this report examines factors that are

associated with fathers’ and mothers’ involvement in their children’s schools and the

influence of that involvement on selected children’s outcomes.
 Parents of children not yet in kindergarten were excluded because those with preschool children were asked a slightly 3

different set of school involvement questions than parents of older children and because not all young children are enrolled in

preschool. Parents of children who were home-schooled were also excluded because they were not asked questions about “in

school” involvement.

 Children living with only foster parents or non-parent guardians were not included in the analyses of residential parent 4

involvement in this report.

 Children living with only foster parents or non-parent guardians were included in the analyses of the involvement of 5

nonresident fathers if the foster parent or non-parent guardian reported that the child had a nonresident father.

10

Data Source

This report is based on data from the 1996 National Household Education Survey

(NHES:96). The NHES is a random-digit-dial (RDD) telephone survey that uses computerassisted telephone interviewing (CATI) technology to collect data on high priority topics that

could not be addressed adequately through school- or institution-based surveys.

NHES:96 was conducted from January to April of 1996 and included interviews with

parents and guardians of 20,792 children 3 years old through 12th grade. This report focuses

on the involvement of parents of 16,910 kindergartners through 12th graders. Included in 3

this sample are 5,440 children in kindergarten through 12th grade who have a nonresident

father and 7,651 children in the 6th through 12th grade with whom a youth interview was

also completed. The results on the involvement of residential parents in their children’s

schools are generalizable to all U.S. children in kindergarten through 12th grade who have

at least one biological, adoptive, or stepparent in the home. The results on the recency of

4

contact with nonresident fathers in their children’s lives are generalizable to all U.S. children

in kindergarten through 12th grade who have a biological or adoptive father living

elsewhere. The results on the involvement of nonresident fathers in their children’s schools

5

are generalizable to all children in kindergarten through 12th grade who have had contact

with their nonresident father in the past year.

It should be noted that the unit of analysis in the NHES:96 is the child and not the

parent. Thus, when parent-reported data are presented in this report, they are referenced to

the children. Strictly speaking, “the percent of parents who are involved in their children’s

schools” is “the percent of children whose parents are involved in their schools.” Though

not technically equivalent, both phrases are used in this report.

Measuring Parental Involvement

Researchers have employed a variety of frameworks and measures to describe and

discuss parental involvement. Epstein (1990), for example, described six types of

involvement as a way to assist educators in developing programs of family-school
 Some have pointed out that involvement in schools need not always be positive (Coleman, 1991). Examples of negative 6

involvement include parents who attempt to influence teachers or the administration in ways that could have a negative effect on

other students or who attempt to gain special favors for their own children at the expense of others. Such negative involvement is

not discussed in this report.

 In the 1996 NHES, two question formats were used to ask respondents about attendance at a school meeting. Half of the 7

sample were asked a single question, whereas the other half were asked two questions about different types of school meetings. 

The single question asked about attendance at a general school meeting, for example, an open house, a back-to-school night, or a

meeting of a parent-teacher organization. The two questions asked about attendance at an open-house or back-to-school night

and attendance at a meeting of a PTA, PTO, or parent-teacher-student organization. To create a single variable about attendance

at a school meeting, the two items asked in the second set were combined. Multiple regression analyses were used to examine

whether the question format used to ask parents about attendance at school meetings explained any of the variance in attendance

at school meetings after taking into account other potentially mediating factors such as family income, race/ethnicity, family

structure, maternal education, and maternal employment. The findings of these analyses indicated that the question format that

was used did not account for differences in attendance at school meetings. Consequently, the data obtained from the two

question formats were combined for the analyses performed in this report.

11

partnerships: (1) basic obligations of families, such as providing for the health and nutrition

of children; (2) basic obligations of schools to communicate with families; (3) parent

involvement at school, such as volunteering and attending school events; (4) parent

involvement at home, such as providing learning activities at home; (5) parent participation

in school decision making; and (6) collaboration and exchanges with community

organizations to increase family and student access to community resources.

Others have conceptualized involvement according to the extent to which the activities

are directly related to teaching. Thus, for example, Kellaghan and his colleagues (1993)

describe proximal, intermediate, and distal forms of involvement. Proximal forms of

involvement include such activities as supervision of homework by the parent or the parent

serving as a teacher’s aide in the school. Intermediate forms of involvement include

involvement in school workshops or doing education activities in the home such as visits to

the library that do not directly involve instruction. Distal forms of involvement include

fulfilling the basic obligations of a family such as providing for the health and general wellbeing of their children.

Still others have simply divided involvement according to where it occurs: at home,

at school, or in the community. In addition, some researchers distinguish activities from

attitudes or expectations. This report focuses on parental involvement in schools, though

some information on involvement in the home is also presented.6

The NHES:96 asked about four types of school activities that parents could participate

in during the school year. The activities are fairly typical of those available in most schools:

attendance at a general school meeting, attendance at a regularly scheduled parent-teacher 7
 Although it would have been interesting to examine the frequency with which parents participated in each of these four 8

activities, the NHES:96 did not collect that information.

 A similar indicator appeared in Zill and Nord, 1994. That indicator, however, was based on data from the 1993 NHES, 9

School Safety and Discipline component. The 1993 NHES contained only three activities that the parents could have

participated in at school: a general school meeting; a school or class event; or serving as a volunteer. The parents were not asked

about attendance at a regularly scheduled parent-teacher conference. Thus, the information on levels of involvement that appear

in the current report are not comparable to those that appeared in the 1994 report. Specifically, levels of involvement, because

there are more activities, will appear higher in the current report. 

 The NHES:96 collected information about whether the children’s schools had held general school meetings or parent- 10

teacher conferences since the beginning of the school year. About 5 percent of the children in grades K-12 attended schools that

did not offer general school meetings and about 14 percent attended schools that had not held regularly scheduled parent-teacher

conferences. Children in grades 6 through 12 were much more likely than those in K through 5 to attend schools that did not

offer regularly scheduled parent-teacher conferences (22 percent versus 6 percent). Most schools offered general school

meetings: only 8 percent of children in grades 6 through 12 and 3 percent of students in grades K-5 attended schools that did not.

12

conference, attendance at a school or class event, and serving as a volunteer at school.8

Parents are said to have low involvement in their children’s schools if they have done none

or only one of the four activities. They are categorized as having moderate involvement if

they have done two of the activities. Those who said that they have done three or more of

the activities are said to be highly involved in their children’s schools. Not all schools offer

9

parents the opportunity to be involved in each of these activities. Particularly as children

grow older, schools offer parents fewer opportunities for involvement. Low involvement can

result because parents do not or cannot take advantage of available opportunities for

involvement or because schools do not offer them opportunities for involvement.10

The NHES:96 is unusual in that it not only asked about parental involvement in their

children’s schools, but it also asked which parent participated in the activities or whether

both parents participated. Moreover, resident parents were asked a parallel set of questions

about the involvement of the nonresident parent (if there was one). Thus, it is possible with

the NHES:96 to describe the school involvement of resident mothers and fathers and of

nonresident parents. For 75 percent of the cases of the full NHES:96 file, the mother was the

respondent. An important issue is whether mothers accurately report the involvement of

fathers in their children’s schools. It is generally believed that mothers are better reporters

than fathers about factual matters regarding children, such as when they last saw a doctor.

Given that the items in the NHES:96 that measure involvement in school are essentially

factual (attended a meeting or not), mothers’ reports are probably quite good. Whether

resident mothers are good reporters about the actions of nonresident fathers is less certain.

Other research indicates that there are discrepancies between the reports of resident and

nonresident parents on the amount of child support monies that have been paid by the

nonresident parents and on the extent of contact between nonresident parents and their

children (Braver et al., 1991; Schaeffer, Seltzer, and Klawitter, 1991). 
 The NHES:96 obtained information about 5,440 nonresident fathers, of whom 4,118 had seen their children in the past 11

year. Information was also obtained about 1,468 nonresident mothers, of whom 1,343 had seen their children in the past year.

 The NHES:96 collects information on the relationship of other household members to the child but not to each other. 12

Although marital status information is collected for all household members age 16 and older, the spouse is not identified. The

parents’ marital status was not used in defining two-parent families, only the relationship of the parents to the child.

13

Organization of the Report

In the remainder of the report, the findings of the NHES:96 concerning the

involvement of fathers in their children’s schools are presented. The first section of findings

provides a detailed description of the involvement of resident fathers in their children’s

schools by selected characteristics of children, families, and schools. Many of these

characteristics are viewed as different types of resources that are available to the families.

Parallel information on the involvement of mothers in their children’s schools is also

provided as a contrast. Selected child, family, and school factors are then examined together

in multivariate models so that the net influence of each on high father and mother

involvement in their children’s schools can be determined. Finally, the influence of fathers’

involvement on five student outcomes is examined. 

Throughout the discussion of resident fathers’ involvement, a distinction is made

between fathers in two-parent families and fathers who are heads of single-parent families.

Two reasons prompted the decision to examine fathers in single-parent and two-parent

families separately. First, single-parent and two-parent families differ in many respects that

can affect both how parents spend their time and how their children perform in school.

Second, the NHES:96 allows the unusual opportunity to examine how parents in two-parent

families share child-rearing responsibilities in one important realm: their children’s

schooling. 

The second major section of the findings describes nonresident fathers’ involvement

in their children’s schools and the link between that involvement and measures of how

children are doing in school. The influences on the likelihood that nonresident fathers have

had contact with their children in the past year are first examined. Then, among children who

have had contact with their nonresident fathers, the influences on the likelihood that their

fathers are moderately to highly involved in their schools are examined. Descriptive

information on nonresident mothers is presented to serve as a contrast to nonresident

fathers.11

In this report, two-parent families consist of children who live with two biological or

adoptive parents or with a biological parent and a step or adoptive parent. Single-parent

12

families consist of children who live with their biological or adoptive mother or father or, in

a few cases, with only a stepparent. Table 1 shows the percentage of children living in these
14

different family types. Most children live with two biological or two adoptive parents (57.7

percent). Nine percent of the children live with a biological mother and a step or adoptive

father and 2.1 percent live with a biological father and a step or adoptive mother. Nearly a

quarter of the children (24.2 percent) live with only their mother. Three percent live with

only their father. Four percent live with foster parents or with other persons who are not their

biological, adoptive, step, or foster parents. Many of these children may be living with

grandparents or other relatives.

Only children who live with at least one biological, adoptive, or stepparent are

included in the analyses that examine the involvement of resident parents in their children’s

school. However, all children who have a nonresident parent, including children living in

non-parental arrangements, are included in the analyses that examine whether nonresident

parents have had contact with their children in the past year, and among those who have had

contact, their involvement in their children’s schools.
15

Table 1.— Living arrangements of children: Students in grades K-12, 1996

Living arrangement (thousands) Percent

Number of

students

Two biological or adoptive parents .......................... 28,495 57.7

Two biological .........................................

Two adoptive ..........................................

27,963 56.6

532 1.1

Biological mother/step or adoptive father .................... 4,460 9.0

Biological mother/stepfather ..............................

Biological mother/adoptive father ..........................

4,055 8.2

405 0.8

Biological father/step or adoptive mother .................... 1,025 2.1

Biological father/stepmother ..............................

Biological father/adoptive mother ..........................

986 2.0

38 0.1

Mother only ............................................ 11,935 24.2

Biological mother ......................................

Adoptive mother .......................................

Stepmother ............................................

11,730 23.8

177 0.4

29 0.1

Father only ............................................. 1,499 3.0

Biological father .......................................

Adoptive father ........................................

Stepfather .............................................

1,404 2.8

58 0.1

37 0.1

Other arrangement ...................................... 1,970 4.0

Two foster parents ......................................

Foster mother only ......................................

Foster father only .......................................

Other non-parental arrangement ...........................

67 0.1

154 0.3

15 0.0

1,721 3.5

NOTE: Because of rounding, details may not add to total.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1996 National Household Education Survey.
This page left intentionally blank

16
 The words significant and significantly when used in this report always indicate statistical significance (at 0.05 level, 13

unless noted otherwise).

17

FINDINGS

Involvement of Resident Parents

Types of Activities in Which Fathers and Mothers Participate

Figure 1 shows the percentage of children in kindergarten through 12th grade whose fathers

and mothers participated in each of the four activities inquired about in the NHES:96. Several

observations can be made from this figure. First, in two-parent families, the most common activity

in which parents participate is attending a general school meeting, such as a back-to-school night.

Although single fathers also appear more likely to attend a general school meeting than they are to

participate in the other activities, the proportion who do so is not significantly different from the 13

proportion who attend conferences or school or class events. The least common activity that parents

participate in, regardless of family type, is volunteering at their children’s schools, the most timeintensive of the four activities.

Second, fathers in two-parent families are substantially less likely than mothers in either type

of family or fathers in single-parent families to participate in each of the activities. For example, 55

percent of fathers in two-parent families attended at least one general school meeting compared to

77 percent of mothers in two-parent families, 69 percent of mothers in single-parent families, and

68 percent of fathers in single-parent families. This pattern fits the notion that parents in two-parent

families divide their labor to more efficiently allocate their resources, in this case, their time.

According to economic theorists, efficiency in a family is increased by specialization in both the

allocation of time and human capital (Becker, 1981). The finding that single fathers are more

involved than fathers in two-parent families is consistent with existing research. A study based on

the National Survey of Families and Households found that with the exception of the time spent

sharing meals, single fathers spend more time with their children than biological fathers in twoparent families (Cooksey and Fondell, 1996).

Third, fathers who head single-parent families have school involvement patterns that are very

similar to that of mothers who head single-parent families. The pattern of participation for both

fathers and mothers in single-parent families is more similar to the participation of mothers in twoparent families than it is to fathers in two-parent families. The one activity that is substantially lower

in single-parent families than it is for mothers in two-parent families is that of volunteering at the

school. This result is consistent again with the roles that parents fill in two-parent and in singleparent families. In two parent
18

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1996 National Household Education Survey.

Figure 1. — Percent of children whose fathers and mothers participated in each school activity, by family

type: Students in grades K-12, 1996

families, mothers generally assume primary responsibility for the children. In single-parent families,

the single parent must fill that role regardless of whether that parent is the mother or the father.

However, because involvement requires a certain amount of time, single parents generally experience

greater constraints on their ability to participate than do mothers in two-parent families, who can

share with their husbands some of the other demands on their time. It is precisely the activity that

requires the most time, volunteering, in which the greatest difference between single parents and

mothers in two-parent families is seen.

Fourth, in two-parent families, there are two activities for which fathers’ involvement

approaches that of mothers: attendance at general school meetings and attendance at school or class

events, such as sports events. For these activities, the ratios of the proportion of fathers who have

participated to the proportion of mothers who have participated are 71 percent (55/77) and 79 percent
19

(53/67), respectively, whereas the ratios of the proportion of fathers to mothers who have attended

a parent-teacher conference or volunteered at their children’s schools are 57 percent (39/68) and 37

percent (15/41), respectively. Fathers may find it easier to attend general meetings and school

events, such as sports events, because such activities are more likely than the others to occur during

nonschool and nonwork hours, thus increasing the ability of fathers to attend without missing work.

Levels of Involvement in School Activities by Fathers and Mothers

Thus far, participation in specific activities has been examined. It is also of interest to know

the extent to which parents participate in multiple activities. Figure 2 tells a similar story to figure

1: Mothers in two-parent families are the most likely to show high levels of involvement in their

children’s schools (56 percent), while fathers in two-parent families are the least likely to show high

levels of involvement (27 percent). Fathers who head single-parent families show similar levels of

involvement to mothers who head single-parent families (46 percent versus 49 percent). This pattern

adds further support to the notion that there is a division of labor in two-parent families, with

mothers taking more responsibility for participating in school activities, whereas in single-parent

families the lone parent assumes that responsibility. It also supports research that finds single fathers

and mothers are more similar in their parenting behavior than are mothers and fathers in two-parent

families.

Another observation that can be made from figure 2 is that most parents participate in at least

some of the activities in their children’s schools. Although in two-parent families nearly half the

children have fathers who participate in none or only one of the four activities, 79 percent of the

children have mothers who participate in two or more activities in their schools. In single-parent

families, 72 percent of children living with their fathers and 74 percent living with their mothers

have a parent who participated in two or more activities in their schools.
20

Low involvement is participation in none or only one activity; moderate involvement is participation in two activities; and high *

involvement is participation in three or four activities.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1996 National Household Education Survey.

Figure 2. — Level of fathers’ and mothers’ involvement in school, by family type: Students in grades K- *

12, 1996
 The NHES:96 asked parents whether their children’s schools had general school meetings or parent-teacher conferences 14

since the beginning of the school year. Tabulations of these data for important subgroups such as two-parent, single-mother, and

single-father families revealed no systematic differences in their opportunities for involvement. Moreover, when the analyses are

restricted to only those children whose schools offer the opportunity for involvement, declines in parental involvement are still

observed as children move from elementary to middle to high school. The declines, however, are less pronounced.

 The pattern of decline for mothers and fathers is similar for attending a general school meeting or a conference, so these 15

data are not shown. Data are also not shown for single-parents because the pattern of decline for mothers and fathers is similar

for all the activities.

21

Changes in Involvement with Grade Level

Research on parental involvement in schools has shown that involvement in schools

decreases as children grow older (Zill and Nord, 1994). As noted earlier, part of the decrease is due

to schools offering parents fewer opportunities for involvement as children grow older. As can

14

be seen in figure 3, mothers and fathers in both two-parent and single-parent families tend to

decrease their involvement as children move from elementary to middle to high school. Fathers in

single-parent families behave very much like mothers in single-parent families with respect to

involvement in school activities. At each grade level, their involvement patterns remain at similar

levels. In two-parent families, however, mothers’ involvement starts out higher but decreases more

than fathers’ involvement so that by the high school years, though mothers still show higher levels

of involvement, the differences are not as large. This pattern can also be seen by comparing the ratio

of the proportion of fathers in two-parent families with high levels of involvement to the proportion

of mothers in such families with high levels of involvement at each school level. In elementary

school, this ratio is 43 percent (30/69). It increases to 49 percent (25/51) by middle school and to

59 (23/39) percent by high school.

The convergence of mothers’ and fathers’ involvement in two-parent families occurs because

mothers show a steeper decline than fathers in two of the activities: attendance at a school or class

event and volunteering. Figure 4 shows how mothers’ and fathers’ participation in these two

activities change with grade level. Mothers’ participation in school or class events declines steadily

15

as children move from elementary to middle to high school. Fathers’ participation, on the other

hand, remains steady and even increases somewhat between grade school and middle school. The

pattern is somewhat different with respect to volunteering. The proportion of mothers in two-parent

families who volunteer in their children’s school declines sharply between grade school and middle

school and then levels off. Among fathers in two-parent families, the proportion who volunteer also

declines between elementary and middle school, but then increases again between middle and high

school. Approximately 12 percent of fathers in two-parent families with children in grades 6 through

8 volunteered in their children’s schools. This figure increased to 17 percent of fathers with children

in grades 9 through 12.
22

Low involvement is participation in none or only one activity; moderate involvement is participation in two activities; and *

high involvement is participation in three or four activities.

NOTE: Because of rounding, percents may not add to 100.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1996 National Household Education Survey.

Figure 3. — Level of fathers’ and mothers’ involvement* in school, by grade grouping and family type:

Students in grades K-12, 1996
23

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1996 National Household Education Survey.

Figure 4. — Percent of children in two-parent families whose fathers and mothers attended a school or

class event and volunteered at school, by grade level: Students in grades K-12, 1996
 Families were said to have received Federal assistance if they had received funds or services from any of the following 16

programs in the past 12 months: Women, Infants, and Children (WIC), Food Stamps, or Aid to Families with Dependent

Children (AFDC).

24

Familial Resources and Parental Involvement in Schools

Parental involvement in children’s education involves an investment of time and other resources. In

order to be able to invest these resources, it is necessary to have them available. Much existing research on

parental involvement in schools has shown the association between involvement in schools and social and

demographic characteristics of the family such as the number of parents present, the education level of the

parents, and maternal employment. As noted previously, these factors are markers for different types of

capital available to the family: financial (or physical), human, and social.

Financial and human capital. As others have found, parental involvement in school is associated

with the amount of financial capital that families have available to them. In general, families with more

financial resources show greater levels of involvement. For example, the proportion of fathers and mothers

in two-parent families who are highly involved in their children’s schools increases as household income

rises (figure 5). The same is true of single fathers and single mothers, though it appears that single mothers

earning the highest incomes may be somewhat less involved. This pattern could be due to demands placed

on the mothers’ time by their work, which interferes with their ability to be involved in their children’s

schools. However, the difference between the top two income categories for single mothers is not

significant, so not too much emphasis should be placed on the apparent decrease in high involvement. 

Parental involvement in schools is higher for children in families living above the poverty threshold

and not receiving federal assistance compared to those that experience economic difficulties (figure 6).

16

This is true in both two-parent and single-mother families, though the differences are larger in two-parent

families. This pattern of results is probably due, in part, to the fact that there is a wider disparity in the

household incomes of families experiencing and not experiencing economic difficulties in two-parent

families than in single-mother families (Baugher and Lamison-White, 1996). To the extent that income and

income-related factors are linked to involvement in school, the greater disparity in two-parent families could

account for the more marked difference in high involvement by these economic indicators. Single fathers

are also more likely to be highly involved if they do not receive federal assistance, but there is no significant

difference in the proportion who are highly involved by whether their household incomes are above or below

the poverty threshold.
25

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1996 National Household Education Survey.

Figure 5. — Percent of children whose fathers and mothers have high involvement in school, by household

income and family type: Students in grades K-12, 1996
26

* “No” category consists of renters.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1996 National Household Education Survey.

Figure 6. — Percent of children whose fathers and mothers have high involvement in school, by poverty

status, receipt of federal assistance, home ownership, and family type: Students in grades K12, 1996
27

Home ownership is also associated with high parental involvement in two-parent families and in

mother-only families, but not in single-father families. Home ownership is not only a measure of economic

well-being, but it also is an indicator of stability in family life. Families who own their own homes tend to

move less often than families who rent (Hansen, 1995). This stability, in turn, allows for the establishment

of more ties to individuals and institutions in the community, reflecting a greater level of social capital

(Coleman, 1988).

Parental involvement in schools increases with the amount of human capital in the home, as measured

by parents’ education (figure 7). This is true of parents in both single-parent families and in two-parent

families. Income and education, however, are highly correlated. People with greater levels of education

have higher incomes than those with less. To determine the unique influence of education and income on

parental involvement, they both need to be included along with other potentially confounding factors in

multivariate models. 

It is also interesting to note that figures 5 through 7 show that mothers and fathers in single-parent

families are more similar to each other in their levels of high involvement than mothers and fathers in twoparent families. Thus, even controlling for the financial circumstances of the families and the education

levels of the parents, mothers and fathers in single-parent families are more similar in their tendency to be

highly involved in their children’s schools than are mothers and fathers in two-parent families.

Social capital. Numerous studies have shown that parental involvement in schools promotes school

success (Henderson and Berla, 1994; Henderson, 1987). It seems likely that it is not attendance at school

activities, per se, that leads directly to improved school outcomes, but rather that such attendance is a marker

for other important factors that contribute to children’s school success (Zill and Nord, 1994). For example,

parents who are involved may be more familiar with the school and with their children’s teachers. This

familiarity may lead to better parent-teacher relations and more personal attention for their children. It may

also enable the parents to intervene earlier if problems in their children’s behavior or academic work should

arise. Attendance at school functions also shows children that their parents believe school is important.

However, it is also likely that parents who are highly involved at school also hold certain beliefs and

attitudes and exhibit behaviors at home that foster the academic success of their children. Thus, at least part

of the positive benefit of involvement in the schools may be due to the types of parents that become

involved, including not only their demographic characteristics such as income and education, but also their

own behaviors outside the school building and their attitudes and expectations regarding education.
28

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1996 National Household Education Survey.

Figure 7. — Percent of children whose fathers and mothers have high involvement in school, by education

of parents and family type: Students in grades K-12, 1996
 In figure 8a and several other figures, mothers and fathers with moderate levels of involvement in their children’s schools 17

are not shown. They were omitted to conserve space and to highlight the difference between parents with high and low levels of

involvement.

29

The NHES:96 asked a series of questions about the types of activities that families did with their

children in kindergarten through grade 5 and those in grades 6 through 12 in the past week and in the past

month. In addition, parents of children in grades 6 through 12 were asked about their educational

expectations for their children, whether they discussed future school courses with their children, and about

their own involvement in community activities and attendance at religious services. Although the NHES

did not ask which parent in the household did each of the activities with the child, these items can still be

used to characterize the households of children whose fathers and mothers exhibit high or low levels of

involvement in their schools.

These data reveal that parents who are highly involved in their children’s schools are generally more

likely to be involved at home, as well. Single fathers, especially those with children in elementary school,

are an exception, and they will be discussed separately. Children in kindergarten through grade 5 who live

in two-parent families in which their fathers or mothers are highly involved in their schools are more likely

to participate in educational activities with their parents (e.g., were told a story by their parents or in the past

week or visited a museum or historical site with their parents in the past month) than are children whose

parents have low levels of involvement in their schools (figure 8a). The same patterns are observed for 17

children living in mother-only families (figure 8b). Single mothers who are active at school tend to be active

at home, as well.

It is not only elementary school children who appear to have a richer home life if their parents are

highly involved in their schools. Children in grades 6 through 12 whose fathers or mothers have high levels

of involvement in their schools are also more likely than children whose parents have low levels of

involvement to have played a game or sport or to have worked on a project with their parents in the past

week (figures 9a and 9b). They are also more likely than children whose parents have low levels of

involvement in their schools to have discussed how to manage their time with their parents in the past week

or to have talked about future courses in the past month. Parents who are highly involved in their children’s

schools are also more likely than those who are less involved to believe that their children will attend school

after high school and that the youth will graduate from a 4-year college. These statements are true of

children living in two-parent families and those living in mother-only families.

The story is somewhat different for single fathers. Single fathers who are highly involved in their

children’s schools are more likely than those with low levels of involvement to participate in some 
30

Social capital activities were engaged in by either parent. 1

Not asked about kindergartners. 2

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1996 National Household Education Survey.

Figure 8a. — Percent of children with selected types of social capital, by level of fathers’ and mothers’

1

involvement in school: Students in grades K-5 in two-parent families, 1996
31

Social capital activities were engaged in by either parent. 1

Not asked about kindergartners. 2

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1996 National Household Education Survey.

Figure 8b. — Percent of children with selected types of social capital, by level of fathers’ and mothers’

1

involvement in school: Students in grades K-5 in single-parent families, 1996
32

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1996 National Household Education Survey.

Figure 9a. — Percent of children with selected types of social capital, by level of fathers’ and mothers’

involvement in school: Students in grades 6-12 in two-parent families, 1996
33

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1996 National Household Education Survey.

Figure 9b. — Percent of children with selected types of social capital, by level of fathers’ and mothers’

involvement in school: Students in grades 6-12 in single-parent families, 1996
34

activities with their elementary school children, such as having visited a museum or historical site and

having attended a sports event in the past month. However, for many of the other activities there is no

significant difference between single fathers with high and with low levels of involvement in their children’s

schools (figure 8b). What is striking about the single fathers with children in grades 1 through 5 is how

highly involved at home the fathers are who have low levels of involvement in their children’s schools. The

proportion of elementary school children living in single-father families who have been told a story or

worked on a project in the past week with their fathers is virtually the same for those whose fathers have

high levels and those whose fathers have low levels of involvement in their schools. 

Among single fathers of children in grades 6 through 12, the contrasts between those with high and

those with low involvement in their children’s schools are greater, more like those seen in two-parent and

in mother-only families. Children in grades 6 through 12 living in father-only families are more likely to

have played a game or sport with their fathers in the past week and to have talked with their father about

future high school courses in the past month if the fathers have high levels as opposed to low levels of

involvement in their children’s schools. Similarly, fathers with high levels of involvement are more likely

than those with low levels of involvement to expect that their children will attend school after high school

and that they will graduate from a 4-year college. 

These figures yield another interesting observation upon close inspection: With a few exceptions,

children whose parents are highly involved in their schools are almost equally likely to have shared in any

given activity with their families outside of school, regardless of whether it is their fathers or mothers who

are highly involved or whether they live in two-parent or in single-parent families. For example, 74 percent

of children in kindergarten through 5th grade who live in two-parent families were told a story in the past

week if their fathers were highly involved in their schools, compared to 72 percent if their mothers were

highly involved and to 71 percent of children living in father-only families whose fathers were highly

involved and 72 percent of children in mother-only families whose mothers were highly involved (figures

8a and 8b). When differences occur, they tend to be differences between two-parent and single-parent

families rather than between mothers and fathers. For example, 61 percent of children in grades 1 through

5 who live in two-parent families and whose fathers were highly involved in their schools went to the library

with a parent in the past month, as did 59 percent of children in such families whose mothers were highly

involved (figure 8a). In contrast, 47 percent of children in father-only families and 52 percent of children

in mother-only families whose parents were highly involved had visited the library with their parents in the

past month. These patterns suggest that regardless of family type, families who are involved in their

children’s schools tend to share other activities with their children as well. However, the constraints of

being the only parent in the household may limit the ability of single parents to be as involved as they might

wish.
35

There is another form of social capital that highly involved mothers and fathers offer their children:

greater connections to the larger community. For children living in two-parent families or in mother-only

families, their fathers or mothers are more likely to belong to an organization such as a community group,

church or synagogue, union, or professional organization and to participate in an ongoing service activity

if the parents have high levels rather than low levels of involvement in their schools (figure 10). For

children living in father-only families, their fathers are significantly more likely to participate in an ongoing

service activity, but are not significantly more likely to belong to an organization, if their fathers have high

levels of involvement in their schools as opposed to low levels of involvement. Similarly, for children living

in two-parent families or in mother-only families, their parents are more likely to attend religious services

on a weekly basis if the mothers or fathers have high levels of involvement in their schools. The differences

are not significant for children living in father-only families, though children whose fathers never attend

religious services are significantly less likely to have fathers who are involved in their schools than are

children whose fathers attend religious services at least occasionally.

School Resources and Parental Involvement

As noted previously, existing research has found that school factors exert a strong influence on

parental involvement in their children’s education (Eccles and Harold, 1996; Epstein and Dauber, 1991).

Important school factors include whether the school is a public or private school, the size of the school,the

school environment or climate, school policies and practices, and teacher attitudes and practices (Epstein

and Dauber, 1991; Coleman and Hoffer, 1987). Although not all of these factors can be examined using

NHES:96 data, several can. As can be seen in figure 11, fathers and mothers in both two-parent and in

single-parent families are more likely to be highly involved if their children attend private as opposed to

public schools. There are no significant differences in parental involvement between attending a public

school that is assigned and one that is chosen. Private schools often make parental involvement a

requirement, and thus, part of the higher involvement may be due to school policies. However, Coleman

and others have argued that private schools, particularly private, religiously affiliated schools, have greater

amounts of social capital due to the greater sense of community present in these schools (Bryk, Lee, and

Holland, 1993; Coleman and Hoffer, 1987). Parents may be more willing to become involved when they

know and are friendly with other parents in the school.
36

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1996 National Household Education Survey.

Figure 10. — Percent of children whose parents have ties to the community, by level of fathers’ and

mothers’ involvement in school: Students in grades 6-12, 1996
37

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1996 National Household Education Survey.

Figure 11. — Percent of children whose fathers and mothers have high involvement in school, by school

characteristics and family type: Students in grades K-12, 1996
38

One reason for expecting that school size may be an important influence on parental involvement is

that it may be easier to establish ties with administrators, teachers, and other parents when schools are not

very large. If that is the case, parents may feel more comfortable and more welcomed by smaller schools.

Figure 11 shows that high involvement in schools does tend to decrease as school size increases. However,

the decreases are not uniform and are often not significant. High involvement by fathers and mothers in

two-parent families is greater in smaller (less than 300 or 300-599 students) as opposed to larger schools

(600-999 or 1,000 or more students) (figure 11). In mother-only families, mothers are significantly less

likely to be involved if the school is very large (1,000 or more students) as opposed to smaller (less than

1,000 students). There are no significant differences in single mothers being highly involved in schools

by the size of the school in schools smaller than 1,000 students. None of the differences in father-only

families by school size are significant. It should be noted, however, that broad categories of size were used

to classify schools. There may be threshold sizes, which differ for mothers and fathers and by grade of the

children, after which high involvement decreases.

The notion that social capital within schools encourages parental involvement gains support by

examining the association between fathers’ and mothers’ involvement in schools and several measures of

the school environment. The NHES:96 asked parents of children enrolled in grades 1 through 12 about how

strongly they agreed with the following statements:

! Child’s teachers maintain good discipline in the classroom.

! In child’s school, most students and teachers respect each other.

! The principal and assistant principal maintain good discipline at child’s school.

! Child’s school welcomes my family’s involvement with the school.

! Child’s school makes it easy to be involved there.

Respondents are more likely to strongly agree with these statements if the parents have high

involvement in their children’s schools than if they have low involvement (figure 12). For example, among

two-parent families in which fathers have high involvement, nearly half strongly agree that the children’s

teachers maintain good discipline in the classroom compared to about a third of respondents in families in

which fathers have low involvement. It is not possible to establish the causal linkage in the outcomes from

a cross-sectional survey such as the NHES. It may be that greater school efforts to promote involvement

lead to greater parent involvement. Conversely, it may be that highly involved parents have the skills to

establish cooperative relationships with their children’s schools, and thus view the schools more positively

and see them as more welcoming.
39

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1996 National Household Education Survey.

Figure 12. — Percent of children whose parents strongly agree with statements about school climate, by

level of fathers’ and mothers’ involvement in school: Students in grades 1-12, 1996
 Kindergartners were excluded from the models for two reasons. First, the items that were used to create the school climate 18

scale were not obtained for children in kindergarten. Second, of the five student outcomes examined, only grade repetition was

asked of kindergartners. Separate reduced models that limited the regressors to child and family characteristics were estimated

for children in kindergarten through 12th grade and for children in 1st through 12th grade to explore whether the exclusion of

kindergartners affected the results. The dependent variables examined were high father involvement, high mother involvement,

and grade repetition in two-parent and in single-parent families. Only one result changed when kindergartners were included: in

two-parent families, fathers were less likely to be highly involved in their children’s schools when the mother was not working.

 The logistic regression results in this report are presented as adjusted odds ratios. See the Methodology and Data 19

Reliability section, p. 93 for details on adjusted odds ratios and how to interpret them. In the discussion, the results are expressed

as percent changes in the odds. The percent change is calculated as (odds ratio -1)*100, with a negative result indicating a

percent decrease and a positive result indicating a percent increase in the odds.

 None of the models shown in the following pages include information on whether schools offered general school meetings 20

or had held parent-teacher conferences since the beginning of the school year. In response to a reviewer’s comments, additional

models were estimated that included this information to determine whether it altered any of the results presented. As expected,

parents are more likely to be highly involved in their children’s schools if the schools offer them opportunities for involvement

compared to if the schools do not. The addition of information on opportunities for involvement, however, does not materially

alter the observed associations between the other factors in the models and high parental involvement. The three instances where

results are affected are noted in the discussion.

40

Influences on Parent Involvement in School

From the foregoing discussion, it is apparent that high levels of parent involvement in schools are

correlated with other variables such as education, economic status, family environment, and school

characteristics. Many of these same factors are also correlated. For example, parents with more education

are more likely to have higher incomes. To obtain a sense of the relative importance of these different

factors in contributing to high parental involvement, it is necessary to examine them together in a single

model. Because it is of interest to examine the association between social capital in the home and high

parental involvement in schools, separate models were estimated for children in grades 1 through 5 and in

grades 6 through 12. As noted earlier, the social capital items that are available in the NHES:96 differ by 18

the grade level of the children.

Logistic regression models were used to examine the influence of selected child, family, and school

characteristics on high father and mother involvement in schools. To simplify the discussion, the results 19

are presented separately for two-parent and single-parent families. Not all factors in the models are

discussed. This section describes some of the major results of the models.20
41

Two-parent families. Because parents divide their time so as to best meet the needs of their

own households, it is instructive to examine the models estimating high father and high mother

involvement at the same time. 

Involvement of the other parent. The levels of involvement of both parents in their

children’s schools are closely associated. Fathers are more likely to be highly involved as mothers’

involvement increases and vice versa, though mothers’ involvement exerts a somewhat stronger

influence on fathers’ involvement than the other way around. According to the results shown in

table 2, there is an 84 percent increase in the adjusted odds that fathers of children in the 1st through

5th grade are highly involved in their children’s schools with each unit increase in mothers’

involvement, that is, with each additional activity that the mothers participate in. Similarly, with

each unit increase in fathers’ involvement there is a 65 percent increase in the adjusted odds that

mothers of elementary school children are highly involved in their schools. The results also indicate

that the association between mothers’ and fathers’ involvement grows stronger as children move

from elementary school into the higher grades. Among children in the 6th through 12th grades, the

adjusted odds that their fathers are highly involved in their schools increases by 175 percent with

each additional activity that mothers participate in (table 3). The close association between the

involvement levels of the two parents is probably indicative of shared values concerning the

importance of education. That is, when parents share strong educational values, they tend to work

in concert to support their children’s educations by means of direct involvement. The stronger

association between the involvement levels of parents of 6th through 12th graders may be due to a

selection process whereby parents who value education the most are the most likely to remain

involved in their children’s schools as their children grow older.

Presence of a stepparent. Stepmothers are significantly less likely than biological or

adoptive mothers to be highly involved in their children’s schools, regardless of the children’s grade

level. The adjusted odds that the mothers are highly involved in their 1st through 5th graders’

schools are 56 percent less if the mothers are stepmothers (table 2). Among children in grades 6

through 12, the adjusted odds are 57 percent less if the mothers are stepmothers (table 3). Fathers,

on the other hand, are more likely to be highly involved in their children’s schools if the mother in

the household is a stepmother. The presence of stepmothers increases the adjusted odds that

children’s fathers are highly involved in their schools by 194 percent among children in grades 1

through 5 and by 197 percent among children in grades 6 through 12 relative to if the mothers are

their biological or adoptive mothers. Thus, in families with stepmothers, fathers appear to assume

a greater share of child-related responsibilities than they do when the children’s biological or

adoptive mothers are present.
42

Table 2.— Adjusted odds ratios of fathers’ and mothers’ high involvement in their children’s schools,

by child, family, and school characteristics: Students in grades 1-5 living in two-parent

families, 1996

Characteristic Fathers Mothers

Child’s race and ethnicity

Black, non-Hispanic vs. white, non-Hispanic ..................... 0.80 0.70 *

Hispanic vs. white, non-Hispanic .............................. 1.05 0.85

Child’s sex (male) ............................................... 1.09 0.92

Mother’s education .............................................. 0.99 1.12 *

Father’s education .............................................. 1.19 * 1.08

Household income ............................................... 1.02 1.06 *

Family type ....................................................

Mother, stepfather vs. two bio/adopt. parents ..................... 0.82 0.84

Father, stepmother vs. two bio/adopt. parents ..................... 2.94 * 0.44 *

Mother’s employment

Full time vs. part time ....................................... 1.40 * 0.49 *

Looking for work vs. part time ................................ 1.15 0.84

Not working vs. part time .................................... 0.82 0.88

Family social capital

Number of in-home activities shared with child ................... 1.17 * 1.16 *

Number of out-of-home activities shared with child ................ 1.25 * 1.38 *

Told a story in past week or family history in past month ........... 1.14 1.35 *

School characteristics

School type

Public, chosen vs. public, assigned ............................ 1.26 1.20

Private vs. public, assigned ................................... 1.48 * 1.34

School size

Small (under 300) vs. medium (300-599) ........................ 1.05 1.16

Large (600-999) vs. medium (300-599) ......................... 0.79 * 1.01

Very large (1,000+) vs. medium (300-599) ...................... 0.92 1.25

School climate .................................................. 1.04 1.08 *

Other parent’s involvement in school ................................ 1.84 * 1.65 *

F(21.60)=15.91 F(21,60)=23.19

*p<.05

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1996 National Household Education Survey.
43

Table 3. — Adjusted odds ratios of fathers’ and mothers’ high involvement in their children’s schools,

by child, family, and school characteristics: Students in grades 6-12 living in two-parent

families, 1996

Characteristic Fathers Mothers

Child’s race and ethnicity

Black, non-Hispanic vs. white, non-Hispanic ........................ 0.79 0.87

Hispanic vs. white, non-Hispanic ................................. 0.90 0.94

Child’s sex (male) ............................................... 1.22 * 0.86

Child’s grade level

Grades 6-8 vs. grades 9 - 12 ..................................... 0.72 * 1.65 *

Mother’s education .............................................. 1.02 1.11 *

Father’s education .............................................. 1.23 * 0.91

Household income ............................................... 1.04 1.03

Family type

Mother, stepfather vs. two bio/adopt. parents ........................ 0.61 * 1.26 *

Father, stepmother vs. two bio/adopt. parents ....................... 2.97 * 0.43 *

Mother’s employment

Full time vs. part time .......................................... 1.20 0.79 *

Looking for work vs. part time ................................... 0.75 0.74

Not working vs. part time ....................................... 0.88 0.87

Family social capital

Child will graduate from 4-year college (yes vs. no) .................. 1.25 1.43 *

Confidence that someone can help with homework ................... 1.04 0.98

Discussed education plans with child (yes vs. no) .................... 1.12 1.19

Number of activities participated in with child ....................... 1.16 * 1.12

Frequency with which a parent helps with homework ................. 1.15 * 1.08 *

Child gets homework (no homework vs. any homework) ............ 1.68 0.63

Family ties to the community

Frequency with which parent attends religious services ................ 1.03 1.06 *

A parent regularly participates in community service activity (yes vs. no) . . 1.28 * 2.01 *

School characteristics

School type

Public, chosen vs. public, assigned ................................ 0.91 1.27 *

Private vs. public, assigned ...................................... 1.16 1.93 *

School size

Small (under 300) vs. medium (300-599) ........................... 0.84 1.31 *

Large (600-999) vs. medium (300-599) ............................ 0.90 0.91

Very large (1,000+) vs. medium (300-599) ......................... 0.91 0.84 *

School climate .................................................. 1.04 * 1.07 *

Other parent’s involvement in school ................................ 2.75 * 2.29 *

F(27,54)=21.58 F(27,54)=43.48

*p<.05

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1996 National Household Education Survey.
 When information on whether schools offered general school meetings and parent-teacher conferences is added to the 21

model, the association between mothers’ involvement in their children’s schools and maternal education becomes insignificant

(p=.11) among children in grades 1-5 living in two-parent families.

44

Stepfathers also tend to be less involved in children’s schools than biological or adoptive fathers,

though the differences are only significant among children in grades 6 through 12. The adjusted odds that

fathers are highly involved in their 6th through 12th graders’ schools are 39 percent less if the fathers are

stepfathers relative to if they are biological or adoptive fathers (table 3). Mothers of children in grades 6

through 12, like fathers, are significantly more likely to be highly involved in school if the father in the

household is the children’s stepfather. Thus, at least among older children, mothers assume even more of

the child-related responsibilities when stepfathers are present. However, the increasing involvement of

mothers of older children and of fathers, regardless of the children’s ages, does not make up for the lower

involvement of stepparents. A study that used NHES:93 data found that parental involvement in

stepfamilies is, on average, lower than in families with two biological or adoptive parents (Zill and Nord,

1994). 

From the data in the NHES:96, it is not possible to determine why stepparents tend to be less

involved in children’s schools. It is possible that stepparents, or the biological parents themselves, believe

it is the biological parents’ responsibility. It is also possible that children, particularly older children,

discourage the involvement of their stepparents. These results are consistent with other research. A study

based on the National Surveys of Families and Households found that biological fathers reported spending

more time with their children when the mother in the household was a stepmother instead of the biological

mother and that stepfathers reported spending less time with children than biological fathers (Cooksey and

Fondell, 1996).

Household income and parents’ education. Although the tabulations presented in figures 5 and

7 showed that household income and parents’ education are both associated with high involvement of

fathers and mothers in their children’s schools, after controlling for other factors in the models the

importance of household income is reduced. It remains a significant influence on high involvement in

schools only among mothers of children in the 1st through 5th grades. Income has no influence on

involvement in schools among mothers of older children or fathers of children in any grade level. On the

other hand, education remains an important influence on high parental involvement in schools even after

controlling for income and the other factors in the models. As fathers’ and mothers’ education increases, 21

the adjusted odds that they are highly involved in their children’s schools also increase. Among children

in grades 1 through 5, there is a 19 percent increase in the adjusted odds that their fathers are highly
 A unit increase indicates the amount of additional schooling that fathers have obtained (e.g., no high school degree, a high 22

school graduate, some college or vocational school experience, a college graduate, and graduate or professional school

experience).

45

involved in their schools with each unit increase in fathers’ education. These results parallel those found 22

in other studies, that is, that parental education is a more important influence on parental involvement than

is income (Zill and Nord, 1994).

The NHES:96 data also reveal that it is fathers’ education that influences fathers’ involvement and

mothers’ education that influences mothers’ involvement. Many studies use the education level of the most

educated parent in the household or the mother’s education when examining parental involvement in

schools. Because the education of mothers and fathers are highly correlated, substituting one for the other

is probably a good proxy.

Maternal employment. Mothers who work 35 or more hours per week are significantly less likely

to be highly involved in their children’s schools, regardless of the grade level, than are mothers who work

part time. Among children in grades 1 through 5, there is a 51 percent reduction in the adjusted odds that

their mothers are highly involved in their schools if their mothers work full time relative to if they work part

time. However, these analyses also reveal that fathers whose wives work full time increase their

involvement in their children’s schools. Among children in grades 1 through 5, the adjusted odds that their

fathers are highly involved increases by 40 percent if the mothers work full rather than part time. Among

children in grades 6 through 12, fathers also appear more likely to be highly involved if the mothers work

full time instead of part time, but the difference is only significant at the 0.10 level. These results suggest

that families in which mothers work full time establish a different division of labor, with fathers sharing

more of the child-related responsibilities, than families in which mothers work part time or not at all.

Children’s age and sex. Whether children in grades 1 through 5 are boys or girls has no significant

impact on the adjusted odds that either their fathers or their mothers are highly involved in their schools.

However, among children in grades 6 through 12, the adjusted odds that children have highly involved

fathers increase by 22 percent if the children are boys relative to if they are girls. This outcome suggests

that fathers are more likely to increase their involvement if they have sons. Mothers of 6th through 12th

graders, on the other hand, are somewhat less likely to be highly involved if the children are boys, though

the association is only significant at the 0.10 level. 

In a similar vein, fathers are less likely to be highly involved with middle school children (6th

through 8th grade) than with high school children (9th through 12th grade). Recall from figure 4 that the

proportion of children whose fathers volunteered at their schools increased between middle and high school.
46

Mothers, on the other hand, are more likely to be highly involved with their 6th through 8th graders than

with their 9th through 12th graders—a finding that also matches the results obtained earlier that showed

mothers’ involvement in their children’s schools decreases steadily as the grade level of their children

increases. This pattern of associations suggests a division of labor within two-parent families, with mothers

focusing on younger children and on girls and with fathers spending somewhat more time with older

children and with boys.

Family social capital. Even after controlling for the other factors in the models, the results confirm

that parental involvement in schools and parental involvement at home are closely linked. Three measures

of social capital were included in the models for children in grades 1 through 5. These were the number of

in-home activities the children have shared with their parents in the past week, the number of out-of-home

activities that the children have shared with their parents in the past month, and an indicator of whether the

children have been told a story in the past week or have talked with their parents in the past month about

family history. Among mothers of children in grades 1 through 5, all three measures of social capital are

associated with high mother involvement in schools, even after controlling for the level of involvement of

fathers and the other factors in the model. The adjusted odds that mothers are highly involved in their

children’s elementary schools increase by 16 percent with each additional activity participated in at home

in the past week and increase by 38 percent with each additional outing that the family has gone on with the

children in the past month. 

Among fathers of children in grades 1 through 5, the number of activities in the home that their

families have shared with the children in the past week and the number of outings that the families have

shared with the children in the past month are significantly associated with high father involvement in the

children’s schools. With each additional activity the families have shared with the children in the past week,

the adjusted odds that fathers are highly involved in their children’s elementary schools increase by 17

percent. Similarly, with each additional type of outing the families have gone on with their children, the

adjusted odds that fathers are highly involved in their children’s schools increase by 25 percent. 

More questions were available to measure social capital in the families of older children. Seven

factors were included: parents’ belief that the children will graduate from a 4-year college; parents’

confidence that someone in the household can help the children with their homework; whether a parent has

discussed future courses with the children in the past month; how often a parent helps the children with their

homework; the number of activities shared with children in the past week; how often a parent attends

religious services; and whether a parent regularly participates in an ongoing community service activity.

Among children in grades 6 through 12, several of these items are significant influences on the odds that
 When information on whether schools offered general school meetings and parent-teacher conferences was added to the 23

model, the association between high mother involvement and frequency with which a parent helps with homework became

insignificant.

 The correlations between high mother involvement and high father involvement in schools and regularly participating in an 24

ongoing service activity are 0.28 and 0.21, respectively. 

 Frequency of helping with homework is measured as follows: never, less than once a week, 1 to 2 times per week, 3 to 4 25

times a week, or 5 or more times a week. Children who did not receive homework were included in the never category. A

variable that took the value of 1 when no homework was given and 0 otherwise was added to the model to remove the influence

of those who did not receive homework from the estimate of the influence of homework frequency.

 A scale of school climate was created by summing the responses to the five statements about children’s schools shown in 26

figure 12: teachers maintain good discipline in the classroom; most students and teachers respect each other; the principal and

assistant principal maintain good discipline at the school; the school welcomes my family’s involvement with the school; and the

school makes it easy to be involved there. The response categories were assigned a value from 1 (strongly disagree) to 4

(strongly agree). Thus, the scale ranges from 5 to 20 with higher scores indicating a more positive school climate.

47

mothers and fathers are highly involved in their children’s schools, though the specific social capital

measures that are associated with parental involvement differ somewhat for mothers and fathers. Among

mothers, expecting that the children will graduate from a 4-year college, the frequency with which parents

help with homework, the frequency with which parents attend religious services, and having a parent who

regularly participates in an ongoing community service activity are all significantly associated with high

mother involvement in schools after controlling for the involvement of fathers and the other factors in the

model (table 3). The adjusted odds that mothers are highly involved in their children’s schools are 43

23

percent higher among mothers who expect their children will graduate from a 4-year college compared to

those who do not. Similarly, the adjusted odds that mothers are highly involved in their children’s schools

are doubled if a parent regularly participates in an ongoing service activity. However, it is possible that the

ongoing service activity is involvement in their children’s schools.24

Among fathers, the number of activities the families have participated in with the children, the

frequency with which a parent helps with homework, and whether a parent regularly participates in an

ongoing community service activity are associated with high father involvement. With each unit increase

in the number of activities participated in with the children, the adjusted odds that fathers are highly

involved in their 6th through 12th graders’ schools increase by 16 percent. Similarly, with each unit

increase in helping with homework, the odds that fathers are highly involved in their children’s schools

increase by 15 percent. There is a 28 percent increase in the odds that fathers are highly involved in their 25

6th through 12th graders’ schools if a parent in the household regularly participates in an ongoing service

activity.

School characteristics. The measure of school climate is more consistently related to the odds

26

of mothers and fathers being highly involved in their children’s schools than any of the other school
48

characteristic factors. Although school climate has no significant influence on the adjusted odds that fathers

of children in grades 1 through 5 will be highly involved in their children’s schools, it is significantly

associated with high father involvement among children in grades 6 through 12 and with high mother

involvement at all ages. With each unit increase in the scale, the adjusted odds that fathers of children in

grades 6 through 12 are highly involved in their children’s schools increase by 4 percent. Although 4

percent may not seem large, consider that the adjusted odds that fathers are highly involved in their

children’s schools are 20 percent higher if respondents strongly agree (a value of 4 on each of the 5 items)

compared to if they agree (a value of 3 on each of the 5 items) with each statement. 

Whether a school is public or private is also associated with parental involvement. The adjusted

odds that fathers of children in the 1st through 5th grades are highly involved in their children’s schools are

48 percent greater if their children attend private as opposed to public schools that they were assigned to.

Whether a school is public or private has no effect on the odds that mothers of elementary school children

are highly involved in their schools. This is probably due to the fact that the majority of mothers of

elementary school children are highly involved in their children’s schools, as shown earlier in the report.

However, the odds that mothers are highly involved in the schools of their 6th through 12 graders increase

by 93 percent if the children attend private rather than public schools that they were assigned to. There is

evidence that mothers are more involved if their 6th through 12th graders are enrolled in a public school of

their choice compared to if they are enrolled in a public school that they were assigned to. The odds that

mothers of children in the 6th through 12th grades are highly involved in their schools are 27 percent higher

if the children attend a public school of their choice as opposed to one that they were assigned to.

Children get mostly A’s. Because some researchers have noted that parent involvement is higher

if parents have a high assessment of their children’s abilities (Eccles and Harold 1996), additional models

were estimated that included parents’ reports of their children’s usual grades (data not shown). The result

of these models suggest that fathers are more likely to be highly involved in their 6th through 12th graders’

schools if their children are doing well academically. The adjusted odds that fathers are highly involved in

their 6th through 12th graders’ schools are 30 percent higher when parents report that their children get

mostly A’s than when they do not. Because the NHES is a cross-sectional survey, it is not possible to

determine the direction of causation. It is equally possible that children are more likely to do well in school

because their fathers are involved in their schools. It is quite likely that causation runs in both directions,

with fathers more likely to be involved when their children are doing well and children doing better when

their fathers are involved. There is no association between children getting mostly A’s and mothers’

involvement among younger or older children or fathers’ involvement among children in elementary school.
49

Single-parent families. Fewer factors are important influences on high father or mother

involvement in single-parent families after controlling for the other factors in the models.

Household income and parents’ education. Once education and the other factors are controlled,

household income has no influence on whether single fathers or mothers are highly involved in their

children’s schools. Parents’ education, on the other hand, remains a significant influence on the likelihood

that mothers and fathers are highly involved in their children’s schools, except among fathers of children

in grades 6 through 12. The adjusted odds that fathers of 1st through 5th graders are involved in their

children’s schools increase by 67 percent with each unit increase in the education measure (table 4).

Similarly, the adjusted odds that mothers are highly involved in their children’s elementary schools increase

by 42 percent and the adjusted odds that they are involved in their 6th through 12th graders’ schools

increase by 15 percent with each unit increase in education (tables 4 and 5).

Children’s age and sex. Unlike fathers in two-parent families, single fathers are more likely to be

highly involved in their 6th through 12th graders’ schools if the children are in the 6th through 8th grade

rather than high school. However, when information on whether schools offered general school meetings

or parent-teacher conferences is added to the model (not shown), this association becomes insignificant.

There is no association between the children’s grade level and mothers’ involvement in their schools. There

is also no association between the sex of the children and the involvement of either single mothers or single

fathers in their schools.

Family social capital. Several of the social capital measures are important influences on the

adjusted odds that single mothers are highly involved in their children’s schools. Fewer of them influence

the adjusted odds that single fathers are highly involved. Among children in grades 1 through 5, the odds

that their mothers are highly involved in their schools increase by 30 percent with each additional activity

they have shared with their mothers in the past week, by 60 percent with each additional outing they have

gone on with their mothers in the past month, and by 73 percent if their mothers have told them a story in

the past week or have discussed their family history in the past month. None of the social capital measures

are significant influences on high father involvement among children in grades 1 through 5. 

Among children in grades 6 through 12, the adjusted odds that mothers are highly involved in their

schools are greater as the number of activities the mothers have participated in with their children in the past

week increases, as the frequency with which they attend religious services increases, and if they regularly

participate in community service activities (table 5). The adjusted odds that single fathers are highly

involved in their 6th through 12th graders’ schools are significantly greater if they have discussed future

high school courses or plans after high school with their children in the past month. Fathers also 
50

Table 4. — Adjusted odds ratios of fathers’ and mothers’ high level of involvement in their children’s

schools, by child, family, and school characteristics: Students in grades 1-5 living in singleparent families, 1996

Characteristic Fathers Mothers

Child’s race and ethnicity

Black, non-Hispanic vs. white, non-Hispanic ........................ 2.56 0.59 *

Hispanic vs. white, non-Hispanic ................................. 0.44 0.89

Child’s sex (male) ............................................... 1.09 0.99

Parent’s education ............................................... 1.67 * 1.42 *

Household income ............................................... 1.17 1.04

Mother’s employment

Full time vs. part time .......................................... NA 0.78

Looking for work vs. part time ................................... NA 1.31

Not working vs. part time ....................................... NA 0.95

Family social capital

Number of in-home activities shared with child ..................... 1.49 1.30 *

Number of out-of-home activities shared with child ................... 1.16 1.60 *

Told a story in past week or family history in past month .............. 0.82 1.73 *

School characteristics

School type

Public, chosen vs. public, assigned ................................ 0.85 1.15

Private vs. public, assigned ...................................... 0.99 1.52

School size

Small (under 300) vs. medium (300-599) ........................... 0.99 0.84

Large (600-999) vs. medium (300-599) ............................ 0.70 1.05

Very large (1,000+) vs. medium (300-599) ......................... 0.82 1.17

School climate .................................................. 1.35 * 1.15 *

F(14,67)=2.36 F(17,64)=6.77

*p<.05

NA=Not applicable.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1996 National Household Education Survey.
51

Table 5. — Adjusted odds ratios of fathers’ and mothers’ high level of involvement in their children’s

schools, by child, family, and school characteristics: Students in grades 6-12 living in singleparent families, 1996

Characteristics Fathers Mothers

Child’s race and ethnicity

Black, non-Hispanic vs. white, non-Hispanic ..................... 0.81 0.76

Hispanic vs. white, non-Hispanic .............................. 1.45 0.85

Child’s sex (male) ............................................... 0.71 0.95

Child’s grade level

Grades 6-8 vs. grades 9 -12 .................................. 3.25 * 1.36

Parent’s education ............................................... 0.91 1.15 *

Household income ............................................... 1.01 1.01

Mother’s employment

Full time vs. part time ....................................... NA 1.26

Looking for work vs. part time ................................ NA 1.51

Not working vs. part time .................................... NA 0.90

Family social capital

Child will graduate from 4-year college (yes vs. no) ............... 2.61 1.42

Confidence that someone can help with homework ................ 1.03 1.07

Discussed education plans with child (yes vs. no) ................. 2.69 * 1.32

Number of activities participated in with child .................... 1.67 1.52 *

Frequency with which a parent helps with homework .............. 1.19 1.11

Child gets homework (no homework vs. any homework) ...... 2.20 0.36 *

Family ties to the community

Frequency with which parent attends religious services ............. 1.19 1.15 *

A parent regularly participates in community service activity (yes vs.

no) ........................................................... 1.49 2.51 *

School characteristics

School type

Public, chosen vs. public, assigned ............................ 2.53 0.71 *

Private vs. public, assigned ................................... 4.01 1.63

School size

Small (under 300) vs. medium (300-599) ........................ 0.80 1.13

Large (600-999) vs. medium (300-599) ......................... 0.91 1.05

Very large (1,000+) vs. medium (300-599) ...................... 1.11 0.99

School climate .................................................. 1.11 1.15 *

F(20,61)=1.81 F(23,58)=8.59

*p<.05

NA=Not applicable.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1996 National Household Education Survey.
52

are more likely to be highly involved in their 6th through 12th graders’ schools if they expect that their

children will graduate from a 4-year college and as the number of activities they have participated in with

their children in the past week increases. However, these factors are only significant at the 0.10 level.

School characteristics. As in two-parent families, school climate is an important influence on the

involvement of single mothers and single fathers in their children’s schools, especially when their children

are in elementary school. The odds that single fathers and single mothers are highly involved in their 1st

through 5th graders’ schools increase by 35 percent and 15 percent, respectively, with each unit increase

in the school climate scale, after controlling for measures of social capital in the family, whether the schools

are public or private, and other factors in the model (table 4).

Among children in grades 6 through 12, school climate only influences whether single mothers are

highly involved in their children’s schools. It has no influence on single fathers. The odds that single

mothers are highly involved in their children’s schools increase by 15 percent with each unit increase in the

school climate scale. 

There is some evidence that single fathers are more likely to be highly involved in their 6th through

12th graders’ schools if the schools are private or are public schools of their choice as opposed to public

schools that they were assigned to. However, the relationships between these factors and high father

involvement are only significant at the 0.10 level. There is also weak evidence that single mothers are more

likely to be highly involved in their 6th through 12th graders’ schools if the schools are private (significant

at the 0.10 level). However, it appears that single mothers may be somewhat less likely to be highly

involved in their children’s schools if the children attend public schools of their choice.

Children get mostly A’s. Children making mostly A’s only has a significant influence on the

adjusted odds that single mothers are highly involved in their 6th through 12th graders’ schools (data not

shown). It has no association with single fathers’ involvement at any grade level or with single mothers’

involvement in elementary school. As noted earlier, the causal relationship between children doing well in

school and high parental involvement is unclear, though it is likely that the two influence each other.

Parental Involvement and Student Outcomes

Much of the research on parental involvement in schools has focused on its influence on students’

academic success (Henderson, 1987). Academic success can be measured in a variety of ways. This report
 The student outcomes are based on parent reports, and parents tend to provide positive assessments of their children. For 27

example, 38 percent of children in 1st through 12th grade get mostly A’s, according to the report of the parents. It is likely that if

school records were used to obtain this information instead, the proportion would be lower.

53

uses a measure of academic success and a measure of academic difficulties: getting mostly A’s and

27

having ever repeated a grade. Other facets of children’s school lives are also important to their social and

emotional development. Among these are the extent to which they enjoy school and their involvement in

extracurricular activities. Children who enjoy school are more likely to perform better academically and

to remain in school (Csikszentmihalyi, 1990). Participation in extracurricular activities reduces risky

behaviors in adolescence, such as dropping out of school, becoming a teen parent, using drugs, or engaging

in delinquent conduct (Zill, Nord, and Loomis, 1995). It also provides more opportunities to establish

connections to other young people and adults. Children’s behavior in school is another important school

outcome. Parents of children in the 6th through 12th grade were asked if their child had ever been

suspended or expelled. 

School-aged children in both two-parent and single-parent families are more likely to get mostly

A’s, to enjoy school, and to participate in extracurricular activities and are less likely to have ever repeated

a grade and to have ever been suspended or expelled if their fathers or mothers have high as opposed to low

levels of involvement in their schools (figure 13). However, the differences in the proportion of children

in father-only families who have repeated a grade is not significantly different for children whose fathers

have high and low levels of involvement.

Of course, in two-parent families in which fathers show high levels of involvement, it is likely that

mothers also have high levels of involvement. Thus, the association between fathers’ involvement and

children’s outcomes may be due in part to high levels of involvement by the mother. Figure 14 shows these

same child outcomes by whether neither parent, only the mother, only the father, or both have high

involvement. This figure reveals that it makes little difference whether it is only the mother or only the

father who has high involvement; as long as one of them is highly involved, children have better outcomes

than if neither have high involvement; as long as one of them is highly involved, children have better

outcomes than if neither have high involvement. Moreover, children have the most favorable outcomes if

both of their parents exhibit high involvement. Although the advantage is relatively small, the differences

between having both parents highly involved in the children’s schools and having only the mothers highly

involved are evident for participation in extracurricular activities, getting A’s, enjoying school, and having

ever repeated a grade. The question of whether mothers and fathers make independent contributions to these

outcomes is explored in multivariate models below.
54

Children in 1st through 12th grade. 1

Youth report. 2

Children in 6th through 12th grade. 3

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1996 National Household Education Survey.

Figure 13. — Student outcomes, by fathers’ and mothers’ involvement in school and family type: Students

in grades K-12, 1996
55

Youth report. 1

Children in 1st through 12th grade. 2

Children in 6th through 12th grade. 3

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1996 National Household Education Survey.

Figure 14. — Student outcomes, by level of parental involvement in school and which parent is involved:

Students in grades K-12 in two-parent families, 1996
 For children in grades 1 through 5, three social capital measures are included in the models: the number of in-home 28

activities parents have shared with their children, the number of out-of-home activities they have shared together, and whether

the parents have told their children a story in the past week or shared family history with them in the last month. For children in

grades 6 through 12, seven social capital measures are included in the models: expect children will graduate from a 4-year

college, confidence that someone in the household can help children with homework, whether have discussed educational plans

with children, the number of activities have shared with children in the past week, frequency with which parents help with

homework, frequency with which parents attend religious services, and whether parents regularly participate in a community

service activity.

56

In order to understand the contribution of fathers’ involvement in their children’s schools to student

outcomes, it is important to control for other factors that also influence how students do in school. Logistic

regression models were estimated to examine the influence of mothers’ and fathers’ involvement on the five

student outcomes after controlling for related child and family characteristics. In the tables presented below,

only the adjusted odds of the outcomes by mothers’ and fathers’ involvement are shown. The adjusted odds

ratios for all the factors contained in the models are contained in Appendix B. To simplify the discussion,

results are presented separately for children living in two-parent and in single-parent families.

Two-parent families. Table 6 presents the adjusted odds that children in two-parent families get

mostly A’s, enjoy school, participate in extracurricular activities, have ever repeated a grade, and have ever

been suspended or expelled from school as categorized by their fathers’ and mothers’ involvement in their

schools, after controlling for a variety of related factors. Among the factors that were also included in the

models are the children’s race and ethnicity, sex, and grade level, mothers’ and fathers’ education,

household income, family type, and maternal employment. In addition, models 3 and 5 also control for

different measures of social capital within the families .28

Get mostly A’s. Children are more likely to get mostly A’s if their fathers are involved in their

schools. Among children in grades 6 through 12, the adjusted odds that children get mostly A’s increase

by 46 percent if fathers are highly involved in their schools and by 21 percent if fathers are moderately

involved in their schools compared to if the fathers have low levels of involvement (model 4). Even after

controlling for measures of social capital in the family, the odds that children get mostly A’s are 43 percent

higher if their fathers are highly involved in their schools compared to if they are not very involved (model

5). Mothers’ involvement in their children’s schools also influences the odds that the children get mostly

A’s, but mainly among children in grades 6 through 12. Once measures of social capital are entered into

the models, mothers’ involvement is no longer a significant influence. These results indicate that fathers’

involvement in their children’s schools exerts a distinct and independent influence on children making good

grades and that the association is not due to the fact that mothers tend to be involved when fathers are

involved. The results also suggest that for this particular outcome, fathers’ involvement is more important

than mothers’.
57

Table 6. — Adjusted odds ratios of selected student outcomes, by fathers’ and mothers’ level of

involvement in their schools and grade level: Students in grades 1-12 living in two-parent

families, 1996

Parental involvement Model 1 Model 2 Model 3 Model 4 Model 5

Grades 1-12 Grades 1-5 Grades 6-12

1 1 2 1 2

Father’s involvement Gets mostly A’s

Moderate vs. low ................. 1.22* 1.22* 1.20 1.21* 1.17

High vs. low ..................... 1.42* 1.35* 1.30* 1.46* 1.43*

Mother’s involvement

Moderate vs. low ................. 1.16 .88 .86 1.28* 1.25

High vs. low ..................... 1.21* .98 .92 1.30* 1.16

Father’s involvement Enjoys school

Moderate vs. low ................. 1.30* 1.28* 1.26* 1.34* 1.26*

High vs. low ..................... 1.55* 1.48* 1.40* 1.63 1.51*

Mother’s involvement

Moderate vs. low ................. 1.25* 1.23 1.21 1.23* 1.16

High vs. low ..................... 1.52* 1.39* 1.30* 1.58* 1.40*

Father’s involvement Participates in extracurricular activities3

Moderate vs. low ................. 1.30 1.16 1.48* 1.38*

High vs. low ..................... 1.58* 1.35 1.88* 1.70*

Mother’s involvement

Moderate vs. low ................. 1.62* 1.48* 1.31* 1.25

High vs. low ..................... 2.39* 1.95* 2.46* 2.05*

Father’s involvement Ever repeated a grade

Moderate vs. low ................. .75* .65* .64* .79 .84

High vs. low ..................... .72* .66 .65 .76 .83

Mother’s involvement

Moderate vs. low ................. .73* .50* .50* .83 .88

High vs. low ..................... .71* .55* .55* .76 .90

Father’s involvement Ever suspended or expelled4

Moderate vs. low ................. .96 1.06

High vs. low ..................... .91 1.02

Mother’s involvement

Moderate vs. low ................. .76 .81

High vs. low ..................... .57* .76*

*p<.05

Odds ratios after controlling for children’s race/ethnicity and sex, parents’ education, household income, family type, and maternal 1

employment.

Odds ratios after controlling for factors listed in note 1 plus several measures of social capital. 2

Information on participation in extracurricular activities for children in grades 1 through 5 were obtained from parents’ reports. 3

Parallel information for children in grades 6 through 12 were obtained from youths’ reports. Thus, there is no combined estimate

of participation in extracurricular activities for children in grades 1-12.

Only parents of children in grades 6 through 12 were asked whether their children had ever been suspended or expelled. 4

NOTE: See Appendix B, tables B1-B3 for adjusted odds ratios of student outcomes for all factors included in the models.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1996 National Household Education Survey.
58

Enjoy school. Children, at least according to their parents’ reports, enjoy school more when their

fathers and mothers are involved. The adjusted odds that children in the 1st through 12th grade enjoy school

are 30 percent higher if the fathers are moderately involved and 55 percent higher if they are highly involved

relative to if they have low involvement in the schools (model 1). A similar increase in the adjusted odds

occurs when mothers are involved in their children’s schools (model 1). The association between fathers’

and mothers’ involvement and children’s enjoying school is apparent at all grade levels.

Participate in extracurricular activities. Children are more likely to participate in extracurricular

activities when their mothers and fathers are involved in their schools. Because it is not possible to

determine the direction of causation, another interpretation is that parents are involved because their

children are participating in sports teams, orchestras, or other extracurricular activities that draw the parents

to the schools as spectators, coaches, or advisors. Among children in grades 6 through 12, the adjusted odds

that they participate in extracurricular activities are 48 percent higher if their fathers are moderately involved

in their schools and are 88 percent higher if their fathers are highly involved in their schools (model 4). The

odds that they participate in extracurricular activities are 146 percent greater if their mothers are highly

involved in their schools relative to if their mothers have low involvement (model 4). Adding information

on social capital in the home to the models reduces somewhat the influence of parental involvement on the

odds that children participate in extracurricular activities (model 5).

Ever repeated a grade. The involvement of mothers and fathers, particularly mothers, is also

important in reducing the likelihood that children in elementary school have ever repeated a grade. Among

children in grades 1 through 5, the adjusted odds that they have repeated a grade are 35 percent lower if

fathers are moderately involved and 34 percent lower (significant at the 0.10 level) if they are highly

involved. The odds that children have ever repeated a grade are 50 percent lower if mothers are moderately

involved and 45 percent lower if they are highly involved in their children’s schools relative to if the

mothers have low involvement. Among children in grades 6 through 12, the odds that they have ever

repeated a grade are lower if their fathers are moderately or highly involved in their schools or their mothers

are highly involved. These associations, however, are only significant at the 0.10 level. 

Ever suspended or expelled. Mothers’ involvement in school, but not fathers’ involvement, reduces

the likelihood that 6th through 12th graders have ever been suspended or expelled from school. The

adjusted odds that children have ever been suspended or expelled are 24 percent lower if their mothers are

moderately involved in their schools (significant at the 0.10 level) and are 43 percent lower if their mothers

are highly involved in their schools relative to if their mothers have low levels of involvement. The lack
 See footnote 28 on page 56 for a listing of the social capital measures that are included in the models. 29

59

of association between fathers’ involvement and the likelihood that children have ever been suspended or

expelled may be due to the fact that some fathers become involved because their children are having

behavioral problems. 

Single-parent families. Table 7 shows the adjusted odds that children get mostly A’s, enjoy school,

participate in extracurricular activities, have ever repeated a grade, and have ever been suspended or

expelled from school by the involvement of their mothers or fathers, after controlling for a variety of child

and family characteristics. The other factors that were included in the models are the child’s race/ethnicity,

sex, parents’ education, and household income. The single-mother families also include information on

maternal employment. Because most fathers are employed full time, information on fathers’ employment

was not included in the models. Models 3 and 5 include measures of social capital in the families.29

Get mostly A’s. Children in the 6th through 12th grade who live in single-parent families are more

likely to get mostly A’s if their parents are involved in their schools. In single-father families, the adjusted

odds that children get mostly A’s are twice as high for children whose fathers are highly involved in their

schools compared to children whose fathers show low levels of involvement. Much of the association is due

 to the fact that such fathers are also involved at home as well. Once the social capital measures are added

to the models, the influence of fathers’ involvement in schools on children getting mostly A’s is no longer

significant. The importance of mothers’ involvement in schools to children getting mostly A’s only

becomes significant after measures of social capital are added to the model. The adjusted odds that children

in the 6th through 12th grade living in single-mother families get mostly A’s are 70 percent greater if their

mothers are highly involved rather than having only low levels of involvement in their schools. For children

in grades 1 through 5, parents’ involvement is not associated with making mostly A’s after controlling for

the other factors in the models.

Enjoy school. Single fathers’ involvement in their children’s schools is not associated with whether

the children enjoy school. However, there is an association between single mothers’ involvement and

children’s enjoyment of school. The association, however, is not consistent. Among children in grades 1

through 5, it appears that children whose mothers are moderately involved have a reduced likelihood that

they enjoy school after measures of social capital are entered into the model. Among children in grades 6

through 12, children are more than twice as likely to enjoy school if their mothers are highly involved, but

the relationship is no longer significant once measures of social capital are added to the model.
60

Table 7.— Adjusted odds ratio of selected student outcomes, by fathers’ and mothers’ level of

involvement in their schools and grade level: Students in grades 1-12 living in single-parent

families, 1996

Parental involvement Model 1 Model 2 Model 3 Model 4 Model 5

Grades 1-12 Grades 1-5 Grades 6-12

1 1 2 1 2

Father’s involvement Gets mostly A’s

Moderate vs. low ................. 1.88* 1.35 1.36 1.99 1.60

High vs. low ..................... 1.84* 1.12 1.13 2.23* 1.58

Mother’s involvement

Moderate vs. low ................. 1.07 .72 .68 1.36 1.28

High vs. low ..................... 1.57* 1.09 .95 1.99 1.70*

Father’s involvement Enjoys school

Moderate vs. low ................. .87 .68 .68 1.11 .84

High vs. low ..................... 1.73 1.84 2.03 1.65 1.13

Mother’s involvement

Moderate vs. low ................. .99 .69 .64* 1.19 1.11

High vs. low ..................... 1.73* 1.15 1.05 2.23* 1.79

Father’s involvement Participates in extracurricular activities3

Moderate vs. low ................. 1.99 1.95 .64 .59

High vs. low ..................... 2.34 2.16 2.46 2.46

Mother’s involvement

Moderate vs. low ................. 1.36 1.17 1.72* 1.65*

High vs. low ..................... 2.27* 1.62 2.46* 2.10*

Father’s involvement Ever repeated a grade

Moderate vs. low ................. 1.13 1.55 1.38 1.06 1.06

High vs. low ..................... .95 2.39 1.99 .76 .68

Mother’s involvement

Moderate vs. low ................. .53* .57 .53* .50* .53*

High vs. low ..................... .51* .42* .43* .58* .75

Father’s involvement Ever suspended or expelled4

Moderate vs. low ................. .84 1.04

High vs. low ..................... .28* .30*

Mother’s involvement

Moderate vs. low ................. .75 .82

High vs. low ..................... .58* .71

*p<.05

Odds ratios after controlling for children’s race/ethnicity and sex, parents’ education, household income, family type, and maternal 1

employment, if there is a mother in the household.

Odds ratios after controlling for factors listed in note 1 plus measures of social capital. 2

Information on participation in extracurricular activities for children in grades 1 through 5 were obtained from parents’ reports. 3

Parallel information for children in grades 6 through 12 were obtained from youths’ reports. Thus, there is no combined estimate

of participation in extracurricular activities for children in grades 1-12.

Only parents of children in grades 6 through 12 were asked whether their children had ever been suspended or expelled. 4

NOTE: See Appendix B, tables B4-B8 for adjusted odds ratios of student outcomes for all factors included in the models.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1996 National Household Education Survey.
61

Participate in extracurricular activities. Single fathers’ involvement has a weak association with

whether their 6th through 12th graders participate in extracurricular activities (significant at the 0.10 level)

and no influence on whether their 1st through 5th graders participate in extracurricular activities. The

involvement of single mothers in their children’s schools increases the likelihood that their 6th through 12th

graders participate in extracurricular activities. Children in grades 1 through 5 are also more likely to

participate in extracurricular activities if their mothers are highly involved in their schools (model 2).

Ever repeated a grade. The involvement of single mothers, but not single fathers, reduces the odds

that children have ever repeated a grade among children at all grade levels. The adjusted odds for children

in the 1st through 5th grade are 58 percent lower and the adjusted odds for children in grades 6 through 12

are 42 percent lower if their mothers are highly involved in their schools compared to if they have low levels

of involvement.

Ever suspended or expelled. The involvement of both single fathers and single mothers reduces

the adjusted odds that their 6th through 12th graders have ever been suspended or expelled from school,

though the influence of mothers’ involvement is no longer significant once the social capital measures are

added to the models. If single fathers are highly involved in their children’s schools, the odds that children

have ever been suspended or expelled are 72 percent lower than if the fathers have low levels of

involvement.

Involvement of Nonresident Fathers

Nowadays, with the high rates of non-marriage, separation, and divorce, many children spend part

of their childhoods living apart from at least one of their biological parents (Zill, 1996). Extensive research

has been conducted on the effects of divorce for children’s well-being (Kelly, 1993; Furstenberg and

Cherlin, 1991; Wallerstein, 1991; Chase-Lansdale and Hetherington, 1990; Hetherington, 1981, 1979) and

the problems experienced by children growing up in single-parent families (McLanahan and Sandefur,

1994). Such research has found that children are better off financially, psychologically, and emotionally

when they are raised by two parents. However, reviewers of the research also note that the effects of divorce

should not be overstated. The majority of children whose families are disrupted by divorce show no adverse

signs several years later. For a small proportion of children, however, the consequences may be longer

lasting. Researchers have found effects of marital disruption 12 to 22 years later in such outcomes as poor

relationships with parents, increased levels of problem behavior, increased likelihood of dropping out of

school and receiving psychological help, and lower likelihood of attending college (McLanahan and
62

Sandefur, 1994; Zill, Morrison, and Coiro, 1993). Although the overall likelihood of these outcomes was

relatively small, for some outcomes, such as dropping out of school, the risk was doubled.

It is not uncommon following the breakup of a family for one of the parents to become increasingly

detached, paying little or no child support and visiting only infrequently, if at all (Seltzer, 1991; Furstenberg

and Nord, 1985; Furstenberg et al., 1983). Because mothers are more likely than fathers to retain custody

of the children in the event of divorce, most of the extant research has focused on noncustodial fathers and

the consequences for children of living apart from their fathers (McLanahan and Sandefur, 1994; Amato,

1993). Existing research is mixed about whether the continuing involvement of nonresident fathers is

important to children’s lives. Several large-scale studies have found no association between the amount of

contact a non-custodial father has with his children and an assortment of measures of child well-being

(King, 1994; Furstenberg, Morgan, and Allison, 1987). Other studies, however, have found continued

contact to be related to improved psychological scores, fewer behavioral problems, and better peer

relationships (Peterson and Zill, 1986; Wallerstein and Kelly, 1980). Most of the studies that examine the

influence of paternal contact on children examine the amount of contact that nonresident fathers have with

their children. However, a simple count of days may not accurately reflect the role that fathers play in their

children’s lives. There is a need to consider other aspects of fathers’ presence in children’s lives, such as

the quality of the relationship between fathers and their children, the types of activities that fathers share

with their children, whether the visits are forced upon or welcomed by the children, whether the children’s

lives are disrupted by the contact (e.g., by having to travel long distances away from friends and family in

order to visit their fathers), and whether the contact reflects the continuing presence of committed and

involved fathers in their children’s lives. 

In this section, information on the involvement of nonresident fathers in their children’s schools is

presented and discussed. Some data on the involvement of nonresident mothers are also presented as a

contrast to that of fathers. This section also examines factors that are associated with nonresident fathers’

involvement and whether such involvement is linked to selected student outcomes. According to data from

the NHES:96, approximately 16.8 million (34 percent) children in kindergarten through 12th grade have

fathers who live apart from them. A much smaller number, 4.1 million (8 percent), have mothers who live

outside the home.

Children’s Contact with Nonresident Fathers and Mothers

According to the reports of the custodial parents, approximately one-quarter of the nonresident

fathers had not had contact with their children in kindergarten through 12th grade in more than a year.

Similarly, 10 percent of nonresident mothers had had no contact with their children in more than a year.
63

These figures indicate, however, that three-quarters of nonresident fathers and 90 percent of nonresident

mothers did have contact with their school-aged children in the previous year. The finding that nonresident

mothers are more likely than nonresident fathers to have had at least some contact with their children in the

previous year is consistent with previous research (Nord and Zill, 1996). 

The fact that 75 percent of the students in the NHES:96 have had contact with their nonresident

fathers in the past year is notable. In the early 1980s, it was estimated that just over half of children ages

6 to 17 years with nonresident fathers had had contact with their fathers in the past year (Furstenberg et al.,

1983). School-aged children in 1996 were more likely to have at least some contact with their nonresident

fathers than were children 15 years ago.

Types of Activities in Which Nonresident Fathers and Mothers Participate

Custodial parents who reported that the nonresident parent has had contact with their children in

the past year reported on the involvement of the nonresident parent in four school activities: attended a

general meeting, attended a regularly scheduled parent-teacher conference, attended a class or school event,

or volunteered at the school. 

The most common activity of nonresident fathers is attending a school or class event (figure 15).

Twenty-two percent of nonresident fathers who had seen their children in the last year attended at least one

such event according to the reports of custodial mothers or the children’s guardians. This compares with

53 percent of fathers in two-parent families. Approximately 18 percent of nonresident fathers attended a

general school meeting and 15 percent attended a parent-teacher conference. In contrast, 55 percent of

fathers in two-parent families attended a general school meeting since the beginning of the school year and

39 percent attended a parent-teacher conference. Clearly, involvement in schools by nonresident fathers is

substantially lower than that of fathers in two-parent families; however, the proportion of nonresident

fathers participating in school activities is by no means trivial.

Nonresident mothers are more likely than nonresident fathers to attend a class or school event, a

parent-teacher conference, or a general school meeting. Just under one-third of nonresident mothers

attended each of these events according to the reports of the custodial parent or guardian (figure 15).

However, as with nonresident fathers, their participation in school activities is substantially lower than that

of resident mothers.
64

* Questions on nonresident parents’ involvement were only asked if children had seen their nonresident parents in the last year. 

According to the reports of custodial parents, 75 percent of nonresident fathers and 90 percent of nonresident mothers had had

contact with their children in the last year.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1996 National Household Education Survey.

Figure 15. — Percent of children whose nonresident fathers and mothers participated in each school

activity: Students in grades K-12, 1996*

Levels of Involvement in School Activities by Nonresident Fathers and Mothers

A large proportion of nonresident parents have not participated in any of the school activities, even

though they have seen their children in the previous year. Approximately 69 percent of the nonresident

fathers and 56 percent of the nonresident mothers had participated in none of the activities (figure 16). In

contrast, only 25 percent of resident fathers and 8 percent of resident mothers in two-parent families had not

participated in any of the school activities since the beginning of the school year. One explanation may be

that some of these parents do not live nearby and, thus, find it difficult to participate. According to data

from the 1990 Survey of Income and Program Participation conducted by the U.S. Bureau of the Census,

38 percent of nonresident parents live in the same city or county as their children (Nord and Zill, 1996).

This same study found that contact decreased substantially as parents moved away from the city or county

in which their children lived. Such information was not collected in the NHES:96, so it is not possible to

determine the extent to which distance is interfering with the involvement of nonresident parents in their

children’s schools.

In spite of the large proportion of nonresident parents with no involvement in their children’s

schools, 31 percent of nonresident fathers and 44 percent of nonresident mothers who have had contact with

their children in the past year have attended at least one of the four activities. Eighteen percent of
65

Low involvement is participation in one activity; moderate involvement is participation in two activities; and high involvement 1

is participation in three or four activities.

Questions on nonresident parents’ involvement were only asked if children had seen their nonresident parents in the last year. 2

According to the reports of custodial parents, 75 percent of nonresident fathers and 90 percent of nonresident mothers had had

contact with their children in the last year.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1996 National Household Education Survey.

Figure 16. — Level of involvement in school of nonresident fathers and mothers who have seen their

1

children within the last year : Students in grades K-12, 1996 2

nonresident fathers and 31 percent of nonresident mothers have participated in at least two of the four

activities. And 9 percent of nonresident fathers and 20 percent of nonresident mothers have attended at least

three of the school activities.

Influences on the Involvement of Nonresident Fathers

Several factors have been found to be associated with fathers’ continued contact with their children

following the disruption of families. These factors include whether fathers pay child support, the custodial

mothers’ education and household income, and ages of the children (Nord and Zill, 1996; Furstenberg and

Cherlin, 1991; Seltzer, Schaeffer, and Charng, 1989). Previous studies have found that children who are

younger, whose fathers pay child support, who have well-educated mothers, and who have higher family

incomes are more likely to have seen their fathers within the past year than are other children. The results

based on the NHES:96 are similar. Children are more likely to have had some contact with their fathers in

the past year if their fathers have paid some child support, if the custodial mothers are more educated, and

if their families are not experiencing economic difficulties (figure 17). There were no differences in 
66

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1996 National Household Education Survey.

Figure 17. — Percent of children who have had contact with their nonresident fathers in the previous year,

by payment of child support and selected family characteristics: Students in grades K-12,

1996
67

NHES:96 in the proportion who had seen the children in the previous year by the grade level of the children.

These factors were entered together in multivariate models to determine whether their influence

remained important after controlling for the other factors in the models (table 8). Three separate models are

shown for nonresident fathers and for nonresident mothers. These models show the factors that are

associated with the odds that nonresident parents have had contact in the past year with their children in

grades K-12 (model 1), grades K-5 (model 2), and grades 6-12 (model 3). The results remain generally the

same for children at all grade levels. The strongest influence on whether nonresident fathers have had

contact with their children in the past year is whether they have paid any child support. Mothers’ education

and household income are also positively associated with continued father contact, as others studies have

found. The one exception is among children in kindergarten through 5th grade. For these children,

household income has no influence on whether their fathers have had contact with them or not in the last

year. Children’s grade level also has no significant influence on whether fathers have had contact with

them. However, fathers are more likely to have had contact with their children if the mothers have not

remarried. 

These same factors are also associated with nonresident fathers being highly involved in their

children’s schools (figure 18). Nonresident fathers who have paid any child support are more likely than

those who have paid none to be highly involved in their children’s schools (10 percent versus 7 percent).

High involvement by the nonresident fathers also tends to increase as the custodial mothers’ education

increases and if the custodial mothers are not experiencing economic difficulties. As with custodial parents,

there is a tendency for nonresident fathers to decrease their involvement in their children’s schools as the

children move from elementary to middle to high school.

These factors were entered together in multivariate models to determine whether they remained

important influences on nonresident fathers’ involvement in their children’s schools after controlling for the

other factors in the models. Because only a small proportion of nonresident fathers are highly involved in

their children’s schools, for the multivariate models the dependent variable used was whether the

nonresident fathers were moderately to highly involved in their children’s schools, that is, whether they had

attended two or more of the school activities since the beginning of the school year. In addition to the above

factors, one set of models included the resident mothers’ level of involvement in the children’s schools.
68

Table 8. — Adjusted odds ratios of nonresident fathers’ contact with their children in the last year, by child and resident family 

nonresident fathers paid any child support in the last year: Students in grades K-12, 1996

Characteristic Model Model Model Model M

All children with a nonresident father Children livin

Grades K-12 Grades K-5 Grades 6-12 Grades K-12 Gr

1 2 3 1 

Child’s race and ethnicity

Black, non-Hispanic vs. white, non-Hispanic .... 1.11 1.31 0.94 1.20 

Hispanic vs. white, non-Hispanic ............. 0.72* 1.02 0.54* 0.74* 

Child’s sex (male) .............................. 0.97 1.04 0.90 0.90 

Child’s grade level

Grades 6-8 vs. grades K-5 ................... 1.03 1.05

Grades 9-12 vs. grades K-5 .................. 0.94 0.84

Grade 6-8 vs. grades 9-12 ................... 1.12 

Household income .............................. 1.06* 1.03 1.07* 1.06* 

Education of mother/guardian .................... 1.20* 1.27* 1.14* 1.23* 

Family type

Single mother vs. stepfather family ............ 1.88* 1.93* 1.80* 1.88* 

Nonparent/guardian vs. stepfather family ....... 1.13 1.03 1.21

Paid any child support in last year ................. 4.95* 5.31* 4.71* 5.10* 

F(10,71)=29.23 F(8,73)=21.41 F(9,72)=24.46 F(9,72)=33.46 F(7,

* p <.05

 Model 1 shows that factors that are associated with whether children in grades K-12 have had contact with the past year with their nonresident fathers and 

1

 Models 2 and 3 show that same information for children in grades K-5 and 6-12, respectively.

2

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1996 National Household Education Survey.
69

Restricted to children who have had contact with their nonresident fathers in the past year. *

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1996 National Household Education

Survey.

Figure 18. — Percent of children whose nonresident fathers have high involvement in their schools, by

*

payment of child support and selected family characteristics: Students in grades K-12, 1996
70

Even after controlling for the other factors in the model, the tendency for nonresident fathers to

become less involved in their children’s schools as the children grow older is evident. The adjusted odds

that children’s fathers are moderately to highly involved in their schools are 36 percent less if the children

are in grades 6 through 8 and 46 percent less if they are in grades 9 through 12 compared to if they are in

kindergarten through 5th grade (table 9). Household income, mothers’ education, whether the children live

in single-mother families or in stepfather families, mothers’ involvement in their schools, and whether the

nonresident fathers have paid any child support are all significant influences on nonresident fathers’

involvement among children in kindergarten through 12th grade. The specific factors that are important

influences on nonresident fathers’ involvement, however, differ somewhat by the grade level of the children.

Children in kindergarten-5th grade. Child support remains an important influence on nonresident

fathers’ involvement in their children’s schools among children in kindergarten through 5th grade, though

it loses some of its influence when mothers’ involvement in school is added to the model. Moreover, the

influence of child support on nonresident fathers’ involvement in their children’s schools is considerably

smaller than it was on nonresident fathers’ contact with their children. Other important influences on

nonresident fathers’ involvement among children in these grades are mothers’ education and mothers’

involvement in the children’s schools. The likelihood that nonresident fathers are moderately to highly

involved in their children’s schools is also higher if the mothers have not remarried (significant at the 0.10

level). Household income has no influence on whether nonresident fathers are involved in the children’s

schools.

Children in 6th-12th grade. Whether nonresident fathers pay child support has no influence on their

level of involvement in the schools of 6th through 12th graders, nor does mother’s education. However,

nonresident fathers are more likely to be moderately to highly involved in their children’s schools as the

resident families’ household incomes and mothers’ involvement in the children’s schools increase. The

strongest influence on nonresident fathers’ involvement in their 6th through 12 graders’ schools, however,

is mother’s marital status. Nonresident fathers are much more likely to be moderately to highly involved

in their children’s schools if the mothers are single than if there is a stepfather present. It is not clear

whether the reason for the association is due to the time elapsed since the mothers and fathers separated or

to the presence of a stepfather.
71

Table 9. — Adjusted odds ratios of nonresident fathers’ moderate to high involvement in their children’s schools, by 

characteristics and whether nonresident fathers paid any child support in the last year: Students in grades K-12, 

Characteristic Model 1 Model 2 Model 3 Model 1 Model 2 Model 3 Model 

Grades K-12 Grades K-5 

All Children living with All Children living with All 

children mothers children mothers childr

2 3 3 2 3 3 

Child’s race and ethnicity

Black, non-Hispanic vs. white, non-Hispanic 1.20 1.23 1.30 1.23 1.25 1.31 1.1

Hispanic vs. white, non-Hispanic ........ 1.38 1.42* 1.46* 1.27 1.28 1.30 1.5

Child’s sex (male) ..................... 0.98 0.99 0.99 1.12 1.15 1.14 0.8

Child’s grade level

Grades 6-8 vs. grades K-5 .............. 0.66* 0.67* 0.76*

Grades 9-12 vs. grades K-5 ............. 0.54* 0.55* 0.74

Grade 6-8 vs. grades 9-12 .............. 1.2

Household Income .................... 1.07* 1.07* 1.06* 1.05 1.04 1.03 1.1

Education of mother/guardian ........... 1.21* 1.23* 1.16* 1.27* 1.28* 1.23* 1.1

Family type

Single mother vs. stepfather family ....... 1.93* 1.90* 1.86* 1.54 1.52 1.49 2.4

Nonparent/guardian vs. stepfather family . . 1.40 1.28 1.6

Paid any child support in last year ........ 1.35* 1.35* 1.28* 1.42* 1.42* 1.36 1.2

Involvement of resident mother .......... 1.45* 1.28* 

F(10,71)=9.01 F(9,72)=10.64 F(10,71)=13.65 F(8,73)=5.46 F(7.74)=5.37 F(8.73)=4.86 (F9,72)=

* p <.05.

All models are restricted to children who have had contact with their nonresident fathers in the past year.

1

Model 1 shows the factors that are associated with whether the nonresident fathers of children in grades K-12 are moderately to highly involved in their 

2

Models 2 and 3 show the same information for children in grades K-5 and 6-12, respectively.

3

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1996 National Household Education Survey.
72

Involvement of Nonresident Fathers and Student Outcomes

In this section, the influence of nonresident fathers’ involvement in their children’s schools on five

student outcomes is examined. All children with nonresident fathers are included so that contrasts can be

made between children with and without any contact with their nonresident fathers and among those whose

fathers show different levels of involvement in their schools. Results are presented for children in grades

1 through 12 and in grades 1 through 5 and grades 6 through 12 so that differences in the influence of

nonresident fathers involvement on student outcomes can be examined for different grade levels. As

described below, there is an association between nonresident fathers’ involvement in their children’s schools

and all five outcomes, though the influence is stronger for some outcomes than for others and is more

apparent among children in grades 6 through 12 than among children in grades 1 through 5.

Get mostly A’s. As table 10 indicates, nonresident fathers’ involvement in their children’s schools

is associated with increased odds that children in grades 1 through 12 get mostly A’s (models 1 and 2). This

influence is reduced somewhat when the resident mothers’ involvement in school is included in the model

(model 3). When looking at the association by grade level of the children, nonresident fathers’ involvement

is not associated with whether children in grades 1 through 5 get mostly A’s. However, nonresident fathers’

involvement in their children’s schools is associated with increased odds that 6th through 12th graders get

mostly A’s. The adjusted odds that 6th through 12th graders gets mostly A’s increase by 42 percent if their

fathers have attended one school activity and by 54 percent if their fathers have attended at least two school

activities compared to children who have had contact with their nonresident fathers but whose fathers have

not participated in any of the school activities (model 1). These results pertain to all 6th through 12th

graders with a nonresident father. Among such children who are living with their mothers (whether in a

stepfamily or in a single-parent family), the adjusted odds that they get mostly A’s are also greater if their

nonresident fathers have participated in school activities compared to if they have not (model 2). However,

once mothers’ involvement in school is added to the model, the influence of nonresident fathers’

involvement is reduced (model 3).

Enjoy school. Children in grades 1 through 12 are more likely to enjoy school if their nonresident

fathers are moderately to highly involved in their schools than if their fathers have contact with them but

do not participate in any of the activities. Children also appear to enjoy school more even if their fathers

participate in only one activity than if they participate in none (significant at the 0.10 level). The

relationship between nonresident fathers’ involvement in their children’s schools and children’s enjoyment

of school is weaker when the sample is restricted to children who live with their mothers. However, there

is still some evidence that children are more likely to enjoy school if their fathers are moderately to highly

involved in their schools (significant at the 0.10 level). When looking at the association by children’s 
73

Table 10.— Adjusted odds ratios of selected student outcomes, by nonresident fathers’ contact and level of involvement 

Students in grades 1-12, 1996

Nonresident fathers’ involvement Model 1 Model 2 Model 3 Model 1 Model 2 Model 3 Model 

Grades 1-12 Grades 1-5 

Gets mostly A’s

Moderate/high .......................... 1.39* 1.38* 1.28 1.30 1.35 1.32 1.54

One activity ............................ 1.31* 1.34* 1.30* 1.19 1.20 1.19 1.42

No contact in last year .................... 0.90 0.85 0.86 1.00 0.90 0.91 0.79 

Never contact with child ................... 1.08 1.14 1.14 0.88 0.91 0.91 1.3

Enjoys school

Moderate/high .......................... 1.34* 1.25 1.15 1.07 1.01 0.99 1.70

One activity ............................ 1.22 1.16 1.12 1.27 1.13 1.11 1.22 

No contact in last year .................... 1.23 1.26 1.28 1.06 1.02 1.03 1.40 

Never had contact with child ............... 1.17 1.11 1.12 0.99 0.93 0.93 1.3

Participates in extracurricular activities

Moderate/high .......................... 1.51 1.55 1.40 2.46

One activity ............................ 1.79* 1.80 1.70 2.12

No contact in last year .................... 1.38 1.46 1.55 1.6

Never had contact with child 1.05 1.00 0.98 1.0

Ever repeated a grade

Moderate/high .......................... 0.52* 0.53* 0.59* 0.52 0.55 0.60 0.52

One activity ............................ 0.61* 0.58* 0.61* 0.52 0.49 0.51 0.62 

No contact in last year .................... 0.99 1.07 1.06 1.20 1.23 1.17 0.8

Never had contact with child ............... 0.83 0.84 0.84 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.7

Ever suspended or expelled

Moderate/high .......................... 0.4

One activity ............................ 0.50

No contact in last year .................... 0.8

Never had contact with child ............... 0.62

* p <.05.

NOTES: Contrast group is fathers who had contact with their children in the past year but did not participate in any school activities. Kindergartners were 

five outcomes (ever repeated a grade and participated in extracurricular activities) were asked about them.

Model 1 applies to all children in a given grade level with nonresident fathers.

Models 2 and 3 apply to all children in a given grade level who live with their mothers and have nonresident fathers.

All models control for the following variables: Child characteristics (race/ethnicity, sex); Resident family characteristics (mothers’ or guardians’ education

mother-only versus stepfather family, nonparent/guardian vs. stepfather family); whether nonresident fathers paid any child support in the last year.

Model 3 also controls for the mothers’ involvement in the children’s schools.

See Appendix B, tables B9-B11 for adjusted odds ratios of student outcomes for all factors included in the models.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1996 National Household Education Survey.
74

grade level, there is no association between nonresident fathers’ involvement in their children’s schools and

the odds that children in grades 1 through 5 enjoy school. However, the odds that children in grades 6

through 12 enjoy school are greater among children whose fathers are moderately to highly involved in their

schools compared to children who have had contact with their fathers, but whose fathers have participated

in none of the activities. This association weakens when mothers’ involvement is included in the model.

Participate in extracurricular activities. The information on participation in extracurricular

activities for children in grades 1 through 5 was obtained from parents’ reports. Parents were not asked

about their 6th through 12th graders’ participation in extracurricular activities. The information on such

participation among the older children was obtained from the youth themselves. The results in table 10

indicate that nonresident fathers’ involvement in their children’s schools is associated with a greater odds

that the children are involved in extracurricular activities, particularly among children in grades 6 through

12. Among older children, the association persists even after mothers’ involvement in the schools is

included in the model.

These models also indicate that children who have had no contact with their fathers in more than

a year are more likely to be involved in extracurricular activities than children who have seen their fathers

in the past year but whose fathers participated in none of the school activities. Part of the explanation for

this pattern may be that children are spending time with their nonresident fathers instead of participating

in extracurricular activities. However, it is not possible to determine with the NHES data whether this

supposition is correct or not.

Ever repeated a grade. Nonresident fathers’ involvement in their children’s schools reduces the

odds that children in grades 1 through 12 have ever repeated a grade, even after controlling for mothers’

level of involvement and the other factors in the model. The odds that children in grades 1 through 12 have

ever repeated a grade are 39 percent less if their nonresident fathers have participated in one activity at

school and 48 percent less if their nonresident fathers have participated in at least two activities at their

schools, as compared to their fathers’ simply having had contact with them but not participating in any of

the school activities (model 1). The pattern is similar when the sample is restricted to children living with

their mothers (models 2 and 3). There is a weak association between the odds that children in grades 1

through 5 have ever repeated a grade and the involvement of their nonresident fathers (significant at the 0.10

level). Children in grades 6 through 12, however, are significantly less likely to have ever repeated a grade

if their nonresident fathers are involved in their schools.
75

Ever suspended or expelled. The question on whether the children have ever been suspended or

expelled from school was only asked of children in grades 6 through 12. Nonresident fathers’ involvement

in schools decreases the adjusted odds that children have ever been suspended or expelled from school even

after controlling for mothers’ involvement in school. The adjusted odds that children have ever been

suspended or expelled among all children in grades 6 through 12 who have nonresident fathers’ (model 1)

are 50 percent less if the fathers have participated in only one activity and 59 percent less if the fathers have

participated in two or more of the school activities. 

Nonresident fathers with contact but no involvement in their children’s schools. Another

interesting pattern in the models is that children who have had no contact with their nonresident fathers in

the last year are somewhat more likely to enjoy school than children who have had contact, but whose

fathers have not participated in any of the school activities. This association is strongest among children

in grades 6 through 12 and persists even after controlling for mothers’ involvement in the schools. It may

be that children with some contact with their fathers, but whose fathers are not as involved as the children

might wish, face more ongoing psychological strain that also affects their attitude towards school than

children who do not expect that their fathers are going to be involved because they have not seen them at

all. There is some support for this speculation in the literature (Nord and Zill, 1996). There is other

evidence that children who have not seen their fathers at all in the past year are somewhat better off than

children who have seen their fathers but whose fathers have had no involvement in their schools. Even after

controlling for mothers’ involvement in their schools, the adjusted odds that children have ever been

suspended or expelled are 29 percent less (significant at 0.10 level) if they have not seen their fathers at all

in the past year compared to children who have seen their fathers, but whose fathers have not participated

in any of the school activities. Moreover, for two of the outcomes, getting mostly A’s and having ever

repeated a grade, there is no difference in the outcomes among children whose fathers have had contact with

them but did not participate in any of the school activities and children who have not had any contact with

their fathers in more than a year or who have never had contact with their fathers.

Taken together, these results may offer a clue as to why existing studies yield mixed results on the

importance of nonresident fathers’ involvement in children’s lives: The measures that are used to assess

nonresident fathers’ involvement may not be adequate. Often involvement is measured by the simple

measure days of contact. The results in these models suggest that it is not contact, per se, that is important,
 One reviewer noted that the models presented in table 10 do not include information on nonresident fathers’ frequency of 30

contact with their children. To address the reviewer’s concerns, additional models were estimated that included information on

both nonresident fathers’ frequency of contact with their children and their level of involvement in their children’s schools. 

Model 2 was re-estimated for three of the five outcomes shown in table 10 with information on frequency of contact added to the

existing set of explanatory variables. The outcomes examined were the following: get mostly A’s, ever repeated a grade, and

ever suspended or expelled. The first two outcomes were examined for children in grades 1 through 12. The third outcome was

examined for children in grades 6 through 12.

When both nonresident fathers’ frequency of contact and their level of involvement in their children’s schools are

included in the same model, it is their involvement in school, not their frequency of contact that is important. Nonresident

fathers’ involvement in their children’s schools remains a significant influence on all three outcomes, even after controlling for

their frequency of contact. Nonresident fathers’ frequency of contact with their children, on the other hand, is not a significant

influence on any of the outcomes after controlling for their school involvement.

76

but rather other dimensions of involvement that go along with contact that are beneficial to children’s lives.30

Indeed, contact may be a mixed blessing if the contact is enough to tantalize children but not enough to

satisfy. Although with the data in hand it is not possible to determine what it is about involvement in

schools that is beneficial for children it seems likely that fathers who make the effort to attend school

functions may be demonstrating to their children how much they care about them and the importance that

they place on education. Their involvement may also reflect their level of commitment to their children.

If future studies include more specific measures about what fathers do with their children and the

circumstances under which contact occurs (e.g., is it regular, is it disruptive to the children, how do the

children feel about it), then more consistency in the results might be found.

Overall, the results in this section provide strong evidence that nonresident fathers’ involvement in

their children’s schools is important to children, particularly to older children.
SUMMARY AND DISCUSSION

This report has provided new national data on the extent to which fathers and mothers are involved

in their children’s schools and the relationship of that involvement to five measures of how children are

doing in school. Involvement in school was measured by the number of different types of activities that

parents have participated in since the beginning of the school year. The activities are fairly typical of those

available in most schools: attending a general school meeting, attending a regularly scheduled parentteacher conference, attending a school or class event, and volunteering at the school. Parents were said

to have low involvement in their children’s schools if they had dune none or only one of the four activities.

They were categorized as having moderate involvement if they had done two of the activities. They were

said to be highly involved in their children’s schools if they had done three or more of the activities. In

this section, the major conclusions that can be drawn from the report are presented. Data limitations and

suggestions for future research are also discussed. -

Major Conclusions

Although some of the specifics of the analyses are lost when generalizations are made, taken all

together the results suggest the following broad conclusions.

The involvement of fathers, as well as mothers, in their children’s schools is important for

children’s achievement and behavior.

Children h better in school when their fathers are involved in their schools, regardless of whether

tha”r ftihers live w“th them. The importance of parental involvement in their children’s education has been

recognized for many years. For many policymakers, school administrators, and families, however, this

is ofien assumed to mean that mothers’ involvement in schools is important. This assumption has some

basis in truth, in the sense that mothers are more likely than fathers to be highly involved in their

children’s schools, and the extent of their involvement is strongly related to children’s school performance

and adjustment. However, fathers’ involvement is also important.

In two-parent families, the involvement of fathers exerts a distinct and independent influence on

whether children have ever repeated a grade, get mostly A’s, enjoy school, and participate in

extracurricular activities, even afler controlling for mothers’ involvement in school and other potentially

confounding factors. In father-only families, fathers’ involvement increases the likelihood that their

children get mostly A’s and reduces the likelihood that their children have ever been suspended or

77
expelled.3’ The involvement of nonresident fathers in their children’s schools reduces the likelihood that

their children have ever been suspendd orexpelled from school and that they have ever repeated a grade,

even after controlling for the resident mothers’ level of involvement and other factors.

Fathers in two-parent families have relatively low levels ofinvolvement in their children’s

schools.

Maqfathers in~o-paretifam"lies arenotveq involved intheir children's schools. Nearly half

of fathers in two-parent families have participated in none or only one of the four school activities since

.

the beginning of the school year. In contrast, only 21 percent of mothers in two-parent families, 26

percent of mothers in mother-only families, and 29 percent of fathers in father-only families have

participated in none or only one of the four school activities. It is not structural factors, such as work

commitments, that account for fathers in two-parent families having low levels of involvement because the

data reveal that singie-fathers with custody of their children have levels of involvement that approach those

of mothers. Rather, it appears that two-parent families divide the tasks of their households so that mothers

assume greater responsibility y for child-related duties, including involvement in their children’s schools.

The low participation rates of fathers in two-parent families, however, offer schools an opportunity

to increase overall parental involvement. By targeting fathers, schools may be able to make greater gains

in parental involvement than by targeting mothers or parents, in general. Because mothers already exhibit

relatively high levels of participation in their children’s schools, there is less room to increase their

involvement. The opposite is true of fathers in two-parent families. Fathers in two-parent families,

moreover, exhibit a tendency as their children grow older to become or remain involved in two activities:

attending class or school events, and volunteering at their children’s schools. Schools could encourage

this tendency by offering fathers more opportunities for participation in these two activities. For example,

schools could offer fathers more opportunities to coach sports teams, drama clubs, or other extracurricular

activities; develop special orientation events aimed at fathers; or ask fathers to talk to students about their

work or about specific skills, hobbies, or interests that they have. Because many fathers do not have the

flexibility of being available during school hours, opportunities for involvement in the evenings or

weekends might also help to increase their involvement, as well as that of working mothers.

3*It must be recognized that fathers who have custody of their children area select group of fathers. It is still the case that

following a divorce or nonmarkd birth, mothers typically retain custody of the children. There is evidence in the report that single

fathers who were not involved in their children’s schools were involved with them at home. Thus, the reason that there were fewer

differences in student outcomes by single fathers’ involvement in schools compared to fathers in two-parent families maybe because

single fathers are not representative of all fathers.

78
schools

fathers

Single mothers and fathers are involved in their children’s schools.

Single mothers and single fathers exhibit nearly as high levels of involvement in their children’s

as mothers in two-parent families. Forty-nine percent of single mothers and 46 percent of singIe

are highly involved in their children’s schools compared to 56 percent of mothers in two-parent

families. S~dieshave repeatedly found that parental involvement ishigher intwo-parent than in singleparent families. While true, those findings do not acknowledge the extent to which single parents are

involved in their children’s schools. When the comparisons are based on parents, as is done in this report,

instead of families, the extent to which single parents are involved in their schools is clear. The reason

that single-parent families have lower levels of involvement than two-parent families is primarily due to

the fact that there is only one parent in the household to be involved.

Children benefit when their nonresident fathers participate in their schools, not when their

fathers just maintain contact with them.

The active participation of nonresident fathers in their children’s schools is strongly related to

children’s behavior as measured by whether the children had ever been suspended or expelled and whether

they had ever repeated a grade. However, children who see their nonresident fathers, but whose fathers

do not pa~”cipate in any of their school activities, do no better on any of the outcomes than children who

have not had contact with their fathers in more than a year or who have never had contact with their

fathers. The reason that existing studies are inconclusive as to the importance of nonresident fathers for

their children’s lives may be because the simple measure days of contact is often used to measure

involvement. The results from this study indicate that it is not contact, per se, that is important, but active

participation in children’s school lives that matters when it comes to educational success.

School climate is related to parental involvement.

Mothers and ftihers are more likely to be highly involved in their children’s schools if the schools

welcome parental involvement and make it easy for parents to be involved. Involvement is also higher if

classroom and school discipline are maintained and if teachers and students respect each other. School

climate influences parental involvement even after controlling for school size and type (public or private).

Limitations of the Data

There are two limitations of the data that need to be recognized. First, the NHES :96 is a crosssectional survey, and as such, it is not possible to definitively establish the direction of causation for

79
observed associations. For example, fathers may be more likely to be highly involved because their

children are doing well, or their children maybe doing better because their fathers are highly involved.

Second, the information about children’s school experiences and school climate is based on parents’

reports. It is possible that parent.s who are highly involved are more positive about how their children are

doing and about the schools their children attend, which could account for some of the observed

association between parental involvement and student outcomes and between parental involvement and

school climate. However, it is unlikely that atendency for highly involved parentsto be more positive

about their children’s school experiences or their children’s schools is amajorexplanation of the findings

because theassociation between fathers’ and mothers’ involvement andstudent outcomes is also apparent

for more objective measures (e.g., grade repetition).

Suggestions for Future Research

The limitations discussed above could be overcome by collecting longitudinal data on these topics

and by seeking more objective measures of student outcomes and school climate. Such data could support

and strengthen the results of this research. Longitudinal data would help to sort out the causal direction

of many of the associations identified in this report. By collecting information on student outcomes from

schools as well as parents, researchers would be able to determine whether parents’ participation in school

activities colors their attitudes or their assessment of how their children are doing. Such information

would be useful to other studies, such as this one, which do not have access to school records. It would

also provide a stronger test of the relationship between parental involvement and student outcomes.

Comparing parents’ reports of school climate with schools’ reports of specific practices that they have to

involve parents and schools’ assessments of their own climate would also be informative for the same

reasons.

The results of this report also indicate that it would be useful to develop and collect more

discriminating measures of nonresident fathers’ involvement in their children’s lives in order to understand

more filly the relationship between nonresident fathers’ involvement and children’s well-being. Such data

are much needed because existing research is inconclusive about whether the continued presence of

nonresident fathers in their children’s lives matters.

In addition to collecting new data, there are other research questions that it would be fruitfid to

pursue. An important question concerns why parental involvement in school is important for children.

There are several possible explanations that are not mutually exclusive. One possibility stems from the

notion of social capital. Parental involvement may be important because it makes the children’s worlds

more cohesive; that is, it establishes more links among the people and institutions in the children’s lives

80
that most influence them. A second possibility is that parental involvement changes the children’s school

environments in a way that makes the environments more conducive to learning. Parental involvement

could also influence teachers and administrators so that they intervene early when potential problems in

the children’s performance or behavior are noted. A third possibility is that parental involvement directly

changes children’s behavior through its concrete demonstration to the children that education and school

matter to their parents; that is, children’s motivation and attitudes towards school may change when their

parents become involved in their schools. A fourth possibility is that parents who are involved in their

children’s schools do other things that benefit children and it is these things rather than their involvement

in school that really matters. In exploring this possibility, the authors found that although involved parents

were more likely than less involved parents to participate in other educational activities with their children,

parental involvement in schools still remained important. Of course, there may be other factors,

unexamined in this report, that could explain the association between parental involvement and student

outcomes.

Other research questions would be usefhl to pursue: Is it only the number of activities that parents

are involved in that matters, or are some types of activities, such as volunteering, more important than

others? Is the intensity of parental involvement important? That is, do children fare best if their parents

regularly participate in school activities compared to if they only occasional y participate? Is the influence

of parental involvement in schools on student outcomes greater for more educated parents or is it the same

regardless of parents’ education level? If the influence is due to a transfer of human capital through more

cohesiveness in the children’s immediate worlds, then one might expect that parents’ education levels

would matter. If, on the other hand, parental involvement changes students’ own motivation, then the

parents’ education should not alter the association between their involvement and students’ outcomes.

81
This page left intentionally blank

82
83

METHODOLOGY AND DATA RELIABILITY

Survey Methodology

The 1996 National Household Education Survey (NHES:96) is a telephone survey

conducted by Westat for the U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education

Statistics (NCES). Data collection took place from January through April of 1996. The sample

was selected using list-assisted, random-digit-dialing (RDD) methods. Data were collected using

computer-assisted telephone interviewing (CATI) technology. The sample was drawn from the

civilian, noninstitutionalized population in households in the 50 states and the District of

Columbia.

The Parent/Family Involvement in Education (PFI) and Civic Involvement (CI)

components of the NHES:96, which are the basis of this report, employed a sample of children

and youth from age 3 through 12th grade. Up to three instruments were used to collect

information included in this report. The first instrument was a set of household screening items

(Screener) administered to an adult member of the household, which was used to determine

whether any children of the appropriate ages lived in the household, to collect information on

each household member, and to identify the appropriate parent/guardian to respond for the

sampled child. For sampling purposes, children residing in the household were grouped into

younger children, age 3 through grade 5, and older children, in grades 6 through 12. One younger

child and one older child from each household could have been sampled for the NHES:96. If the

household contained more than one younger child or more than one older child, one from each

category was randomly sampled as an interview subject. For households with youth in 6th

through 12th grade who were sampled for the survey, an interview was conducted with the

parent/guardian most knowledgeable about the care and education of the youth, and following

completion of that interview and receipt of parental permission, an interview also was conducted

with the youth. 

Response Rates

For the NHES:96 survey, Screeners were completed with 55,838 households, of which

19,337 contained one or more sampled children. The response rate for the Screener was 69.9

percent. A total of 20,792 PFI/CI interviews with parents of children age 3 through 12th grade

were completed. The completion rate for this interview (the percentage of interviews completed

with parents of sampled children) was 89.4 percent. Thus, the overall response rate for the PFI/CI

interview with parents (i.e., the product of the Screener response rate and the parent interview

completion rate) was 62.5 percent. A total of 8,403 interviews were conducted with youth in 6th
84

through 12th grade. The completion rate for interviews with youth (i.e., the percentage of

interviews completed with sampled youth) was 76.4 percent. Thus, the response rate was 53.4

percent (the Screener response rate times the youth completion rate).

For the NHES:96, item nonresponse (the failure to complete some items in an otherwise

completed interview) was very low. For some items in the interview, a response of don’t know

or refused was accepted as a legitimate response. Using an imputation method called a “hot-deck

procedure” (Kalton and Kasprzyk, 1986), responses were imputed for missing values (i.e., “don’t

know” or “refused” for items not specifically designated to have those legitimate response

categories, or “not ascertained”). As a result, no missing values remain. Item nonresponse rates

for variables in this report are generally less than 2 percent. The following items used in this

report had nonresponse rates greater than 2 percent. For each item, the variable name, a

description of the variable, number of eligible respondents, and item nonresponse rate are shown.

Variable Label eligible rate

Number nonresponse

Item

SNUDSTUD Number of students at child’s school 17,536 7.11%

SETEADIS Teachers maintain discipline in the classroom 16,151 2.02

SERESPCT Students and teachers respect each other 16,151 2.15

SERPRIDIS Principal maintains discipline in the school 16,151 2.77

SEAFTRHS Child will attend school after high school 9,393 5.16

SECOLLEG Child will graduate from a 4 year college 8,678 11.96

NRLIVEV1 Time since first nonresident parent lived in child’s household 6,803 3.38

NRCONTA1 Child has had contact with first nonresident parent 6,736 2.29

NRLIVAR2 Child’s living arrangements - second nonresident parent 733 3.55

NRLIVEV2 Time since second nonresident parent lived in child’s 624 8.97

household

N4CONTA2 Child has had contact with second nonresident parent 606 5.94

NRLSTCO1 Number given for time since first nonresident parent last saw 2,138 4.96

child

NRLSTNU1 Time since first nonresident parent last saw child 1,817 5.61

NRMEET1 First nonresident parent attended a general school meeting 2,833 5.37

NRSPORT1 First nonresident parent attended a class event 5,526 5.01

NRVOLNT1 First nonresident parent volunteered at school 5,526 5.37

NRBAC1 First nonresident parent attended a back-to-school night 2,693 5.94

NRATTPT1 First nonresident parent attended a PTA meeting 2,477 6.22

NRSUPRT1 First nonresident parent paid child support in past year 7,240 3.26
Variable Label eligible rate

Number nonresponse

Item

85

NRLSTCO2 Number given for time since second nonresident parent last saw 258 17.44

child

NRLSTNU2 Time since second nonresident parent last saw child 186 17.20

NRMEET2 Second nonresident parent attended a general school meeting 201 10.45

NRSPORT2 Second nonresident parent attended a class event 403 10.92

NRVOLNT2 Second nonresident parent volunteered at school 403 10.92

NRBAC2 Second nonresident parent attended a back-to-school night 202 12.87

NRATTPT2 Second nonresident parent attended a PTA meeting 193 14.51

NRSUPRT2 Second nonresident parent paid child support in past year 681 7.20

HINCOME Total household income, grouped 20,792 10.61

HINCMEXT Exact household income to nearest $1,000 3,425 37.05

Data Reliability

Estimates produced using data from the NHES:96 are subject to two types of error,

sampling and nonsampling errors. Nonsampling errors are errors made in the collection and

processing of data. Sampling errors occur because the data are collected from a sample rather

than a census of the population.

Nonsampling Errors

Nonsampling error is the term used to describe variations in the estimates that may be

caused by population coverage limitations and data collection, processing, and reporting

procedures. The sources of nonsampling errors are typically problems like unit and item

nonresponse, the differences in respondents’ interpretations of the meaning of the questions,

response differences related to the particular time the survey was conducted, and mistakes in data

preparation.

In general, it is difficult to identify and estimate either the amount of nonsampling error

or the bias caused by this error. In the NHES:96, efforts were made to prevent such errors from

occurring and to compensate for them where possible. For instance, during the survey design

phase, focus groups and cognitive laboratory interviews were conducted for the purpose of

assessing respondent knowledge of the topics, comprehension of questions and terms, and the

sensitivity of items. The design phase also entailed CATI instrument testing and an extensive,

multi-cycle field test.
86

An important nonsampling error for a telephone survey is the failure to include persons

who do not live in households with telephones. About 93 percent of all students in kindergarten

through 12th grade live in households with telephones. Since the sample for the NHES:96 was

drawn from households with telephones, the estimates were adjusted using control totals from the

Census Bureau’s Current Population Survey (CPS) so that the totals were consistent with the total

number of civilian, noninstitutionalized persons in all (telephone and nontelephone) households.

Another potential source of nonsampling error is respondent bias. Respondent bias occurs

when respondents systematically misreport (intentionally or unintentionally) information in a

study. There are many different forms of respondent bias. One of the best known is social

desirability bias, which occurs when respondents give what they believe is the socially desirable

response. For example, surveys that ask about whether respondents voted in the most recent

election typically obtain a higher estimate of the number of people who voted than do voting

records. Although respondent bias may affect the accuracy of the results, in the voting case the

estimate of the number who voted, it does not necessarily invalidate other results from a survey.

If there are no systematic differences among specific groups under study in their tendency to give

socially desirable responses, then comparisons of the different groups will accurately reflect

differences among the groups. In this report, there may be a tendency for respondents to say that

they participated in a school activity when they did not. There is no a priori reason, however, to

believe that parents in two-parent families are more likely than those in single-parent families or

that mothers are more likely than fathers to give the socially desirable response. Thus, it is likely

that contrasts in this report reflect true differences between fathers and mothers and parents in

single-parent and in two-parent families. 

Another form of respondent bias occurs when respondents give unduly positive

assessments about those close to them. For example, parents may give rosier assessments about

their children’s school experiences than might be obtained from school records or from the

children themselves. It is possible that parents who are highly involved in their children’s schools

are more likely than those who are not so involved to say that their children are doing well in

school or that their children enjoy school. However, it is also possible that parents who are highly

involved in their children’s schools have more information than those who are less involved on

which to base their reports. This information could be positive or negative. Thus, it is equally

conceivable that parents who are highly involved in their children’s schools are less likely than

other parents to give rosy assessments of their children’s school experiences. Readers should be

aware that respondent bias may be present in this survey as in any survey. It is not possible to

state precisely how such bias may affect the results.
87

Sampling Errors and Weighting

The sample of telephone households selected for the NHES:96 is just one of many

possible samples that could have been selected. Therefore, estimates produced from the

NHES:96 sample may differ from estimates that would have been produced from other samples.

This type of variability is called sampling error because it arises from using a sample of

households with telephones, rather than all households with telephones.

The standard error is a measure of the variability due to sampling when estimating a

statistic. Standard errors for estimates presented in this report were computed using a jackknife

replication method. Standard errors can be used as a measure of the precision expected from a

particular sample. The probability that a complete census count would differ from the sample

estimate by less than 1 standard error is about 68 percent. The chance that the difference would

be less than 1.65 standard errors is about 90 percent, and that the difference would be less than

1.96 standard errors, about 95 percent.

Standard errors for all of the estimates in this report have been calculated and are available

from NCES upon request. These standard errors can be used to produce confidence intervals.

For example, it is estimated that 55 percent of fathers in two-parent families with children in

kindergarten through 5th grade attended a meeting at their child’s school, and this statistic has a

standard error of 0.54. Therefore, the estimated 95 percent confidence interval for this statistic

is approximately 54 to 56 percent. 

All of the estimates in this report are based on weighting the observations using the

probabilities of selection of the respondents and other adjustments to partially account for

nonresponse and coverage bias. These weights were developed to make the estimates unbiased

and consistent estimates of the national totals. In addition to properly weighting the responses,

special procedures for estimating the statistical significance of the estimates were employed

because the data were collected using a complex sample design. Complex sample designs, like

that used in the NHES, result in data that violate some of the assumptions that are normally

required to assess the statistical significance of the results. Frequently, the standard errors of the

estimates from the survey are larger than would be expected if the sample was a simple random

sample and the observations were independent and identically distributed random variables.

WesVarPC was used in this analysis to calculate standard errors for both bivariate estimates and

regression analyses.

Replication methods of variance estimation were used to reflect the actual sample design

used in the NHES:96. A form of the jackknife replication method was used to compute

approximately unbiased estimates of the standard errors of the estimates in the report. The

jackknife methods were used to estimate the precision of the estimates of the reported national

totals, percentages, and regression parameters. To test the differences between estimates,
88

Student’s t statistic was employed, using unbiased estimates of standard errors derived by the

replication methods mentioned above.

As the number of comparisons at the same significance level increases, it becomes more

likely that at least one of the estimated differences will be significant merely by chance, that is,

it will be erroneously identified as different from zero. Even when there is no statistical

difference between the means or percentages being compared, there is a 5 percent chance of

getting a significant F or t value from sampling error alone. As the number of comparisons

increases, the chance of making this type of error also increases. A Bonferroni adjustment

procedure was used to correct significance tests for multiple comparisons. This method adjusts

the significance level for the total number of comparisons made with a particular classification

variable. All the differences cited in this report are significant at the 0.05 level of significance

after a Bonferroni adjustment. For example, the total number of comparisons for the

race/ethnicity variable is six (i.e., white, non-Hispanic vs. black, non-Hispanic; white, nonHispanic vs. Hispanic; white, non-Hispanic vs. other race; black, non-Hispanic vs. Hispanic;

black, non-Hispanic vs. other race; Hispanic vs. other race). Thus, the significance criteria for

each race/ethnicity comparison is adjusted to p=0.0083 (i.e., .05 / 6).

Derived Variables

A number of variables used in this report were derived by combining information from

two or more questions in the NHES:96. The derivation of key variables is described in this

section. Original variables from the NHES:96 appear in all upper case letters. The created

variables appear in lower case letters. See the NHES:96 User’s Manual (U.S. Department of

Education, 1997) for the precise wording of the questions.

Parent Involvement Variables

Attendance at a general school meeting. Two versions of the involvement questions were

asked of split-half samples of parent respondents. These two versions differed only with respect

to the questions about attending general school meetings. For this report, the two versions of

items measuring involvement in general school meetings were combined into a single measure

as follows:

Meeting=.

If FSMEETNG=1 or (FSBAC=1 or FSATTPTA=1) then Meeting=1;

else if FSMEETNG=2 then Meeting=2;

else if (FSBAC=2 and FSATTPTA=2) then Meeting=2;
89

Essentially, respondents who received the second version that consisted of two questions

were said to have attended a general school meeting if they had responded yes to either one of the

two types of meetings. They were said not to have attended a general school meeting if they had

not attended either type of meeting.

Number of school activities parents participated in. Information on whether any adult had

attended each of the four types of school activities and which adult had attended was used to

create an indicator of maternal involvement and an indicator of paternal involvement. For each

activity that either the mother or both parents had attended, the indicator of maternal involvement

(Cntmom2) was increased by one. Similarly, for each activity that the father or both parents had

attended, the indicator of father involvement (Cntdad2) was increased by one. Cntmom2 and

Cntdad2 range from 0 (no activities attended) to 4 (all four activities attended). Parallel variables

were created for nonresident fathers and mothers who had had contact with their children in the

past year.

High maternal and paternal involvement. The variables measuring high maternal and

paternal involvement were based on Cntmom2 and Cntdad2. Two dichotomous variables were

created that were assigned a value of 1 if the parents had attended three or four of the activities

and were assigned a value of 0 if they had attended none, one, or only two of the activities.

Parallel variables were created for nonresident fathers and mothers who had had contact with their

children in the past year. For the nonresident parents, however, the dichotomy was between

nonresident parents who had participated in two or more activities in their children’s schools

versus those who had participated in none or only one activity.

Children’s contact with their nonresident parents. The measure on children’s contact with

their nonresident fathers and mothers has the following categories:

! The child has had contact with the nonresident parent within the past year;

! It has been more than one year since the child has had contact with the nonresident

parent;

! The child has never had contact with the nonresident parent; and

! The nonresident parent is deceased.

The NHES:96 contained a variety of items that obtained information on contact with

nonresident parents. The variable on recency of contact with the nonresident parent incorporated

information about which parent the child usually lives with during the school year, the length of

time since the child has lived in the same household with the nonresident parent, whether the

child currently has contact with the nonresident parent, the length of time since the child last had
Not quite 3 percent of children with nonresident parents actually lived most of the school year with that parent. 32

90

contact with the nonresident parent, and whether the nonresident parent is deceased. The SAS

computer code for the first identified nonresident parent is reproduced below:

Nr1stat=.;

If NRLIVAR1=2 or NRLIVAR1=3 then Nr1stat=1;

Else if (NRLIVAR1=4 or NRCONTA1=3) then Nr1stat=4;

Else if (NRLIVAR1=5 or NRLIVEV1=2 or NRCONTA1=4) then Nr1stat=3;

Else if LASTCON1 gt 12 then Nr1stat=2

Else if 1 <= LASTCONT1 <= 12 then Nr1stat=1;

If NR1STAT=. then do;

If NRCONTA1=2 and NRLSTCO1=2 then Nr1stat=3;

Else if NRCONTA1=2 and NRLIVEV1=1 then Nr1stat=2;

Else if NRLIVEV1=0 then Nr1stat=3;

End;

Children were said to have had contact with their nonresident parent within the last year

if any of the following were true:

! The children had lived at least half of the time since the beginning of the school

year with the nonresident parent; or 32

! The children lived mostly with the respondent, but had had contact with their

nonresident parent within the past 12 months.

Children were said to have ever had contact with their nonresident parents, but not to have

had contact in the past 12 months if any of the following were true:

! The children had had contact at some point in their lives, but had not had contact

with their nonresident parent in more than 12 months;

! The children had ever lived with their nonresident parent, but had no current

contact.

Children were said to have never had contact with their nonresident parent if the

respondent reported that the children had never had contact with the nonresident parent.

If the respondent reported that the nonresident parent was deceased, the child was

considered not to have a nonresident parent.
91

A parallel variable, Nr2stat, was created for the second identified nonresident

parent. Once these two variables were created, two additional variables (Momstat and

Dadstat) were created that took the value of Nr1stat or Nr2stat depending upon which one

referred to the nonresident mother or the nonresident father for a particular case.

Family Characteristic Variables

Family type. A measure of the children’s living arrangements was created using

information on the type of father (DADTYPE) and mother (MOMTYPE) present in the

child’s household at the time of the interview. Family type consisted of the following

categories:

! Two biological or adoptive parents;

! Biological mother and step or adoptive father;

! Biological father and step or adoptive mother;

! Biological, adoptive, or stepmother only;

! Biological, adoptive, or stepfather only; and

! Foster or other nonparents only.

Resident parents’ education. Resident fathers’ and resident mothers’ education was

obtained by combining information on the highest grade that the mother or father had

attended and whether the mother or father had a high school diploma or GED. The

variables for mother’s and father’s education consisted of the following categories:

! Less than a high school education;

! High school graduate or obtained GED;

! Some college or vocational school experience;

! Graduated from a 4-year college; and 

! Professional or graduate school experience.

Poverty measure. The poverty measure presented in this chapter was developed by

combining information about household composition and household income. In the

NHES:96, household income was collected in increments of $5,000; however, exact

income to the nearest $1,000 was also collected if the household’s poverty status was

ambiguous based on the increment reported. A household’s size and income was compared

to the poverty thresholds provided by the U.S. Bureau of the Census. A household is

considered poor if:
92

! The number of household members is 2 and household income is $10,259 or

less;

! The number of household members is 3 and household income is $12,158 or less;

! The number of household members is 4 and household income is $16,000 or less;

! The number of household members is 5 and household income is $18,408 or less;

! The number of household members is 6 and household income is $21,000 or less;

! The number of household members is 7 and household income is $24,000 or less;

! The number of household members is 8 and household income is $26,237 or less;

! The number of household members is 9 or more and household income is $31,280 or

less.

Receipt of federal assistance. Respondents were asked: “In the past 12 months, has your

family received funds or services from any of the following programs? How about...(a) Women,

Infants, and Children, or WIC? (b) Food Stamps? (c) AFDC or Aid to Families with Dependent

Children? Respondents who answered “yes” to any of the three sources of assistance were classified

as having received federal assistance in the past 12 months. 

Student Outcome Variables

Gets mostly A’s. If parents reported that their children received mostly A’s in school, this

dichotomous variable was assigned a value of 1. If parents reported that their children received

mostly B’s, C’s , D’s, or F’s in school, the variable was assigned a value of 0. Some children

attended schools that did not give letter grades. For these children, if parents reported that their

children’s work was excellent, the children were coded as receiving mostly A’s, otherwise the

children received a value of 0 on this variable.

Ever repeated a grade. This dichotomous variable is based on SEREPEAT. It takes a value

of 1 if the child has ever repeated a grade and a value of 0 otherwise.

Enjoys school. This dichotomous variable is based on SEENJOY. It takes a value of 1 if the

parent agrees or strongly agrees with the statement that “child enjoys school” and a value of 0

otherwise. The question was not asked of children in kindergarten, so the variable is set to missing

for them.

Ever suspended or expelled. This dichotomous variable is based on SESUSEXP. It takes

a value of 1 if the parent reports that the child has ever been suspended or expelled and a value of

0 otherwise. The question on suspension or expulsion was only asked about children in grades 6

through 12, so the variable is set to missing for all other children.
93

Participates in extracurricular activities. Parents of children in kindergarten through grade

5 were asked whether their children had participated in any school activities such as sports teams,

band or chorus, or safety patrol. They were also asked whether during the school year the children

had participated in any activities outside of school, such as music lessons, church or temple youth

group, scouting, or organized team sports, like soccer. If the parent reported yes to either of these

questions, the child was said to have participated in extracurricular activities, otherwise the child was

said not to have participated. Children in grades 6 through 12 were asked the same two questions.

If the 6th through 12th graders reported that they had participated in school or non-school activities

during the school year, they were said to have participated in extracurricular activities, otherwise

they were said not to have participated.

School Climate Variable

The variable measuring school climate was based on responses to the following question:

! “Tell me whether you strongly agree, agree, disagree, or strongly disagree with the

following statements:

! Child’s teachers maintain good discipline in the classroom;

! In child’s school, most students and teachers respect each other;

! The principal and assistant principal maintain good discipline at school;

! The child’s school welcomes my family’s involvement with the school; and

! The child’s school makes it easy to be involved there.”

These items were first recorded so that strongly agree took a value of 4, agree a value of 3,

disagree a value of 2, and strongly disagree a value of 1. The recorded items were then summed to

create the scale of school climate. The scale ranges from 5 to 20.

Adjusted Odds Ratios

Tables 2 through 10 present the results of the logistic regression models as adjusted odds

ratios. Odds are the ratio of the probability that an event will occur to the probability that it will not.

An odds ratio, as the name implies, is the ratio of two odds. Odds ratios measure the change in the

odds that an event will occur for each unit change in a given variable. When the variable is

dichotomous, the odds ratio measures the change in the odds that is due to belonging to one category

versus the other. Adjusted odds ratios are estimates of the odds ratios after controlling for other

factors.
 In trying to understand the influence of specific factors on the likelihood that an event will occur, it is important to control 33

for potentially confounding factors. According to the results in table 3, after controlling for the other factors in the model, the

adjusted odds that fathers are highly involved in their children’s schools are 28 percent lower, rather than being 10 percent

higher, for fathers of children in grades 6 through 8 relative to those in grades 9 through 12. The change in the interpretation

highlights why it is important to control for potentially confounding factors.

94

An example will help clarify the concepts. The odds that fathers in two-parent families are

highly involved in the schools of their 6th through 8th graders and of their 9th through 12th graders

can be calculated using the descriptive information presented in figure 3. According to figure 3, 25

percent of fathers in two-parent families are highly involved in their 6th through 8th graders’ schools

and 23 percent are highly involved in their 9th through 12th graders’ schools. The odds that fathers

are highly involved in their 6th through 8th graders’ schools are calculated as follows: 0.25/(1-

0.25)=0.33. Similarly, the odds that fathers are highly involved in their 9th through 12th graders’

schools are 0.23/(1-0.23)=0.30. The odds ratio, 0.33/0.30, measures the change in the odds that

fathers are highly involved in their children’s schools that is due to the children’s grade level. In this

case, the odds that fathers are highly involved in their children’s schools are 1.1 times as large for

fathers of 6th through 8th graders as they are for fathers of 9th through 12th graders. This can also

be expressed as a percent change in the odds calculated as (odds ratio-1)*100. A positive value

indicates a percent increase in the odds and a negative value indicates a percent decrease in the odds.

Thus, one can also say that the odds that fathers are highly involved in their children’s schools are

10 percent greater for fathers of 6th through 8th graders than they are for fathers of 9th through 12th

graders. This does not mean, however, that fathers of 6th through 8th graders are 1.1 times more

likely or are 10 percent more likely to be highly involved in their children’s schools than fathers of

9th through 12th graders. In this example, the relative risk or relative probability that they are

33

highly involved is 0.25/0.23 or 1.09, which can also be expressed as a percent change in the relative

risk, as follows: [(relative risk -1)*100=9]. In this case, the odds ratio and the relative risk are close.

This is not always the case, however. Odds ratios will always overstate the difference in relative

risks. It is always true, however, that whenever odds ratios are greater than 1 so is the relative risk.

Similarly, whenever odds ratios are less than 1, so is the relative risk.

The reason that odds ratios are frequently used to summarize the results of logistic regression

models is because odds ratios are easy to obtain and do not depend upon the values of the other

variables in the model. Probabilities, on the other hand, change depending upon where on the

logistic regression curve they are evaluated (that is, they depend upon the values of the other

variables in the model).
95

References

Amato, P.R. (1994). Father-Child Relations, Mother-Child Relations, and Offspring Psychological

Well-Being in Early Adulthood. Journal of Marriage and the Family 56(4): 1031-1042.

Amato, P.R. (1993). Children’s Adjustment to Divorce: Theories, Hypotheses, and Empirical Support.

Journal of Marriage and the Family 55(1): 23-38.

Baugher, E., and Lamison-White, L. (1996). Poverty in the United States: 1995. Current Population

Reports . P60-194. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census.

Becker, G.S. (1981). A Treatise on the Family. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Braver, S.H., Wolchik, S.A., Sandler, I.N., Fogas, B.S., and Zvetina, D. (1991). Frequency of

Visitation by Divorced Fathers: Differences in Reports by Fathers and Mothers. American

Journal of Orthopsychiatry 61(3): 448-453.

Bryk, A.S., Lee, V.E., and Holland, P.B. (1993). Catholic Schools and the Common Good.

Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Chase-Lansdale, L.P., and Hetherington, E.M. (1990). The Impact of Divorce on Life-Span

Development: Short and Long Term Effects. In P.B. Baltes, D.L. Featherman, and R.M. Lerner,

eds. Life-Span Development and Behavior, vol. 10. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum

Associates, 105-150.

Cherlin, A.J. (1992). Marriage, Divorce, Remarriage, revised. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University

Press.

Clinton, W.J. (1995). Supporting the Role of Fathers in Families. Memorandum for the heads of

executive departments and agencies, June 16.

Coleman, J.S. (1991). Parental Involvement in Education. Policy Perspectives. Washington, DC: U.S.

Department of Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement.

Coleman, J.S. (1988). Social Capital in the Creation of Human Capital. American Journal of

Sociology 94: S94-S120.

Coleman, J.S., and Hoffer, T. (1987). Public and Private High Schools: The Impact of Communities.

New York: Basic Books.

Cooksey, E.C., and Fondell, M.M. (1996). Spending Time with His Kids: Effects of Family Structure

on Fathers’ and Children’s Lives. Journal of Marriage and the Family 58(3): 693-707.
96

Crockett, L.J., Eggebeen, D.J., and Hawkins, A.J. (1993). Father’s Presence and Young Children’s

Behavioral and Cognitive Adjustment. Family Relations 14: 355-377.

Crowell, N.A., and Leeper, E.M., eds. (1994). America’s Fathers and Public Policy: Report of a

Workshop. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Literacy and Intrinsic Motivation. Daedalus, Journal of the American

Academy of Arts and Science (Spring): 115-140.

Demos, J. (1986). Past, Present, and Personal: The Family and the Life Course in American History.

New York: Oxford University Press.

Downey, D.B. (1994). The School Performance of Children from Single-Mother and Single-Father

Families: Economic or Interpersonal Deprivation? Journal of Family Issues 15(1):129-147.

Eccles, J.S., and Harold, R.D. (1996). Family Involvement in Children and Adolescents’ Schooling.

In A. Booth and J.F. Dunn, eds. Family-School Links: How Do They Affect Educational

Outcomes? Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 3-34.

Epstein, J.L. (1990). School and Family Connections: Theory, Research, and Implications for

Integrating Sociologies of Education and Family. Marriage and Family Review, vol. 15. New

York: Haworth Press, 99-126.

Epstein, J.L., and Dauber, S.L. (1991). School Programs and Teacher Practices of Parent Involvement

in Inner-City Elementary and Middle Schools. Elementary School Journal 91(3):289-303.

Furstenberg, F.F. (1988). Good Dads -- Bad Dads: Two Faces of Fatherhood. In A.J. Cherlin, ed. The

Changing American Family and Public Policy. Washington, DC: Urban Institute Press.

Furstenberg, F.F., and Cherlin, A.J. (1991). Divided Families: What Happens to Children when

Parents Part. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Furstenberg, F.F., Morgan, S.P., and Allison, P.D. (1987). Paternal Participation and Children’s WellBeing. American Sociological Review 52(5): 695-701.

Furstenberg, F.F., and Nord, C.W. (1985). Parenting Apart: Patterns of Childrearing after Marital

Disruption. Journal of Marriage and the Family 47(4): 893-904.

Furstenberg, F.F., Nord, C.W., Peterson, J.L., and Zill, N. (1983). The Life Course of Children of

Divorce. American Sociological Review 48(5): 656-668.

Garasky, S., and Meyer, D.R., (1996). Reconsidering the Increase in Father-Only Families.

Demography 33(3):385-393.
97

Hansen, K.A. (1995). Geographical Mobility: March 1993 to March 1994. Current Population

Reports, P20-485. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census.

Harris, K.M., and Marmer, J.K. (1996). Poverty, Paternal Involvement, and Adolescent Well-Being.

Journal of Family Issues 17(5): 614-640.

Henderson, A.T. (1987). The Evidence Continues to Grow: Parent Involvement Improves Student

Achievement. Columbia, MD: National Committee for Citizens in Education.

Henderson, A.T., and Berla, N. (1994). A New Generation of Evidence: The Family is Critical to

Student Achievement. Washington, DC: National Committee for Citizens in Education.

Hernandez, D.J. (1996). Trends in the Well-Being of America’s Children and Youth: 1996. Part 2:

Population Change and the Family Environment of Children. Washington, DC: U.S.

Department of Health and Human Services, 235-286.

Hetherington, E.M. (1981). Children and Divorce. In R.W. Henderson, ed. Parent-Child Interaction:

Theory, Research, and Prospects. New York: Academic Press.

Hetherington, E.M. (1979). Divorce: A Child’s Perspective. American Psychologist 34(10): 851-858.

Hetherington, E.M., and Parke, R.D. (1993). Child Psychology: A Contemporary Viewpoint, 4th Ed.

New York: McGraw-Hill.

Kalton, G., and Kasprzyk, D. (1986). The Treatment of Missing Data. Survey Methodology 12:1-16.

Kellaghan T., Sloane, K., Alvarez, B., and Bloom, B.S. (1993). The Home Environment and School

Learning: Promoting Parental Involvement in the Education of Children. San Francisco:

Jossey-Bass Publishers.

Kelly, J.B. (1993). Current Research on Children’s Postdivorce Adjustment: No Simple Answers.

Family and Conciliation Courts Review 31(1): 29-49.

King, V. (1994). Nonresident Father Involvement and Child Well-Being. Journal of Family Issues

15(1): 78-96.

Lamb, M.E. (1997). The Role of the Father in Child Development, 3rd Ed. New York: John Wiley &

Sons, Inc.

Lamb, M.E., ed. (1987). The Father’s Role: Cross-Cultural Perspectives. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence

Erlbaum Associates.

Lamb, M.E., ed. (1986). The Father’s Role: Applied Perspectives. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
98

Lamb, M.E., ed. (1981). The Role of the Father in Child Development. New York: John Wiley &

Sons.

Lee, S.A. (1993). Family Structure Effects on Student Outcomes. In B. Schneider and J.S. Coleman,

eds. Parents, Their Children, and Schools, Ch. 3. Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 43-75.

Loomis, L.S., Vaden-Kiernan, N., and Chandler, K. (Forthcoming). Family Involvement in School

Activities. Statistics in Brief. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, National Center

for Education Statistics.

Marsiglio, W. (1993). Contemporary Scholarship on Fatherhood: Culture, Identity, and Conduct.

Journal of Family Issues 14(4): 484-509.

Marsiglio, W. (1991). Paternal Engagement Activities with Minor Children. Journal of Marriage and

the Family 53(4): 973-986.

McLanahan, S., and Sandefur, G. (1994). Growing Up With a Single Parent: What Hurts, What Helps.

Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Meyer, D.R., and Garasky, S. (1993). Custodial Fathers: Myths, Realities, and Child Support Policy.

Journal of Marriage and the Family 55(1): 73-89.

Nord, C.W., and Zill, N. (1996). Non-Custodial Parents’ Participation in Their Children’s Lives:

Evidence From the Survey of Income and Program Participation, 2 Vols. Final report prepared

for the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation, U.S. Department of Health

and Human Services.

Parke, R.D. (1996). Fatherhood. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Parke, R.D. (1995). Fathers and Families. In M.H. Bornstein, ed. Handbook of Parenting, Vol. 3.

Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Peterson, J.L., and Zill, N. (1986). Marital Disruption, Parent-Child Relationships, and Behavior

Problems in Children. Journal of Marriage and the Family 48(2): 295-307.

Pleck, E.H., and Pleck, J.H. (1997). Fatherhood Ideals in the United States: Historical Dimensions.

In M.E. Lamb, ed. The Role of the Father in Child Development, 3rd Ed., Ch 3. New York:

John Wiley & Sons.

Radin, N. (1981). The Role of the Father in Cognitive, Academic, and Intellectual Development. In

M.E. Lamb, ed. The Role of the Father in Child Development. New York: John Wiley & Sons,

379-427.
99

Ramey, S. (1996). Fathers through the Eyes of Children, Mothers, Observers, and Themselves.

Presentation at the Conference on Developmental, Ethnographic, and Demographic Perspectives

on Fatherhood, the National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, June 11 and 12.

Riley, R.W. (1994). Remarks prepared for the release of Strong Families, Strong Schools and delivered

at the National Press Club, Washington, DC, September 7.

Risman, B.J. (1987). Intimate Relationships From a Microstructural Perspective: Men Who Mother.

Gender and Society 1: 6-32.

Saluter, A.F. (1996). Marital Status and Living Arrangements: March 1994. Current Population

Reports, Series P20-484. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the

Census.

Schaeffer, N.C., Seltzer, J.A., and Klawitter, M. (1991). Estimating Nonresponse and Response Bias:

Resident and Nonresident Parents’ Reports About Child Support. Sociological Methods &

Research 20(1): 30-59.

Scott, J.W., and Tilly, L.A.. (1975). Women’s Work and the Family in Nineteenth-Century Europe.

In C.E. Rosenberg, ed. The Family in History. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania

Press, 145-178.

Scott-Jones, D. (1984). Family Influences on Cognitive Development and School Achievement. In

E.W. Gordon, ed. Review of Research in Education, Vol. 11. Washington, DC: American

Educational Research Association. 

Seltzer, J.A. (1991). Relationships Between Fathers and Children Who Live Apart: The Father’s Role

After Separation. Journal of Marriage and the Family 53(1): 79-101.

Seltzer, J.A., Schaeffer, N.C., and Charng, H.W. (1989). Family Ties After Divorce: The Relationship

Between Visiting and Paying Child Support. Journal of Marriage and the Family 51(4): 1013-

1032.

Stevenson, D.L., and Baker, D.P. (1987). The Family-School Relation and the Child’s School

Performance. Child Development 58: 1348-1357.

Thompson, R.A. (1986). Fathers and the Child’s Best Interests: Judicial Decision Making in Custody

Disputes. In M.E. Lamb, ed. The Father’s Role: Applied Perspectives, Ch. 3. New York: John

Wiley & Sons.

Thomson, E., McLanahan, S.S., and Curtin, R.B. (1992). Family Structure, Gender, and Parental

Socialization. Journal of Marriage and the Family 54(2): 368-378.
100

U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. (1996). Statistical Abstract of the United States:

1996, 116th ed. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. (1997). National Household

Education Survey of 1996: Data File User’s Manual, Vol. 1, NCES 97-425. Washington, DC:

Author.

U.S. Department of Education. (1994). Strong Families, Strong Schools: Building Community

Partnerships for Learning. Washington, DC: Author.

U.S. House of Representatives. (1983). Select Committee on Children, Youth and Families. U.S.

Children and Their Families: Current Conditions and Recent Trends. 98th Congress, 1st

session.

Vaden-Kiernan, N., and Davies, B. (1993). Parent Involvement. Unpublished manuscript. Rockville,

MD: Westat, Inc.

Wallerstein, J.S. (1991). The Long-Term Effects of Divorce on Children: A Review. Journal of the

Academy of Child Adolescent Psychiatry 30(3): 349-360.

Wallerstein, J.S., and Kelly, J.B. (1980). Surviving the Breakup: How Children and Parents Cope with

Divorce. New York: Basic Books.

Zill, N. (1996). Family Change and Student Achievement: What We Have Learned, What It Means

for Schools. In A. Booth and J.F. Dunn, eds. Family-School Links: How Do They Affect

Educational Outcomes? Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 139-174.

Zill, N. (1988). Behavior, Achievement, and Health Problems Among Children in Stepfamilies:

Findings from a National Survey of Child Health. In E.M. Hetherington and J. Arasteh, eds.

The Impact of Divorce, Single Parenting and Stepparenting on Children. Hillsdale, NJ:

Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Zill, N., Morrison, D.R., and Coiro, M.J. (1993). Long-Term Effects of Parental Divorce on ParentChild Relationships, Adjustment, and Achievement in Young Adulthood. Journal of Family

Psychology 7(1): 91-103.

Zill, N., and Nord, C.W. (1994). Running in Place: How American Families Are Faring in a

Changing Economy and an Individualistic Society. Washington, DC: Child Trends, Inc.

Zill, N., Nord, C.W., and Loomis, L.S. (1995). Adolescent Time Use, Risky Behavior, and Outcomes:

An Analysis of National Data. Report prepared for the Office of Human Services Policy, Office

of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation, U.S. Department of Health and Human

Services.
101
APPENDIX A

Detailed Tables on Parental Involvement by Student Grade Level

103

Table 1a.— Percent of children whose parents are involved in their schools, by type of activity participated in,

who participated, and family type: Students in grades K-12, 1996

Parental involvement Total Total Total Mother Father

Two parents One parent

 Total students (thousands) .............. 47,413 33,979 13,433 11,935 1,498

Any adult attended meeting

 Yes ................................ 77.5% 80.8% 69.2% 69.3% 68.3%

Who attended meeting

 No adult attended ..................... 22.5 19.2 30.8 30.7 31.7

 Only mother attended .................. 35.7 25.5 61.6 69.3 NA

 Only father attended ................... 5.0 4.0 7.6 NA 68.3

 Both attended ........................ 36.7 51.3 NA NA NA

Any adult attended conference

 Yes ................................ 72.5 73.3 70.3 71.1 63.9

Any adult who attended conference

 No adult attended ..................... 27.5 26.7 29.7 28.9 36.1

 Only mother attended .................. 42.8 34.7 63.2 71.1 NA

 Only father attended ................... 5.5 4.9 7.1 NA 63.9

 Both attended ........................ 24.2 33.8 NA NA NA

Any adult attended class event

 Yes ................................ 67.4 70.1 60.4 59.8 64.8

Who attended class event

 No adult attended ..................... 32.7 29.9 39.7 40.2 35.2

 Only mother attended .................. 27.3 17.1 53.1 59.8 NA

 Only father attended ................... 4.2 2.9 7.2 NA 64.8

 Both attended ........................ 35.8 50.0 NA NA NA

Any adult acted as volunteer

 Yes ................................ 39.5 43.9 28.2 28.8 23.3

Who acted as volunteer

 No adult volunteered .................. 60.6 56.1 71.8 71.2 76.7

 Only mother volunteered ............... 27.7 28.6 25.6 28.8 NA

 Only father volunteered ................ 2.9 3.0 2.6 NA 23.3

 Both volunteered ..................... 8.9 12.4 NA NA NA

Number of activities at least one

parent participated in

 None ............................... 7.8 6.1 12.0 12.1 11.8

 One ................................ 12.0 11.0 14.5 14.2 16.7

 Two ............................... 23.0 22.2 25.2 25.1 25.4

 Three .............................. 30.3 30.4 30.1 29.9 31.7

 Four ............................... 27.0 30.4 18.3 18.7 14.5
104

Table 1a.— Percent of children whose parents are involved in their schools, by type of activity participated in,

who participated, and family type: Students in grades K-12, 1996—continued

Parental involvement Total Total Total Mother Father

Two parents One parent

Number of activities mother participated in

(regardless of whether father participated)

 None ............................... 9.3% 8.4% 12.1% 12.1% NA

 One ................................ 13.1 12.7 14.2 14.2 NA

 Two ............................... 23.6 23.0 25.1 25.1 NA

 Three .............................. 29.5 29.4 29.9 29.9 NA

 Four ............................... 24.6 26.6 18.7 18.7 NA

Number of activities father participated in

(regardless of whether mother participated)

 None ............................... 24.2 24.7 11.8 NA 11.8

 One ................................ 22.8 23.1 16.7 NA 16.7

 Two ............................... 25.4 25.4 25.4 NA 25.4

 Three .............................. 19.5 18.9 31.7 NA 31.7

 Four ............................... 8.1 7.9 14.5 NA 14.5

Number of activities both parents participated

in

 None ............................... 28.3 28.3 NA NA NA

 One ................................ 24.5 24.5 NA NA NA

 Two ............................... 24.6 24.6 NA NA NA

 Three .............................. 17.0 17.0 NA NA NA

 Four ............................... 5.7 5.7 NA NA NA

NA - Not applicable.

NOTE: Because of rounding, percents may not add to 100.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1996 National Household Education Survey.
105

Table 1b.— Percent of children whose parents are involved in their schools, by type of activity participated in,

who participated, and family type: Students in grades K-5, 1996

Parental involvement Total Total Total Mother Father

Two parents One parent

 Total students (thousands) .............. 22,920 16,363 6,557 5,886 671

Any adult attended meeting

 Yes ................................ 83.5% 87.0% 74.8% 75.2% 71.7%

Who attended meeting

 No adult attended ..................... 16.5 13.1 25.2 24.8 28.3

 Only mother attended .................. 38.2 26.5 67.5 75.2 NA

 Only father attended ................... 4.4 3.2 7.3 NA 71.7

 Both attended ........................ 40.9 57.2 NA NA NA

Any adult attended conference

 Yes ................................ 86.6 88.1 83.0 84.0 74.3

Any adult who attended conference

 No adult attended ..................... 13.4 11.9 17.0 16.0 25.7

 Only mother attended .................. 51.6 42.1 75.4 84.0 NA

 Only father attended ................... 5.4 4.5 7.6 NA 74.3

 Both attended ........................ 29.6 41.5 NA NA NA

Any adult attended class event

 Yes ................................ 72.0 74.6 65.6 65.4 66.9

Who attended class event

 No adult attended ..................... 28.0 25.4 34.4 34.6 33.1

 Only mother attended .................. 33.2 23.0 58.7 65.4 NA

 Only father attended ................... 4.2 3.1 6.9 NA 66.9

 Both attended ........................ 34.6 48.4 NA NA NA

Any adult acted as volunteer

 Yes ................................ 49.6 54.9 36.4 37.4 28.1

Who acted as volunteer

 No adult volunteered .................. 50.4 45.1 63.6 62.6 71.9

 Only mother volunteered ............... 37.4 38.9 33.6 37.4 NA

 Only father volunteered ................ 3.1 3.2 2.9 NA 28.1

 Both volunteered ..................... 9.1 12.8 NA NA NA

Number of activities at least one parent

participated in

 None ............................... 3.6 2.4 6.6 6.1 11.1

 One ................................ 7.3 6.1 10.2 10.3 9.9

 Two ............................... 19.7 17.9 24.4 24.2 25.9

 Three .............................. 32.6 31.8 34.5 34.6 33.2

 Four ............................... 36.8 41.8 24.4 24.9 20.0
106

Table 1b.— Percent of children whose parents are involved in their schools, by type of activity participated in,

who participated, and family type: Students in grades K-5, 1996—continued

Parental involvement Total Total Total Mother Father

Two parents One parent

Number of activities mother participated in

(regardless of whether father participated)

 None ............................... 4.4% 3.9% 6.1% 6.1% NA

 One ................................ 8.4 7.7 10.3 10.3 NA

 Two ............................... 20.9 19.7 24.2 24.2 NA

 Three .............................. 32.5 31.7 34.6 34.6 NA

 Four ............................... 33.8 37.0 24.9 24.9 NA

Number of activities father participated in

(regardless of whether mother participated)

 None ............................... 21.9 22.3 11.1 NA 11.1%

 One ................................ 20.4 20.8 9.9 NA 9.9

 Two ............................... 26.7 26.8 25.9 NA 25.9

 Three .............................. 21.3 20.8 33.2 NA 33.2

 Four ............................... 9.7 9.3 20.0 NA 20.0

Number of activities both parents participated

in

 None ............................... 25.3 25.3 NA NA NA

 One ................................ 22.3 22.3 NA NA NA

 Two ............................... 26.4 26.4 NA NA NA

 Three .............................. 19.2 19.2 NA NA NA

 Four ............................... 6.8 6.8 NA NA NA

NA - Not applicable.

NOTE: Because of rounding, percents may not add to 100.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1996 National Household Education Survey.
107

Table 1c.— Percent of children whose parents are involved in their schools, by type of activity participated in,

who participated, and family type: Students in grades 6-8, 1996

Parental involvement Total Total Total Mother Father

Two parents One parent

 Total students (thousands) .............. 11,098 7,800 3,298 2,867 431

Any adult attended meeting

 Yes ................................ 78.4% 81.9% 70.0% 69.6% 72.6%

Who attended meeting

 No adult attended ..................... 21.7 18.1 30.0 30.4 27.4

 Only mother attended .................. 37.0 27.1 60.5 69.6 NA

 Only father attended ................... 6.2 4.9 9.5 NA 72.6

 Both attended ........................ 35.1 49.9 NA NA NA

Any adult attended conference

 Yes ................................ 69.8 70.5 68.1 68.7 64.2

Any adult who attended conference

 No adult attended ..................... 30.2 29.5 31.9 31.3 35.8

 Only mother attended .................. 42.3 34.9 59.7 68.7 NA

 Only father attended ................... 6.3 5.4 8.4 NA 64.2

 Both attended ........................ 21.2 30.1 NA NA NA

Any adult attended class event

 Yes ................................ 66.4 69.5 58.9 57.7 66.3

Who attended class event

 No adult attended ..................... 33.6 30.5 41.1 42.3 33.7

 Only mother attended .................. 25.5 15.1 50.2 57.7 NA

 Only father attended ................... 4.7 3.0 8.7 NA 66.3

 Both attended ........................ 36.1 51.4 NA NA NA

Any adult acted as volunteer

 Yes ................................ 30.8 34.7 21.5 21.9 18.7

Who acted as volunteer

 No adult volunteered .................. 69.2 65.3 78.5 78.1 81.3

 Only mother volunteered ............... 21.7 22.8 19.0 21.9 NA

 Only father volunteered ................ 2.6 2.6 2.5 NA 18.7

 Both volunteered ..................... 6.5 9.2 NA NA NA

Number of activities at least one parent

participated in

 None ............................... 8.0 5.5 14.0 14.4 10.9

 One ................................ 12.6 12.1 13.9 13.2 18.5

 Two ............................... 26.4 26.4 26.6 27.9 17.9

 Three .............................. 31.9 32.4 30.8 28.9 43.5

 Four ............................... 21.0 23.7 14.8 15.6 9.3
108

Table 1c.— Percent of children whose parents are involved in their schools, by type of activity participated in,

who participated, and family type: Students in grades 6-8, 1996—continued

Parental involvement Total Total Total Mother Father

Two parents One parent

Number of activities mother participated in 

(regardless of whether father participated)

 None ............................... 10.0% 8.4% 14.4% 14.4% NA

 One ................................ 13.7 13.9 13.2 13.2 NA

 Two ............................... 27.0 26.6 27.9 27.9 NA

 Three .............................. 30.2 30.7 28.9 28.9 NA

 Four ............................... 19.1 20.3 15.6 15.6 NA

Number of activities father participated in

(regardless of whether mother participated)

 None ............................... 24.1 24.9 10.9 NA 10.9%

 One ................................ 24.4 24.7 18.5 NA 18.5

 Two ............................... 25.3 25.7 17.9 NA 17.9

 Three .............................. 19.8 18.5 43.5 NA 43.5

 Four ............................... 6.4 6.2 9.3 NA 9.3

Number of activities both parents participated

in

 None ............................... 29.0 29.0 NA NA NA

 One ................................ 25.9 25.9 NA NA NA

 Two ............................... 24.7 24.7 NA NA NA

 Three .............................. 16.3 16.3 NA NA NA

 Four ............................... 4.2 4.2 NA NA NA

NA - Not applicable.

NOTE: Because of rounding, percents may not add to 100.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1996 National Household Education Survey.
109

Table 1d.— Percent of children whose parents are involved in their schools, by type of activity participated in,

who participated, and family type: Students in grades 9-12, 1996

Parental involvement Total Total Total Mother Father

Two parents One parent

 Total students (thousands) .............. 13,395 9,817 3,578 3,182 396

Any adult attended meeting

 Yes ................................ 66.6% 69.7% 58.2% 58.3% 57.8%

Who attended meeting

 No adult attended ..................... 33.4 30.3 41.8 41.7 42.2

 Only mother attended .................. 30.5 22.7 51.8 58.3 NA

 Only father attended ................... 5.1 4.6 6.4 NA 57.8

 Both attended ........................ 31.1 42.4 NA NA NA

Any adult attended conference

 Yes ................................ 50.5 51.0 49.0 49.4 46.0

Any adult who attended conference

 No adult attended ..................... 49.5 49.0 51.0 50.6 54.1

 Only mother attended .................. 28.0 22.2 43.9 49.4 NA

 Only father attended ................... 5.1 5.0 5.1 NA 46.0

 Both attended ........................ 17.4 23.7 NA NA NA

Any adult attended class event

 Yes ................................ 60.2 63.2 52.1 51.2 59.7

Who attended class event

 No adult attended ..................... 39.8 36.8 47.9 48.8 40.3

 Only mother attended .................. 18.8 9.0 45.5 51.2 NA

 Only father attended ................... 3.7 2.7 6.6 NA 59.7

 Both attended ........................ 37.7 51.5 NA NA NA

Any adult acted as volunteer

 Yes ................................ 29.3 32.9 19.3 19.2 20.2

Who acted as volunteer

 No adult volunteered .................. 70.7 67.1 80.7 80.8 79.8

 Only mother volunteered ............... 16.2 15.9 17.1 19.2 NA

 Only father volunteered ................ 2.7 2.9 2.2 NA 20.2

 Both volunteered ..................... 10.3 14.1 NA NA NA

Number of activities at least one parent

participated in

 None ............................... 14.6 12.6 20.3 21.1 13.9

 One ................................ 19.4 18.2 22.7 22.3 26.2

 Two ............................... 25.8 26.0 25.3 24.4 32.8

 Three .............................. 25.0 26.3 21.4 22.0 16.4

 Four ............................... 15.1 16.9 10.3 10.3 10.7
110

Table 1d.— Percent of children whose parents are involved in their schools, by type of activity participated in,

who participated, and family type: Students in grades 9-12, 1996—continued

Parental involvement Total Total Total Mother Father

Two parents One parent

Number of activities mother participated in 

(regardless of whether father participated)

 None ............................... 17.1% 15.8% 21.1% 21.1% NA

 One ................................ 20.5 19.9 22.3 22.3 NA

 Two ............................... 25.4 25.7 24.4 24.4 NA

 Three .............................. 23.7 24.3 22.0 22.0 NA

 Four ............................... 13.3 14.3 10.3 10.3 NA

Number of activities father participated in

(regardless of whether mother participated)

 None ............................... 28.1 28.7 13.9 NA 13.9%

 One ................................ 25.5 25.5 26.2 NA 26.2

 Two ............................... 23.3 22.9 32.8 NA 32.8

 Three .............................. 16.2 16.2 16.4 NA 16.4

 Four ............................... 6.9 6.7 10.7 NA 10.7

Number of activities both parents participated

in

 None ............................... 32.6 32.6 NA NA NA

 One ................................ 27.0 27.0 NA NA NA

 Two ............................... 21.6 21.6 NA NA NA

 Three .............................. 13.9 13.9 NA NA NA

 Four ............................... 5.0 5.0 NA NA NA

NA - Not applicable.

NOTE: Because of rounding, percents may not add to 100.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1996 National Household Education Survey.
111

Table 2a.— Percent of children whose parents are involved in their schools, by level of involvement, family type, and 

family characteristics: Students in grades K-12, 1996

Parental involvement (thousands) Low High Low High Low High 

Total

number of

students

Two parents Sing

Mother's Father's Mother's 

involvement involvement involvement 

 Total students ............................ 47,413 21.0% 56.0% 47.8% 26.8% 26.3% 48.6% 

Grade grouping

 Kindergarten - 5th grade .................... 22,920 11.6 68.8 43.1 30.1 16.3 59.5 

 6th -8th grade ............................ 11,098 22.3 51.0 49.5 24.7 27.7 44.5 

 9th - 12th grade .......................... 13,395 35.7 38.6 54.2 22.9 43.3 32.2 

Child's sex

 Male ................................... 24,572 22.2 55.0 47.3 27.6 26.5 47.8 

 Female ................................. 22,842 19.7 57.1 48.3 25.9 26.0 49.5 

Child's race

 White, non-Hispanic ....................... 32,374 18.4 59.4 44.6 28.9 23.1 53.1 

 Black, non-Hispanic ....................... 6,934 28.9 45.5 58.3 20.4 28.4 45.7 

 Hispanic ................................ 6,108 29.8 44.2 59.7 17.7 29.6 41.3 

 Other, non-Hispanic ....................... 1,997 26.4 50.0 49.9 27.4 33.7 48.6 

Mother’s education

 Less than high school ...................... 5,504 43.1 30.8 73.8 10.3 40.1 32.1 

 High school or equivalent ................... 16,851 23.9 50.8 53.8 21.2 28.0 45.5 

 VoTech-some college ...................... 13,507 18.3 59.2 45.1 28.7 20.8 56.2 

 Bachelor's degree ......................... 6,178 12.1 69.3 33.3 38.0 13.2 64.0 

 Graduate/professional school ................ 3,875 10.0 70.3 29.8 40.8 17.9 61.7 

Father’s education

 Less than high school ...................... 3,912 38.3 35.3 72.4 9.6 NA NA 

 High school or equivalent ................... 12,042 23.9 50.7 54.7 20.8 NA NA 

 VoTech-some college ...................... 9,158 19.3 58.2 45.4 28.3 NA NA 

 Bachelor's degree ......................... 5,523 14.3 66.9 34.8 37.0 NA NA 

 Graduate/professional school ................ 4,841 11.0 68.8 30.6 40.7 NA NA 

Work status-mother

 35 hours/week or more ..................... 22,333 22.5 52.1 45.9 28.2 25.5 49.5 

 Less than 35 hours/week ................... 10,108 15.7 65.2 43.6 30.1 24.2 51.2 

 Looking for work ......................... 2,122 28.1 47.1 60.3 17.8 25.3 51.6 

 Not in labor force ......................... 11,351 22.5 55.2 53.7 22.1 30.0 43.2 
112

Table 2a.— Percent of children whose parents are involved in their schools, by level of involvement, family type, and sele

family characteristics: Students in grades K-12, 1996—continued

Parental involvement (thousands) Low High Low High Low High 

Total

number of

students

Two parents Sing

Mother's Father's Mother's 

involvement involvement involvement 

Work status-father

 35 hours/week or more ..................... 31,239 19.5 57.7 46.6 27.4 NA NA 

 Less than 35 hours/week ................... 1,281 29.8 45.9 51.5 29.8 NA NA 

 Looking for work ......................... 797 26.8 40.8 55.7 19.6 NA NA 

 Not in labor force ......................... 2,161 35.5 42.3 60.9 18.1 NA NA 

Own/rent home, other arrangement

 Own home .............................. 30,522 18.7 59.4 44.3 29.3 21.2 54.6 

 Rent home .............................. 14,735 29.6 43.8 59.7 18.0 29.4 45.2 

 Other arrangement ........................ 2,156 21.0 54.1 53.3 24.5 23.6 49.6 

Poverty status

 About poverty threshold .................... 37,202 18.9 58.5 44.8 28.6 22.7 51.6 

 Below poverty threshold ................... 10,211 35.2 39.1 68.1 14.3 30.3 45.3 

Family received federal assistance in past 12

months

1

 No ..................................... 37,814 19.3 58.0 45.1 28.4 23.8 51.4 

 Yes .................................... 9,599 34.0 40.8 68.0 14.5 29.2 45.2 

Number of children in household less than 18

2

 None ................................... 760 41.7 36.3 55.8 23.0 46.8 30.9 

 One .................................... 9,649 25.7 49.7 48.8 26.6 26.4 50.2 

 Two ................................... 18,867 18.0 59.5 43.5 29.7 23.6 49.3 

 Three .................................. 11,760 19.6 58.3 49.9 25.1 26.3 48.2 

 Four or more ............................. 6,376 24.6 51.3 54.5 21.8 30.1 47.0 

NA - Not applicable.

— Too few cases for a reliable estimate.

Family received AFDC, WIC, or food stamps in past 12 months.

1

The “None” category consists of households in which all the children are 18 years or older.

2

NOTE: Because of rounding, details may not add to totals. Percents are computed across rows but do not add to 100 because percent with moderate levels o

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1996 National Household Education Survey.
113

Table 2b.— Percent of children whose parents are involved in their schools, by level of involvement, family type, and sele

family characteristics: Students in grades K-5, 1996

Parental involvement (thousands) Low High Low High Low High 

Total

number of

students

Two parents Sing

Mother's Father's Mother's 

involvement involvement involvement 

 Total students ........................... 22,920 11.6% 68.8% 43.1% 30.1% 16.3% 59.5% 

Child's sex

 Male ................................... 11,787 12.5 68.2 43.2 31.1 15.7 59.2 

 Female ................................. 11,132 10.6 69.4 43.1 29.0 17.0 59.8 

Child's race

 White, non-Hispanic ....................... 15,344 9.1 72.7 40.1 32.3 11.1 67.2 

 Black, non-Hispanic ....................... 3,571 19.9 56.6 50.1 24.6 22.2 53.3 

 Hispanic ................................ 3,024 19.5 54.7 55.7 20.3 16.0 53.7 

 Other, non-Hispanic 979 14.5 64.3 45.3 30.4 24.8 51.2 

Mother’s education

 Less than high school ...................... 2,704 30.2 40.4 71.5 11.6 30.8 39.0 

 High school or equivalent ................... 8,136 12.2 64.9 48.1 25.3 15.7 58.1 

 VoTech-some college ...................... 6,686 10.2 71.2 40.2 31.9 12.8 66.6 

 Bachelor's degree ......................... 3,083 5.3 82.1 28.5 41.4 6.4 75.0 

 Graduate/professional school ................ 1,637 4.0 84.0 27.6 43.4 2.0 85.1 

Father’s education

 Less than high school ...................... 1,876 25.0 46.6 68.3 10.5 NA NA 

 High school or equivalent ................... 6,073 13.3 63.5 49.3 25.2 NA NA 

 VoTech-some college ...................... 4,312 9.7 70.2 39.6 31.9 NA NA 

 Bachelor's degree ......................... 2,653 6.3 80.8 29.5 41.0 NA NA 

 Graduate/professional school ................ 2,117 5.4 84.7 28.0 43.7 NA NA 

Work status-mother

 35 hours/week or more ..................... 9,606 12.5 63.9 39.8 32.8 15.8 60.5 

 Less than 35 hours/week ................... 5,188 7.1 78.5 39.7 33.5 15.1 64.0 

 Looking for work ......................... 1,244 21.5 59.1 56.6 22.2 15.3 59.8 

 Not in labor force ......................... 6,209 13.1 67.9 49.4 24.2 18.6 54.4 
114

Table 2b.— Percent of children whose parents are involved in their schools, by level of involvement, family type, and sele

family characteristics: Students in grades K-5, 1996—continued

Parental involvement (thousands) Low High Low High Low High 

Total

number of

students

Two parents Sing

Mother's Father's Mother's 

involvement involvement involvement 

Work status-father

 35 hours/week or more ..................... 15,117 10.2 70.8 42.2 30.5 NA NA 

 Less than 35 hours/week ................... 628 19.7 52.7 46.7 33.6 NA NA 

 Looking for work ......................... 356 19.1 49.7 49.8 19.8 NA NA 

 Not in labor force ......................... 932 26.3 52.7 53.8 25.3 NA NA 

Own/rent home, other arrangement

 Own home .............................. 13,893 9.2 73.4 38.7 33.0 9.4 69.5 

 Rent home .............................. 7,891 19.2 55.0 55.6 21.4 19.9 54.7 

 Other arrangement ........................ 1,136 10.2 65.5 50.1 28.6 11.5 63.7 

Poverty status

 About poverty threshold .................... 17,362 9.3 72.1 39.6 32.1 12.0 64.5 

 Below poverty threshold ................... 5,558 25.0 49.1 64.1 18.1 20.2 54.9 

Family received federal assistance in past 12

months

1

 No ..................................... 17,448 9.3 71.9 39.4 32.3 12.6 63.2 

 Yes .................................... 5,472 25.3 49.8 65.5 16.9 19.8 56.1 

Number of children in household less than 18

2

 None ................................... — — — — — — — 

 One .................................... 3,341 12.3 65.7 41.4 31.5 13.6 64.6 

 Two ................................... 9,611 9.8 71.7 39.1 34.0 14.7 59 

 Three .................................. 6,497 11.5 68.1 45.4 27.3 18.5 58.6 

 Four or more ............................. 3,468 16.2 64 51.5 23.3 20.5 55.1 

NA - Not applicable.

— Too few cases for a reliable estimate.

Family received AFDC, WIC, or food stamps in past 12 months.

1

The “None” category consists of households in which all the children are 18 years or older.

2

NOTE: Because of rounding, details may not add to totals. Percents are computed across rows but do not add to 100 because percent with moderate levels o

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1996 National Household Education Survey.
115

Table 2c.— Percent of children whose parents are involved in their schools, by level of involvement, family type, and sele

family characteristics: Students in grades 6-8, 1996

Parental involvement (thousands) Low High Low High Low High 

Total

number of

students

Two parents Sing

Mother's Father's Mother's 

involvement involvement involvement 

 Total students ............................ 11,098 22.3% 51.0% 49.5% 24.7% 27.7% 44.5

Child's sex

 Male ................................... 5,729 23.6 49.9 47.5 24.8 29.3 44.0 

 Female ................................. 5,369 20.9 52.2 51.7 24.7 26.1 44.9 

Child's race

 White, non-Hispanic ....................... 7,586 19.5 54.3 45.8 27.0 22.5 50.7 

 Black, non-Hispanic ....................... 1,603 29.8 40.5 66.1 17.2 29.3 38.7 

 Hispanic ................................ 1,445 31.5 41.3 61.0 15.1 37.5 35.7 

 Other, non-Hispanic ....................... 465 30.6 42.8 50.7 27.1 41.6 47.5 

Mother’s education

 Less than high school ...................... 1,326 47.0 27.1 78.5 7.3 46.1 27.8 

 High school or equivalent ................... 3,916 24.1 45.2 54.3 19.2 31.2 39.0 

 VoTech-some college ...................... 3,039 18.8 55.7 45.3 27.6 17.5 53.9 

 Bachelor's degree ......................... 1,420 14.9 62.2 36.5 36.1 12.1 61.5 

 Graduate/professional school ................ 965 10.6 67.3 33.0 37.9 23.9 59.3 

Father’s education

 Less than high school ...................... 978 41.3 32.7 75.1 9.0 NA NA 

 High school or equivalent ................... 2,721 25.5 45.6 55.1 17.6 NA NA 

 VoTech-some college ...................... 2,172 19.9 55.1 45.7 29.6 NA NA 

 Bachelor's degree ......................... 1,216 14.0 62.8 35.6 36.3 NA NA 

 Graduate/professional school ................ 1,144 12.0 59.3 36.8 33.8 NA NA 

Work status-mother

 35 hours/week or more ..................... 5,471 23.4 50.3 45.8 27.4 24.1 46.8 

 Less than 35 hours/week ................... 2,264 17.6 56.7 46.8 25.9 22.1 53.2 

 Looking for work ......................... 485 24.0 36.3 60.9 11.7 38.3 43.1 

 Not in labor force ......................... 2,448 24.6 49.0 57.9 20.1 39.2 30.2 
116

Table 2c.— Percent of children whose parents are involved in their schools, by level of involvement, family type, and 

family characteristics: Students in grades 6-8, 1996—continued

Parental involvement (thousands) Low High Low High Low High 

Total

number of

students

Two parents Sing

Mother's Father's Mother's 

involvement involvement involvement 

Work status-father

 35 hours/week or more ..................... 7,216 21.0 52.3 48.2 25.5 NA NA 

 Less than 35 hours/week ................... 284 29.2 47.3 54.7 27.0 NA NA 

 Looking for work ......................... 216 17.1 47.1 47.1 27.9 NA NA 

 Not in labor force ......................... 514 40.9 35.4 67.1 10.6 NA NA 

Own/rent home, other arrangement

 Own home .............................. 7,235 19.3 54.1 46.3 27.3 19.2 53.1 

 Rent home .............................. 3,325 34.7 38.7 60.8 15.0 33.1 39.3 

 Other arrangement ........................ 537 18.7 52.7 56.1 25.1 26.8 41.9 

Poverty status

 About poverty threshold .................... 8,712 20.8 52.9 46.8 26.8 18.7 51.0 

 Below poverty threshold ................... 2,386 32.9 38.1 68.2 10.6 37.8 37.1 

Family received federal assistance in past 12

months

1

 No ..................................... 8,978 20.8 52.7 47.4 26.0 21.5 50.6 

 Yes .................................... 2,120 35.6 37.0 67.9 14.3 35.9 36.3 

Number of children in household less than 18

2

 None ................................... — — — — — — — 

 One .................................... 2,048 22.9 49.8 48.0 24.4 26.3 47.7 

 Two ................................... 4,587 20.1 53.0 46.3 25.9 24.5 45.1 

 Three .................................. 2,859 22.2 54.1 51.5 25.2 27.0 43.6 

 Four or more ............................. 1,599 28.7 41.0 57.1 21.0 38.3 39.2 

NA - Not applicable.

— Too few cases for a reliable estimate.

Family received AFDC, WIC, or food stamps in past 12 months.

1

The “None” category consists of households in which all the children are 18 years or older.

2

NOTE: Because of rounding, details may not add to totals. Percents are computed across rows but do not add to 100 because percent with moderate levels o

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1996 National Household Education Survey.
117

Table 2d.— Percent of children whose parents are involved in their schools, by level of involvement, family type, and 

family characteristics: Students in grades 9-12, 1996

Parental involvement (thousands) Low High Low High Low High 

Total

number of

students

Two parents Sing

Mother's Father's Mother's 

involvement involvement involvement 

 Total students ............................ 13,395 35.7% 38.6% 54.2% 22.9% 43.3% 32.2

Child's sex

 Male ................................... 7,055 36.8 37.7 53.9 24.2 44.4 29.5 

 Female ................................. 6,340 34.4 39.7 54.5 21.4 42.3 35.0 

Child's race

 White, non-Hispanic ....................... 9,443 32.7 41.7 51.0 24.8 42.9 32.5 

 Black, non-Hispanic ....................... 1,760 42.9 30.9 65.9 15.9 42.4 34.6 

 Hispanic ................................ 1,639 48.6 26.1 66.4 15.1 46.2 24.9 

 Other, non-Hispanic ....................... 553 44.5 30.0 57.5 22.1 42.3 45.3 

Mother’s education

 Less than high school ...................... 1,473 62.7 17.3 73.5 11.0 52.9 22.4 

 High school or equivalent ................... 4,799 42.5 32.6 62.5 16.1 49.1 26.9 

 VoTech-some college ...................... 3,781 31.8 41.2 53.3 24.0 38.9 38.5 

 Bachelor's degree ......................... 1,674 22.2 51.4 39.6 33.3 26.0 47.1 

 Graduate/professional school ................ 1,272 17.6 53.8 30.4 39.7 28.4 41.6 

Father’s education

 Less than high school ...................... 1,058 58.7 18.0 77.1 8.5 NA NA 

 High school or equivalent ................... 3,249 42.5 30.8 64.4 15.2 NA NA 

 VoTech-some college ...................... 2,673 34.4 41.5 54.6 21.5 NA NA 

 Bachelor's degree ......................... 1,654 27.2 47.5 42.5 31.2 NA NA 

 Graduate/professional school ................ 1,580 17.7 54.1 29.8 41.7 NA NA 

Work status-mother

 35 hours/week or more ..................... 7,257 34.6 38.4 53.8 22.9 41.1 35.7 

 Less than 35 hours/week ................... 2,656 30.8 46.7 48.5 27.3 46.8 20.3 

 Looking for work ......................... 393 51.0 27.6 69.8 13.1 45.1 32.3 

 Not in labor force ......................... 2,694 42.6 31.5 59.9 19.1 47.7 28.9 
118

Table 2d.— Percent of children whose parents are involved in their schools, by level of involvement, family type, and 

family characteristics: Students in grades 9-12, 1996—continued

Parental involvement (thousands) Low High Low High Low High 

Total

number of

students

Two parents Sing

Mother's Father's Mother's 

involvement involvement involvement 

Work status-father

 35 hours/week or more ..................... 8,906 34.3 39.7 52.7 23.8 NA NA 

 Less than 35 hours/week ................... 370 47.0 33.7 57.1 25.6 NA NA 

 Looking for work ......................... 224 48.2 20.6 73.3 11.6 NA NA 

 Not in labor force ......................... 714 43.7 33.6 65.7 13.8 NA NA 

Own/rent home, other arrangement

 Own home .............................. 9,394 32.4 42.4 51.1 25.3 37.8 36.6 

 Rent home .............................. 3,519 49.1 22.6 68.2 12.8 47.0 29.7 

 Other arrangement ........................ 483 48.9 28.6 58.1 14.0 47.5 26.2 

Poverty status

 About poverty threshold .................... 11,128 32.8 41.2 51.5 24.5 40.3 34.1 

 Below poverty threshold ................... 2,268 60.4 17.2 76.9 9.2 48.6 29.0 

Family received federal assistance in past 12

months

1

 No ..................................... 11,389 33.7 40.4 52.2 24.3 41.0 35.8 

 Yes .................................... 2,007 56.9 19.5 75.0 8.3 47.7 25.6 

Number of children in household less than 18

2

 None ................................... 752 41.8 36.1 55.7 23.1 47.6 29.8 

 One .................................... 4,260 35.3 39.7 53.7 24.5 41.0 35.4 

 Two ................................... 4,669 32.4 40.9 49.8 24.6 41.6 32.8 

 Three .................................. 2,404 38.2 37.0 60.1 19.3 47.6 24.7 

 Four or more ............................. 1,310 40.8 31.5 59.2 18.8 48.1 32.9 

NA - Not applicable.

— Too few cases for a reliable estimate.

Family received AFDC, WIC, or food stamps in past 12 months.

1

The “None” category consists of households in which all the children are 18 years or older.

2

NOTE: Because of rounding, details may not add to totals. Percents are computed across rows but do not add to 100 because percent with moderate levels o

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1996 National Household Education Survey.
119

Table 3b. — Percent of children with selected sources of social capital in their homes, by level of parental involvement in their 

*

Students in grades K-5, 1996

Parental involvement Total Low High Low High Low Hig

Two parents S

Mother's Father's Mother's 

involvement involvement involvement 

 Total students (thousands) ........... 22,920 1,894 11,250 7,060 4,922 961 3,50

In the past week, someone in family

 Told child a story .................. 67.8% 55.2% 72.0% 63.8% 73.9% 57.8% 72

 Involved child in household chores .... 97.3 94.2 98.1 96.0 98.8 93.2 98

 Work on arts/crafts project w/ child .... 64.9 56.9 67.6 61.7 70.6 50.9 66

 Played a game or sport with child ..... 90.6 89.7 92.7 89.6 93.1 77.4 9

 Worked on a project with child ....... 64.8 52.9 69.8 60.1 72.4 46.7 65

In the past month, someone in family

 Visited the library with child ......... 49.6 31.6 58.8 43.7 61.5 26.3 5

 Went to live concert/show with child ... 32.2 17.8 36.8 25.3 41.7 20.9 40

 Visited museum or historical

 site with child .................... 20.9 11.2 24.9 15.1 28.7 12.7 24

 Visited zoo with child ............... 14.8 9.5 15.1 11.5 15.8 14.3 19

 Talked about family history/

 ethnic heritage with child ........... 57.5 47.1 59.0 52.2 61.3 54.8 66

 Attended community event w/ child .... 53.3 37.8 61.2 47.0 65.5 35.7 53

 Attended athletic/sport event w/ child . . 36.9 23.7 45.1 29.7 51.5 14.1 35

How often parent helps with homework

 Never .......................... 1.9 3.6 1.4 2.5 0.7 3.0 

 Less than 1 time/week ............. 8.2 10.8 7.6 8.8 6.9 8.9 7

 1-2 times/week ................... 29.1 29.3 29.9 28.7 29.3 27.1 28

 3-4 times/week ................... 40.0 36.5 41.6 39.9 43.1 34.3 40

 5 times/week or more .............. 20.8 19.8 19.5 20.2 20.0 26.8 22

Family rules

 Rules for bedtime .................. 97.2 94.2 97.8 96.7 98.4 97.0 97

 Rule for amount of TV .............. 79.7 75.5 81.4 77.8 83.5 76.7 82

 Rules about which TV programs ...... 92.1 88.1 94.6 92.2 93.9 84.3 92

*

 There is no table 3a because different sets of questions were asked depending upon the grade level of the child. Thus no set applied to all children in grades 

NOTE: Because of rounding, percents may not add to 100.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1996 National Household Education Survey.
120

Table 3c.— Percent of children with selected sources of social capital in their homes, by level of parental involvement in their 

Students in grades 6-8, 1996

Parental involvement Total

Two parents 

Mother's Father's Mother's 

involvement involvement involvement 

Low High Low High Low Hi

 Total students (thousands) ............... 11,098,033 1,741 3,981 3,864 1,930 793 1,2

In the past week, someone in family

 Played game/sport with youth ............ 82.6% 75.7% 86.8% 80.0% 88.2% 73.0% 8

 Worked on project with youth ............ 52.7 46.4 59.1 49.1 61.0 32.6 5

 Discussed managing time with youth ....... 76.6 72.4 79.7 74.8 80.7 72.4 8

In the past month, someone in family

 Talked with youth about future high

 school class/plans after high school ....... 64.8 58.5 69.1 63.2 69.3 59.0 7

How often parent helps with homework

 Never .............................. 7.1 11.6 3.5 7.7 3.2 19.2 

 Less than 1 time/week ................ 17.7 19.6 15.8 18.0 15.5 20.9 1

 1-2 times/week ..................... 43.6 42.5 44.8 46.9 42.8 38.1 3

 3-4 times/week ..................... 23.0 21.5 25.4 19.9 27.3 13.9 2

 5 times/week or more ................ 8.6 4.9 10.5 7.5 11.2 7.9 

Parent aspirations

 Youth will attend school after high school ... 91.7 86.8 95.5 89.1 96.1 84.4 9

 Youth will graduate from 4-year college .... 85.8 77.7 91.7 82.8 92.0 75.9 8

Parent positive behaviors

 Adult belongs to organization,

 community group, or other .............. 66.6 55.3 78.4 63.0 79.8 36.0 6

 How often parent attends religious services

 Never .............................. 13.2 19.5 8.5 15.4 8.8 18.7 1

 Infrequently ......................... 41.5 43.3 35.7 41.3 31.8 56.4 4

 Nearly every week or more ............. 45.3 37.2 55.8 43.2 59.4 24.9 4

 Adult volunteers in community ........... 56.4 43.7 72.5 52.5 74.6 25.4 6

NOTE: Because of rounding, percents may not add to 100.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1996 National Household Education Survey.
121

Table 3d.— Percent of children with selected sources of social capital in their homes, by level of parental involvement in their 

Students in grades 9-12, 1996

Parental involvement Total Low High Low High Low Hi

Two parents 

Mother's Father's Mother's 

involvement involvement involvement 

 Total students (thousands) ............... 13,395 3,505 3,793 5,317 2,248 1,379 1,0

In the past week, someone in family

 Played game/sport with youth ............ 66.7% 60.4% 71.8% 62.5% 75.6% 59.0% 7

 Worked on project with youth ............ 35.6 33.1 40.0 33.8 42.2 26.4 4

 Discussed managing time with youth ....... 76.2 72.0 82.5 73.7 82.0 69.6 7

In the past month, someone in family

 Talked with youth about future high

 school class/plans after high school ....... 86.2 84.0 90.0 85.0 91.7 76.7 8

How often parent helps with homework

 Never ............................. 23.5 29.6 17.9 27.2 15.0 31.6 2

 Less than 1 time/week ................ 28.7 29.6 31.8 30.7 29.0 24.8 2

 1-2 times/week ..................... 37.2 32.4 37.6 33.8 41.0 33.0 4

 3-4 times/week ..................... 8.2 6.5 9.6 6.6 10.9 8.4 1

 5 times/week or more ................ 2.4 1.9 3.1 1.6 4.0 2.1 

Parent aspirations

 Youth will attend school after high school ... 91.6 87.4 97.1 89.2 98.2 84.0 9

 Youth will graduate from 4-year college .... 79.9 73.2 89.4 75.9 91.4 69.4 8

Parent positive behaviors

 Adult belongs to organization,

 community group, or other .............. 70.7 64.2 85.4 68.2 86.7 46.6 7

 How often parent attends religious services

 Never .............................. 13.0 17.5 8.1 15.9 7.3 22.1 

 Infrequently ......................... 39.2 37.9 32.8 37.9 31.8 45.0 4

 Nearly every week or more ............. 47.5 44.6 59.1 46.3 60.9 32.9 4

 Adult volunteers in community ........... 56.2 42.4 78.5 49.0 82.3 30.5 6

NOTE: Because of rounding, percents may not add to 100.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1996 National Household Education Survey.
122

Table 4a.— Percent of children whose parents are involved in their schools, by level of involvement, family type, and

selected school and community characteristics: Students in grades K-12, 1996

Parental involvement (thousands) Low High Low High Low High Low High

Total number

of students

Two parents Single parent

Mother's Father's Mother's Father's

involvement involvement involvement involvement

 Total students .............. 47,413 21.0% 56.0% 47.8% 26.8% 26.3% 48.6% 28.4% 46.1%

Type of school child attends

 Total public schools ......... 42,232 22.9 52.9 50.5 24.2 27.2 47.1 30.1 43.5

 Assigned ................. 35,589 23.1 52.2 50.8 23.7 27.2 46.6 30.5 42.0

 Chosen .................. 6,643 21.6 57.6 49.1 27.5 27.3 48.8 28.1 50.8

 Total private schools ........ 5,181 7.5 77.6 28.5 44.7 13.0 69.3 12.9 71.1

 Church related ............ 4,012 5.9 80.6 26.8 46.5 8.7 75.8 14.5 71.1

 Not church related ......... 1,169 12.8 67.1 34.6 38.1 24.9 51.0 6.8 70.8

Number of students at child's

school

 Under 300 ................. 8,541 14.3 66.5 41.0 31.2 19.6 52.1 24.5 50.9

 300-599 .................. 18,385 18.3 59.3 46.5 28.6 22.5 52.2 25.3 49.9

 600-999 .................. 10,443 22.5 53.2 51.0 24.1 29.4 48.7 25.8 45.8

 1,000 or more .............. 10,044 30.2 43.6 52.8 22.5 35.3 39.1 40.7 35.2

Live in/out urbanized area

 Urban-inside ............... 28,913 20.2 56.9 45.8 27.5 27.4 47.2 24.2 54.6

 Urban-outside .............. 6,431 18.9 57.6 46.9 28.1 21.7 53.6 27.7 34.2

 Rural ..................... 12,068 23.8 53.2 52.5 24.6 25.0 50.9 40.5 30.0

NOTE: Because of rounding, details may not add to totals. Percents are computed across rows but do not add to 100 because percent with moderate

levels of involvement is not shown.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1996 National Household Education Survey.
123

Table 4b.— Percent of children whose parents are involved in their schools, by level of involvement, family type, and

selected school and community characteristics: Students in grades K-5, 1996

Parental involvement (thousands) Low High Low High Low High Low High

Total number

of students

Two parents Single parent

Mother's Father's Mother's Father's 

involvement involvement involvement involvement

 Total students .............. 22,920 11.6% 68.8% 43.1% 30.1% 16.3% 59.5% 21.0% 53.2%

Type of school child attends

 Total public schools ......... 20,200 12.7 66.6 45.8 27.6 16.8 58.1 20.6 51.9

 Assigned ................. 16,647 12.7 66.1 46.4 26.8 17.2 57.0 19.5 52.5

 Chosen .................. 3,553 12.5 69.5 43.1 32.1 15.5 61.9 24.1 50.0

 Total private schools ........ 2,720 4.4 82.3 26.2 45.9 10.2 77.5 25.7 68.4

 Church related ............ 2,139 3.8 83.8 24.3 47.2 9.9 82.3 25.7 67.3

 Not church related ......... 581 6.7 77.1 32.8 40.9 11.3 59.7 25.5 74.5

Number of students at child's

school

 Under 300 ................. 5,559 10.0 72.0 37.3 33.1 12.9 58.3 24.1 54.1

 300-599 .................. 10,881 11.9 67.9 43.4 30.9 16.4 59.6 16.8 55.6

 600-999 .................. 4,431 11.4 67.0 47.6 25.8 18.7 61.3 23.5 53.0

 1,000 or more .............. 2,049 15.0 67.8 49.0 26.7 18.8 58.0 24.9 42.7

Live in/out urbanized area

 Urban-inside ............... 14,350 11.2 69.9 41.1 30.9 17.2 58.0 16.3 65.1

 Urban-outside .............. 3,091 9.9 69.1 42.1 33.3 10.3 69.7 21.9 34.7

 Rural ..................... 5,479 13.3 66.0 48.4 26.6 17.2 58.4 32.3 32.8

NOTE: Because of rounding, details may not add to totals. Percents are computed across row, but do not add to 100 because percent with moderate

levels of involvement is not shown.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1996 National Household Education Survey.
124

Table 4c.— Percent of children whose parents are involved in their schools, by level of involvement, family type, and

selected school and community characteristics: Students in grades 6-8, 1996

Parental involvement (thousands) Low High Low High Low High Low High

Total number

of students

Two parents Single parent

Mother's Father's Mother's Father's

involvement involvement involvement involvement

 Total students .............. 11,098 22.3% 51.0% 49.5% 24.7% 27.7% 44.5% 29.4% 52.7%

Type of school child attends

 Total public schools ......... 10,033 24.6 47.1 52.2 22.2 29.0 42.2 33.0 48.1

 Assigned ................. 8,802 25.1 45.9 51.8 21.7 27.7 42.5 35.2 43.7

 Chosen .................. 1,231 20.9 56.8 54.8 26.1 35.7 41.1 15.0 84.0

 Total private schools ........ 1,065 3.5 82.7 28.3 45.3 5.4 82.1 0.0 90.2

 Church related ............ 843 2.2 86.5 29.1 47.4 4.0 84.5 0.0 90.8

 Not church related ......... 222 8.9 67.6 25.4 36.9 10.2 73.9 0.0 87.8

Number of students at child's

school

 Under 300 ................. 1,644 14.7 66.1 43.1 29.5 28.8 48.6 9.0 72.8

 300-599 .................. 4,410 23.1 52.3 48.7 25.8 24.3 46.6 29.9 54.3

 600-999 .................. 2,906 23.2 46.4 53.4 22.1 30.5 46.6 22.4 54.8

 1,000 or more .............. 2,137 25.8 42.5 51.4 22.3 30.6 34.3 49.8 34.5

Live in/out urbanized area

 Urban-inside ............... 6,688 21.2 52.3 48.2 26.1 28.4 42.2 24.0 58.4

 Urban-outside .............. 1,520 20.3 53.5 46.4 24.3 26.6 45.6 22.5 44.7

 Rural ..................... 2,890 25.5 47.3 53.9 22.2 25.5 52.0 48.1 41.2

NOTE: Because of rounding, details may not add to totals. Percents are computed across rows but do not add to 100 because percent with moderate

levels of involvement is not shown.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1996 National Household Education Survey.
125

Table 4d.— Percent of children whose parents are involved in their schools, by level of involvement, family type, and

selected school and community characteristics: Students in grades 9-12, 1996

Parental involvement (thousands) Low High Low High Low High Low High

Total number

of students

Two parents Single parent

Mother's Father's Mother's Father's

involvement involvement involvement involvement

 Total students .............. 13,395 35.7% 38.6% 54.2% 22.9% 43.3% 32.2% 40.1% 27.0%

Type of school child attends

 Total public schools ......... 11,999 38.2 35.3 56.8 20.5 44.9 31.2 43.8 23.4

 Assigned ................. 10,140 38.1 35.2 56.9 20.6 44.9 32.0 42.5 23.5

 Chosen .................. 1,859 38.7 36.3 56.4 20.0 45.1 28.3 52.5 22.8

 Total private schools ........ 1,396 16.5 64.3 33.3 41.8 23.3 45.5 12.3 54.4

 Church related ............ 1,030 13.4 69.1 30.1 44.3 10.1 53.4 15.9 55.5

 Not church related ......... 367 26.3 48.9 43.6 34.0 45.1 32.3 0.0 50.7

Number of students at child's

school

 Under 300 ................. 1,337 32.7 43.0 54.4 24.8 35.2 32.2 35.8 28.2

 300-599 .................. 3,094 33.4 40.2 53.9 24.8 44.7 30.5 43.7 20.2

 600-999 .................. 3,106 37.6 39.7 53.7 23.3 44.1 32.2 33.0 25.1

 1,000 or more .............. 5,858 36.6 36.2 54.5 21.2 44.1 33.1 44.5 31.6

Live in/out urbanized area

 Urban-inside ............... 7,875 35.6 37.2 52.2 22.6 45.3 31.6 37.6 33.0

 Urban-outside .............. 1,821 32.1 42.3 55.0 22.9 41.3 27.0 40.3 24.3

 Rural ..................... 3,700 37.6 39.5 57.3 23.4 37.5 37.4 47.6 11.0

NOTE: Because of rounding, details may not add to totals. Percents are computed across rows but do not add to 100 because percent with moderate

levels of involvement is not shown.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1996 National Household Education Survey.
126

Table 5a.— Percent of children with selected student outcomes, by level of parental involvement in their schools and family 

12, 1996

Student outcome Total Low High Low High Low High 

Two parents Sing

Mother's involvement Father's involvement Mother's involvemen

 Total students (thousands) ......... 47,413 7,140 19,024 16,242 9,101 3,133 5,803 

Child gets mostly A's .............. 37.7% 29.4% 46.7% 34.1% 50.4% 22.2% 35.5% 

Child enjoys school ............... 39.1 27.0 46.8 33.0 49.8 27.8 45.1 

Child did extracurricular activities

 Kindergarten - 5th grade ........ 79.0 62.1 87.3 73.7 90.6 57.5 78.8 

 6th - 12th grade* .............. 83.2 75.1 93.1 79.3 94.5 67.2 85.4 

Child has repeated a grade ......... 12.6 19.5 7.6 14.8 6.7 28.1 12.1 

Child has ever been expelled/suspended 18.1 21.6 9.9 17.7 9.8 34.6 21.0 

*From youth report.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1996 National Household Education Survey.
127

Table 5b.— Percent of children with selected student outcomes, by level of parental involvement in their schools and family 

5, 1996

Student outcome Total Low High Low High Low High 

Two parents Sing

Mother's involvement Father's involvement Mother's involvement 

 Total students (thousands) ........... 22,920 1,894 11,250 7,060 4,922 961 3,503 

Child gets mostly A's ................ 42.5% 38.6% 48.4% 39.6% 52.0% 34.6% 37.7% 

Child enjoys school ................. 47.3 36.1 51.3 41.6 55.1 44.2 49.2 

Child did extracurricular activities ...... 79.0 62.1 87.3 73.7 90.6 57.5 78.8 

Child has repeated a grade ............ 8.3 17.1 5.9 10.8 4.9 18.7 7.9 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1996 National Household Education Survey.
128

Table 5c.— Percent of children with selected student outcomes, by level of parental involvement in their schools and family 

8, 1996

Student outcome Total Low High Low High Low High 

Two parents Sing

Mother's involvement Father's involvement Mother's involvement 

 Total students (thousands) ........... 11,098 1,741 3,981 3,864 1,930 793 1,275 

Child gets mostly A's ................ 37.6% 32.4% 46.1% 36.7% 49.6% 17.7% 33.1% 

Child enjoys school ................. 34.5 27.9 42.1 30.6 43.6 23.8 37.1 

Child did extracurricular activities* ..... 84.4 76.5 91.7 81.0 93.2 74.7 84.0 

Child has repeated a grade ............ 15.2 19.7 10.0 16.1 8.6 26.8 17.2 

Child has ever been expelled/suspended . 16.0 18.9 9.1 14.6 9.8 31.7 18.8 

*From youth report.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1996 National Household Education Survey.
129

Table 5d.— Percent of children with selected student outcomes, by level of parental involvement in their schools and family 

12, 1996

Student outcome Total Low High Low High Low High 

Two parents Sing

Mother's involvement Father's involvement Mother's involvement 

 Total students (thousands) ........... 13,395 3,505 3,793 5,317 2,248 1,379 1,026 

Child gets mostly A's ................ 30.9% 23.9% 42.8% 26.4% 47.9% 17.9% 31.8% 

Child enjoys school ................. 31.2 22.6 40.3 25.5 45.0 20.9 43.1 

Child did extracurricular activities* ..... 82.2 74.3 94.5 78.0 95.6 63.0 87.1 

Child has repeated a grade ............ 17.7 20.6 10.3 19.1 8.9 35.4 20.0 

Child has ever been expelled/suspended . 19.8 23.0 10.7 20.0 9.8 36.3 23.7 

*From youth report.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1996 National Household Education Survey.
130

Table 6a.— Percent of children with selected student outcomes, by combined parental involvement in their schools: Student

parent families, 1996

Student outcome Total Low High High Hig

Parent involvement

Both Only mother Only f

 Total students (thousands) ................................. 33,980 5,983 7,929 11,094 1,

Child gets mostly A's ...................................... 41.1% 27.1% 50.7% 43.7% 4

Child enjoys school ....................................... 40.1 25.1 50.6 44.0 4

Child did extracurricular activities 

 6th - 12th grade* ........................................ 85.4 72.6 95.0 91.5 9

Child has repeated a grade .................................. 10.9 20.9 6.1 8.7 1

Child ever expelled/suspended ............................... 14.6 21.9 9.5 10.2 1

*From youth report.

Source: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1996 National Household Education Survey.
131

Table 6b.— Percent of children with selected student outcomes, by combined parental involvement in their schools: Students 

parent families, 1996

Student outcome Total Low High High Hig

Parent involvement

Both Only mother Only f

 Total students (thousands) ................................. 16,363 1,479 4,389 6,861 

Child gets mostly A's ...................................... 45.7% 35.7% 52.6% 45.7% 4

Child enjoys school ....................................... 48.3 32.8 56.1 48.1 4

Child did extracurricular activities ............................ 81.8 58.1 91.1 85.0 8

Child has repeated a grade .................................. 7.5 19.1 4.2 6.9 1

Source: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1996 National Household Education Survey.
132

Table 6c.— Percent of children with selected student outcomes, by combined parental involvement in their schools: Student

parent families, 1996

Student outcome Total Low High High Hig

Parent involvement

Both Only mother Only f

 Total students (thousands) ................................. 7,800 1,436 1,637 2,343 

Child gets mostly A's ...................................... 41.8% 29.7% 48.6% 44.4% 5

Child enjoys school ....................................... 35.8 27.6 43.7 41.0 4

Child did extracurricular activities* ........................... 86.2 73.5 93.0 90.7 9

Child has repeated a grade .................................. 13.1 20.3 7.9 11.5 1

Child ever expelled/suspended ............................... 12.5 19.9 9.7 8.7 1

*From youth report.

Source: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1996 National Household Education Survey.
133

Table 6d.— Percent of children with selected student outcomes, by combined parental involvement in their schools: Student

parent families, 1996

Student outcome Total Low High High Hig

Parent involvement

Both Only mother Only f

 Total students (thousands) ................................. 9,818 3,068 1,903 1,890 

Child gets mostly A's ...................................... 34.1% 22.5% 48.9% 36.6% 4

Child enjoys school ....................................... 32.1 21.0 45.3 35.2 4

Child did extracurricular activities* ........................... 84.8 72.2 96.7 92.4 8

Child has repeated a grade .................................. 14.9 22.1 9.1 11.5 

Child ever expelled/suspended ............................... 16.3 22.9 9.3 12.0 1

*From youth report.

Source: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1996 National Household Education Survey.
134

Table 7a.— Percent of children who have had contact with their nonresident parents and whose nonresident parents are involve

involvement, type of nonresident parent, and selected child, resident parent, and resident family characteristics: St

Nonresident fathers Nonre

Characteristic (thousands) contact 1 year (thousands) 1 year Total Low High 

Total number No contact Contact in last year Total number No contact 

of students Never had in more than of students in more than Involvement 

 Total students .................... 16,752 9.2% 5.5% 75.3% 82.5% 8.7% 4,138 9.7% 

Grade grouping

 Kindergarten-5th grade ............. 7,913 9.7 15.2 75.1 78.7 10.2 1,768 9.9 

 6th - 8th grade ................... 4,025 8.3 15.0 76.7 84.6 8.0 1,012 9.4 

 9th -12th grade ................... 4,813 9.4 16.2 74.4 86.8 6.8 1,357 9.6 

Child's sex

 Male ........................... 8,345 8.8 16.0 75.2 82.6 9.0 2,225 8.5 

 Female ......................... 8,406 9.7 14.9 75.4 82.4 8.3 1,913 11.1 

Child's race

 White, Non-Hispanic .............. 8,595 7.3 12.6 80.1 82.7 8.1 2,395 7.2 

 Black, Non-Hispanic .............. 5,001 11.2 15.3 73.5 82.5 9.2 1,151 15.3 

 Hispanic ........................ 2,535 12.3 23.0 64.6 80.7 9.9 393 8.8 

 Other, Non-Hispanic .............. 622 8.6 24.3 67.1 86.0 8.2 198 8.7 

Residential mother’s education

 Less than high school .............. 2,938 14.9 24.6 60.5 90.5 5.4 518 10.1 

 High school or equivalent .......... 6,554 9.0 14.8 76.2 82.4 9.0 1,008 12.2 

 VoTech-some college .............. 4,955 6.8 14.1 79.1 82.5 8.1 671 12.7 

 Bachelor's degree ................. 1,280 5.1 7.9 87.0 74.6 11.8 195 11.8 

 Graduate/professional school ........ 782 7.4 8.9 83.7 73.0 13.9 138 5.4 

Residential father’s education

 Less than high school .............. 605 15.7 32.1 52.2 91.9 5.7 292 16.2 

 High school or equivalent .......... 1,659 12 17.8 70.2 85.8 8.2 1,041 8.1 

 VoTech-some college .............. 1,192 8.3 16.6 75.2 89.6 5.2 752 5.9 

 Bachelor's degree ................. 428 8.5 10.2 81.3 83.8 9.6 331 6.5 

 Graduate/professional school ........ 255 7.2 9.6 83.2 84.3 5.7 193 4.6 

Work status-residential mother

 35 hours/week or more ............. 8,771 6.5 13.9 79.6 80.6 9.8 1,074 8.7 

 Less than 35 hours/week ........... 2,465 10.4 14.6 75.0 84.8 8.5 334 12.2 

 Looking for work ................. 1,312 11.3 18.1 70.6 86.8 6.4 60 23.6 

 Not in labor force ................. 3,962 13.1 18.9 68.0 83.7 6.8 1,062 13.5 
135

Table 7a.— Percent of children who have had contact with their nonresident parents and whose nonresident parents are involve

involvement, type of nonresident parent, and selected child, resident parent, and resident family characteristics: Stu

1996—continued

Nonresident fathers Nonre

Characteristic (thousands) contact 1 year (thousands) 1 year Total Low High 

Total number No contact Contact in last year Total number No contact 

of students Never had in more than of students in more than Involvement 

Work status-residential father

 35 hours/week or more ............. 3,486 9.7% 16.9% 73.3% 87.5% 6.3% 2,129 7.0% 

 Less than 35 hours/week ........... 202 8.1 26.8 65.1 81.2 14.7 101 9.5 

 Looking for work ................. 111 27.7 9.7 62.6 96.4 3.6 99 2.8 

 Not in labor force ................. 340 18.4 29.2 52.4 85.6 13.1 280 15.9 

Own/rent home, other arrangement

 Own home ...................... 6,884 7.2 11.5 81.4 81.2 9.5 2,468 8.1 

 Rent home ...................... 8,833 10.9 18.2 70.8 84.0 7.7 1,460 11.6 

 Other arrangement ................ 1,035 8.5 18.3 73.2 79.3 10.3 210 14.8 

Poverty status

 About poverty threshold ............ 9,897 7.9 13.6 78.4 80.9 10.1 3,077 8.1 

 Below poverty threshold ........... 6,855 11.1 18.1 70.8 84.9 6.3 1,061 14.1 

Family received federal assistance in past

12 months

1

 No ............................. 9,953 7.4 11.9 80.7 80.6 9.9 3,007 7.3 

 Yes ............................ 6,799 12.0 20.6 67.3 85.8 6.5 1,131 16.0 

Number of children in the household less

than 18

2

 None ........................... 254 10.9 12.8 76.2 87.2 8.1 80 12.2 

 One ............................ 4,014 10.3 15.8 73.9 82.4 8.5 1,198 7.5 

 Two ........................... 5,990 8.6 14.9 76.5 80.5 9.5 1,252 9.8 

 Three .......................... 3,858 8.3 14.8 76.9 84.3 7.4 853 8.5 

 Four or more ..................... 2,636 10.4 17.2 72.3 84.0 8.7 755 14.0 

Nonresident parent paid child support in

last year

 Yes ............................ 7,453 2.7 6.7 90.6 80.2 10.1 475 5.6 

 No ............................. 9,299 14.5 22.5 63.0 85.1 7.0 3,662 10.2 

Family received AFDC, WIC, or food stamps in past 12 months.

1

The “None” category consists of households in which all the children are 18 years or older.

2 

NOTE: Because of rounding, details may not add to totals. Percents are computed across rows. Percents involved in schools do not add to 100 because perce

is not shown.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1996 National Household Education Survey.
136

Table 7b.— Percent of children who have had contact with their nonresident parents and whose nonresident parents are involve

involvement, type of nonresident parent, and selected child, resident parent, and resident family characteristics: St

Nonresident fathers Nonre

Characteristic (thousands) contact 1 year (thousands) 1 year Total Low High 

Total number No contact Contact in last year Total number No contact 

of students Never had in more than of students in more than Involvement 

 Total students .................... 7,913 9.7% 15.2% 75.1% 78.7% 10.2% 1,768 9.9% 

Child's sex

 Male ........................... 3,991 8.7 15.8 75.5 77.9 10.4 942 7.5 

 Female ......................... 3,922 10.7 14.6 74.7 79.6 9.9 826 12.5 

Child's race

 White, Non-Hispanic .............. 3,906 8.2 12.8 79.0 78.9 9.4 993 5.6 

 Black, Non-Hispanic .............. 2,535 11.3 14.6 74.1 78.8 10.5 519 17.4 

 Hispanic ........................ 1,182 10.1 20.4 69.4 78.5 11.9 175 13.3 

 Other, Non-Hispanic .............. 290 13.6 31.4 55.0 75.1 11.9 81 7.3 

Residential mother’s education

 Less than high school .............. 1,397 14.4 25.6 60.0 89.1 6.0 178 7.3 

 High school or equivalent .......... 3,193 8.7 14.6 76.7 78.6 10.3 500 14.1 

 VoTech-some college .............. 2,374 8.2 13.0 78.8 79.0 9.5 267 9.5 

 Bachelor's degree ................. 604 6.2 6.3 87.6 68.2 15.5 68 6.0 

 Graduate/professional school ........ 263 4.0 10.5 85.5 64.4 17.7 42 5.4 

Residential father’s education

 Less than high school .............. 280 15.3 38.6 46.1 80.3 14.0 122 20.9 

 High school or equivalent .......... 706 14.3 17.1 68.7 83.5 8.6 454 7.4 

 VoTech-some college .............. 466 11.7 16.4 71.9 84.0 8.9 310 4.1 

 Bachelor's degree ................. 145 3.0 9.5 87.5 71.3 17.1 138 12.1 

 Graduate/professional school ........ 91 6.6 8.5 84.9 88.4 3.7 63 9.3 

Work status-residential mother

 35 hours/week or more ............. 3,799 6.6 13.3 80.1 76.7 12.1 388 7.1 

 Less than 35 hours/week ........... 1,206 7.9 15.3 76.9 82.1 9.3 132 13.7 

 Looking for work ................. 767 12.9 18.4 68.6 83.7 8.7 19 22.0 

 Not in labor force ................. 2,058 13.4 17.8 68.7 79.1 7.2 516 12.6 
137

Table 7b.— Percent of children who have had contact with their nonresident parents and whose nonresident parents are involve

involvement, type of nonresident parent, and selected child, resident parent, and resident family characteristics: Stu

1996—continued

Nonresident fathers Nonre

Characteristic Total contact 1 year Total 1 year Total Low High 

Never had in more than in more than Involvement 

No contact Contact in last year No contact 

Work status-residential father

 35 hours/week or more ............. 1,402 10.7% 16.9% 72.4% 83.2% 8.4% 876 7.3% 

 Less than 35 hours/week ........... 82 5.7 37.6 56.7 67.3 21.1 54 5.3 

 Looking for work ................. 28 59.7 10.7 29.6 69.7 30.3 41 7.0 

 Not in labor force ................. 177 21.1 31.5 47.4 80.7 19.3 115 21.2 

Own/rent home, other arrangement

 Own home ...................... 2,837 8.5 11.3 80.2 76.1 12.8 1,063 7.0 

 Rent home ...................... 4,569 10.7 17.5 71.8 81.0 8.5 619 15.9 

 Other arrangement ................ 507 7.7 16.0 76.3 75.4 9.1 86 2.8 

Poverty status

 About poverty threshold ............ 4,318 8.7 13.4 77.9 76.1 13.0 1,294 7.9 

 Below poverty threshold ........... 3,595 10.9 17.3 71.8 82.1 6.4 474 15.4 

Family received federal assistance in past

12 months

1

 No ............................. 4,222 7.7 11.7 80.5 75.2 12.8 1,253 6.2 

 Yes ............................ 3,691 11.9 19.2 68.9 83.5 6.7 515 18.7 

Number of children in the household less

than 18

2

 None ........................... — — — — — — — — 

 One ............................ 1,634 13.3 17.4 69.3 77.8 9.8 447 9.0 

 Two ........................... 2,949 9.2 15.1 75.7 76.8 11.6 565 10.9 

 Three .......................... 1,975 7.5 13.4 79.1 81.5 9.0 353 10.8 

 Four or more ..................... 1,351 9.5 15.5 75.0 80.2 9.1 404 8.6 

Nonresident parent paid child support in

last year

 Yes ............................ 3,369 3.0 6.1 90.9 75.3 12.6 220 4.1 

 No ............................. 4,545 14.6 21.9 63.4 82.4 7.6 1,548 10.7 

—Too few cases for a reliable estimate.

Family received AFDC, WIC, or food stamps in past 12 months.

1

The “None” category consists of households in which all the children are 18 years or older.

2 

NOTE: Because of rounding, details may not add to totals. Percents are computed across row. Percents involved in schools do not add to 100 because perce

is not shown.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1996 National Household Education Survey.
138

Table 7c.— Percent of children who have had contact with their nonresident parents and whose nonresident parents are involve

involvement, type of nonresident parent, and selected child, resident parent, and resident family characteristics: St

Nonresident fathers Nonre

Characteristic (thousands) contact 1 year (thousands) 1 year Total Low High 

Total number No contact Contact in last year Total number No contact 

of students Never had in more than of students in more than Involvement 

 Total students .................... 4,025 8.3% 15.0% 76.7% 84.6% 8.0% 1,012 9.4% 

Child's sex

 Male ........................... 1,994 7.8 16.0 76.1 86.6 8.2 572 9.9 

 Female ......................... 2,031 8.7 14.0 77.4 82.7 7.7 440 8.7 

Child's race

 White, Non-Hispanic .............. 2,092 6.1 11.3 82.7 84.5 7.8 611 6.6 

 Black, Non-Hispanic .............. 1,205 9.9 15.4 74.6 84.4 8.3 282 17.5 

 Hispanic ........................ 580 13.6 25.8 60.6 82.0 9.3 76 1.3 

 Other, Non-Hispanic .............. 148 4.7 21.8 73.5 95.1 3.8 43 9.9 

Residential mother’s education

 Less than high school .............. 630 15.1 23.4 61.5 95.2 2.7 87 19.8 

 High school or equivalent .......... 1,598 7.5 14.2 78.3 83.4 8.4 208 10.8 

 VoTech-some college .............. 1,239 5.5 14.5 80.0 86.1 7.1 173 14.7 

 Bachelor's degree ................. 284 2.9 7.9 89.3 80.2 11.7 47 7.5 

 Graduate/professional school ........ 218 16.4 6.7 76.9 67.5 15.0 46 0.0 

Residential father’s education

 Less than high school .............. 139 12.7 24.5 62.7 100.0 0.0 87 10.9 

 High school or equivalent .......... 467 9.7 16.0 74.3 88.3 6.5 238 5.6 

 VoTech-some college .............. 345 2.1 15.1 82.8 91.3 3.9 236 6.2 

 Bachelor's degree ................. 112 16.0 8.4 75.6 89.3 8.2 97 2.0 

 Graduate/professional school ........ 49 14.7 1.5 83.7 77.8 1.0 61 5.1 

Work status-residential mother

 35 hours/week or more ............. 2,270 5.5 13.6 80.9 82.6 8.6 272 11.5 

 Less than 35 hours/week ........... 596 12.2 12.5 75.3 84.9 10.7 76 12.3 

 Looking for work ................. 303 9.2 15.7 75.1 88.5 6.2 12 0.0 

 Not in labor force ................. 798 12.6 20.1 67.2 89.7 3.8 201 13.8 
139

Table 7c.— Percent of children who have had contact with their nonresident parents and whose nonresident parents are involve

involvement, type of nonresident parent, and selected child, resident parent, and resident family characteristics: Stu

1996—continued

Nonresident fathers Nonre

Characteristic (thousands) contact 1 year (thousands) 1 year Total Low High 

Total number No contact Contact in last year Total number No contact 

of students Never had in more than of students in more than Involvement 

Work status-residential father

 35 hours/week or more ............. 937 6.9% 14.4% 78.7% 89.6% 4.9% 588 5.6% 

 Less than 35 hours/week ........... 56 11.9 34.5 53.6 94.7 5.3 23 7.9 

 Looking for work ................. 50 20.5 6.0 73.5 100.0 0.0 31 0.0 

 Not in labor force ................. 69 20.0 19.7 60.2 86.7 7.7 78 10.0 

Own/rent home, other arrangement

 Own home ...................... 1,789 6.7 10.2 83.2 82.4 9.1 586 9.8 

 Rent home ...................... 1,979 9.6 19.4 71.0 87.0 6.5 375 9.0 

 Other arrangement ................ 258 8.8 14.5 76.7 83.8 9.9 50 7.3 

Poverty status

 About poverty threshold ............ 2,383 7.2 10.3 82.5 83.1 8.9 797 7.9 

 Below poverty threshold ........... 1,643 9.9 21.7 68.4 87.2 6.3 215 14.8 

Family received federal assistance in past

12 months

1

 No ............................. 2,453 6.7 10.8 82.5 82.1 9.1 757 7.6 

 Yes ............................ 1,573 10.7 21.5 67.8 89.3 5.8 255 14.8 

Number of children in the household less

than 18

2

 None ........................... — — — — — — — — 

 One ............................ 843 8.3 13.9 77.8 80.8 10.4 283 7.0 

 Two ........................... 1,492 8.3 13.5 78.2 83.3 7.9 314 11.4 

 Three .......................... 952 6.2 13.7 80.1 87.2 6.4 259 2.6 

 Four or more ..................... 738 10.7 21.0 68.3 88.5 7.4 153 21.4 

Nonresident parent paid child support in

last year

 Yes ............................ 1,911 2.1 7.2 90.8 82.0 8.5 108 5.9 

 No ............................. 2,115 13.9 22.0 64.1 88.0 7.3 904 9.8 

—Too few cases for a reliable estimate.

Family received AFDC, WIC, or food stamps in past 12 months.

1

The “None” category consists of households in which all the children are 18 years or older.

2 

NOTE: Because of rounding, details may not add to totals. Percents are computed across rows. Percents involved in schools do not add to 100 because perce

is not shown.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1996 National Household Education Survey.
140

Table 7d.— Percent of children who have had contact with their nonresident parents and whose nonresident parents are involve

involvement, type of nonresident parent, and selected child, resident parent, and resident family characteristics: St

Nonresident fathers Nonre

Characteristic (thousands) contact 1 year (thousands) 1 year Total Low High 

Total number No contact Contact in last year Total number No contact 

of students Never had in more than of students in more than Involvement 

 Total students .................... 4,813 9.4% 16.2% 74.4% 86.8% 6.8% 1,357 9.6% 

Child's sex

 Male ........................... 2,360 9.7 16.4 73.9 87.1 7.2 710 8.5 

 Female ......................... 2,453 9.1 16.1 74.8 86.6 6.3 647 10.9 

Child's race

 White, Non-Hispanic .............. 2,596 6.8 13.5 79.7 86.7 6.3 791 9.8 

 Black, Non-Hispanic .............. 1,260 12.2 16.7 71.1 88.2 7.5 350 10.3 

 Hispanic ........................ 772 14.7 25.0 60.3 83.6 6.9 142 7.2 

 Other, Non-Hispanic .............. 184 3.8 15.3 80.9 91.0 7.7 74 9.6 

Residential mother’s education

 Less than high school .............. 912 15.7 23.9 60.4 89.4 6.4 253 8.8 

 High school or equivalent .......... 1,763 10.9 15.8 73.4 88.5 7.1 301 10.1 

 VoTech-some college .............. 1,342 5.8 15.5 78.8 85.3 6.5 231 15.0 

 Bachelor's degree ................. 392 5.0 10.6 84.5 80.6 6.0 80 19.2 

 Graduate/professional school ........ 302 4.0 9.1 86.9 83.8 10.0 50 10.3 

Residential father’s education

 Less than high school .............. 186 18.4 28.0 53.6 100.0 0.0 83 14.8 

 High school or equivalent .......... 486 11.1 20.6 68.4 86.4 9.4 349 10.6 

 VoTech-some college .............. 380 9.8 18.1 72.2 94.7 2.0 206 8.2 

 Bachelor's degree ................. 171 8.2 11.9 79.9 92.0 3.7 97 3.0 

 Graduate/professional school ........ 115 4.4 13.9 81.7 83.8 9.4 69 0.0 

Work status-residential mother

 35 hours/week or more ............. 2,701 7.1 14.8 78.0 84.6 7.5 415 8.3 

 Less than 35 hours/week ........... 663 13.3 15.3 71.4 89.9 4.8 126 10.5 

 Looking for work ................. 242 8.8 19.9 71.3 94.3 0.0 30 33.6 

 Not in labor force ................. 1,105 12.8 20.1 67.1 88.1 8.0 345 14.5 
141

Table 7d.— Percent of children who have had contact with their nonresident parents and whose nonresident parents are involve

involvement, type of nonresident parent, and selected child, resident parent, and resident family characteristics: St

1996—continued

Nonresident fathers Nonre

Characteristic (thousands) contact 1 year (thousands) 1 year Total Low High 

Total number No contact Contact in last year Total number No contact 

of students Never had in more than of students in more than Involvement 

Work status-residential father

 35 hours/week or more ............. 1,147 10.8% 19.0% 70.1% 90.8% 4.8% 665 7.8 

 Less than 35 hours/week ........... 64 7.7 6.2 86.0 85.6 14.4 24 20.5 

 Looking for work ................. 33 11.1 14.4 74.5 100.0 0.0 28 0.0 

 Not in labor force ................. 94 12.3 31.7 56.0 92.5 7.5 88 14.2 

Own/rent home, other arrangement 

 Own home ...................... 2,258 6.0 12.6 81.4 86.5 5.7 819 8.3 

 Rent home ...................... 2,285 12.6 18.7 68.7 87.7 7.3 465 8.1 

 Other arrangement ................ 270 9.9 26.0 64.1 82.9 13.2 73 34.2 

Poverty status

 About poverty threshold ............ 3,196 7.5 16.3 76.2 85.9 7.1 985 8.7 

 Below poverty threshold ........... 1,618 13.1 16.1 70.8 88.9 6.2 372 12.1 

Family received federal assistance in past

12 months

1

 No ............................. 3,278 7.3 13.0 79.7 86.4 6.8 996 8.4 

 Yes ............................ 1,535 13.7 23.2 63.1 88.0 6.7 361 13.0 

Number of children in the household less

than 18

2

 None ........................... 251 11.1 13.0 75.9 88.8 6.4 78 12.6 

 One ............................ 1,536 8.2 15.2 76.6 87.8 6.3 468 6.4 

 Two ........................... 1,548 7.6 16.1 76.3 84.7 7.3 373 6.7 

 Three .......................... 931 12.0 19.1 68.9 87.7 5.0 240 11.5 

 Four or more ..................... 547 12.4 16.3 71.3 88.2 9.5 198 19.3 

Nonresident parent paid child support in

last year

 Yes ............................ 2,174 2.8 7.2 90.0 86.2 7.5 147 7.7 

 No ............................. 2,639 14.8 23.7 61.5 87.5 5.9 1,210 9.9 

Family received AFDC, WIC, or food stamps in past 12 months.

1

The “None” category consists of households in which all the children are 18 years or older.

2 

NOTE: Because of rounding, details may not add to totals. Percents are computed across rows. Percents involved in schools do not add to 100 because perce

is not shown.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1996 National Household Education Survey.
142

Table 8a.— Percent of children with selected student outcomes, by recency of contact with their nonresident parents, level of in

parents in their schools, and type of nonresident parent: Students in grades K-12, 1996

Nonresident fathers No

Student outcome Total contact than 1 year Total than 1 yeaTotal Low High 

Never had in more in more Involvement 

No contact Contact in last year No contac

 Total students (thousands) .......... 16,752 1,549 2,588 12,614 10,496 1,093 4,138 400 

Child gets mostly A's ............... 29.4% 27.8% 24.5% 30.7% 29.1% 35.2% 26.5% 30.4% 

Child enjoys school ................ 36.3 35.9 36.7 36.3 34.7 44.8 33.4 29.6 

Child did extracurricular activities

 Kindergarten — 5th grade ......... 74.6 70.5 74.6 75.2 73.5 86.6 79.6 74.6 

 6th — 12th grade ..............

2

77.1 70.0 79.5 77.4 75.5 92.0 75.2 66.3 

Child has repeated a grade ........... 17.8 19.2 23.1 16.5 18.1 7.2 17.0 11.6 

Child has ever been expelled/

suspended ........................ 26.6 26.4 30.3 25.8 27.8 14.4 29.7 34.8 

Only a small number of nonresident mothers have never had contact with their children. Therefore, this column combines mothers who have never had con

1

contact with their children in more than 1 year.

From youth report.

2

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics,1996 National Household Education Survey.
143

Table 8b.— Percent of children with selected student outcomes, by recency of contact with their nonresident parents, level of in

parents in their schools, and type of nonresident parent: Students in grades K-5, 1996

Nonresident fathers No

Student outcome Total contact than 1 year Total year* Total Low High 

Never had in more than 1

No contact in more

Contact in last year 

No contac

Involvement 

 Total student (thousands) ........... 7,913 765 1,203 5,945 4,681 604 1,768 175 

Child gets mostly A’s ............... 34.9% 30.8% 33.0% 35.8% 34.4% 41.6% 32.7% 34.1% 

Child enjoys school ................ 44.2 40.5 41.9 45.1 44.5 46.2 40.2 31.9 

Child did extracurricular activities ..... 74.6 70.5 74.6 75.2 73.5 86.6 79.6 74.6 

Child has repeated a grade ........... 11.3 11.9 17.8 9.9 11.0 3.9 8.8 8.5 

* Only a small number of nonresident mothers had never had contact with their children . Therefore, this column combines mothers who have never had con

with their children in more than 1 year.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1996 National Household Education Survey.
144

Table 8c.— Percent of children with selected student outcomes, by recency of contact with their nonresident parents, level of in

parents in their schools, and type of nonresident parent: Students in grades 6-8,1996

Nonresident fathers No

Student outcome Total contact than 1 year Total than 1 yeaTotal Low High 

Never had in more in more Involvement 

No contact Contact in last year No contac

 Total (thousands) .................. 4,025 333 604 3,089 2,613 246 1,012 — 

Child gets mostly A's ................ 29.1% 30.9% 19.3% 30.8% 31.1% 22.6% 26.9% — 

Child enjoys school ................. 33.4 31.4 34.3 33.5 32.6 45.8 31.1 — 

Child did extracurricular activities .....

2

78.8 75.8 82.4 78.5 77.2 92.3 78.9 — 

Child has repeated a grade ............ 20.7 15.1 27.7 19.9 21.8 8.1 18.9 — 

Child has ever been expelled/suspended 22.7 22.1 28.9 21.5 23.5 8.3 24.8 — 

—Too few cases for a reliable estimate.

Only a small number of nonresident mothers had never had contact with their children . Therefore, this column combines mothers who have never had con

1

with their children in more than 1 year.

From youth report.

2

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics,1996 National Household Education Survey.
145

Table 8d.— Percent of children with selected student outcomes, by recency of contact with their nonresident parents, level of in

parents in their schools, and type of nonresident parent: Students in grades 9-12, 1996

Nonresident fathers No

Student outcome Total contact than 1 year Total than 1 yeaTotal Low High 

Never had in more in more Involvement 

No contact Contact in last year No contac

 Total (thousands) ................. 4,813 452 782 3,580 3,109 242 1,357 131 

Child gets mostly A's ............... 22.0% 21.6% 16.5% 23.3% 20.7% 34.2% 19.4% 24.7% 

Child enjoys school ................ 27.8 33.0 31.3 26.3 24.0 40.7 27.8 20.4 

Child did extracurricular activities ....

2

75.6 65.5 77.3 76.5 74.1 91.6 72.4 70.0 

Child has repeated a grade ........... 25.9 34.6 27.7 24.5 25.7 14.5 26.3 20.3 

Child has ever been expelled/suspended 29.8 29.5 31.4 29.5 31.4 20.5 33.4 44.4 

Only a small number of nonresident mothers had never had contact with their children . Therefore, this column combines mothers who have never had con

1

with their children in more than 1 year.

From youth report.

2

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1996 National Household Education Survey.
146
APPENDIX B

Adjusted Odds Ratios for All Factors Included in Models of Student Outcomes

149

Table B1. — Adjusted odds ratios of student outcomes, by child and family characteristics of children

living in two-parent families: Students in grades 1-12, 1996

Characteristic Gets mostly A's school a grade

Enjoys Ever repeated

Child’s race and ethnicity

Black, non-Hispanic vs. white, non-Hispanic .................... 0.72 * 1.22 * 1.07

Hispanic vs. white, non-Hispanic ............................. 0.91 1.06 0.73 *

Child’s sex (male) ............................................ 0.54 * 0.57 * 1.92 *

Child’s grade level

Grades 6-8 vs. grades 1-5 ................................... 0.90 0.64 * 1.54 *

Grades 9-12 vs. grades 1-5 .................................. 0.65 * 0.58 * 1.73 *

Mother’s education ........................................... 1.20 * 1.08 * 0.76 *

Father’s education ........................................... 1.14 * 1.06 0.90 *

Household income ............................................ 1.02 1.00 0.90 *

Family type

Mother, stepfather vs. two bio/adopt. parents .................... 0.75 * 1.01 1.62 *

Father, stepmother vs. two bio/adopt. parents ................... 0.76 0.72 * 1.52 *

Mother’s employment

Full time vs. part time ...................................... 0.87 * 1.03 1.36 *

Looking for work vs. part time ............................... 1.11 1.06 1.63

Not working vs. part time ................................... 0.98 1.02 1.32 *

Parental involvement in school

Mother

Moderate vs. low ......................................... 1.16 1.25 * 0.73 *

High vs. low ............................................. 1.21 * 1.52 * 0.71 *

Father

Moderate vs. low ......................................... 1.22 * 1.30 * 0.75 *

High vs. low ............................................. 1.42 * 1.55 * 0.72 *

F(17,64)=48.3 F(17,64)=32.51 F(17,64)=22.2

* p < .05

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1996 National Household Education Survey.
150

Table B2. — Adjusted odds ratios of student outcomes, by child and family characteristics, children living in two-parent fam

grades 1-5, 1996

Gets mostly A's Enjoys school Particip. extracurr. ac

Characteristic Model 1 Model 2 Model 1 Model 2 Model 1 Mode

Child’s race and ethnicity

Black, non-Hispanic vs. white, non-Hispanic ...... 0.74 * 0.73 * 0.96 0.96 0.90 0.82 

Hispanic vs. white, non-Hispanic ............... 0.90 0.90 0.94 0.97 0.54 * 0.56 

Child’s sex (male) .............................. 0.59 * 0.59 * 0.57 * 0.57 * 0.80 0.79 

Mother’s education ............................. 1.16 * 1.15 * 1.09 * 1.08 1.49 * 1.40 

Father’s education ............................. 1.08 * 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.15 * 1.14 

Household income .............................. 1.02 1.02 1.01 1.01 1.11 * 1.11 

Family type

Mother, stepfather vs. two bio/adopt. parents ...... 0.82 0.83 1.16 1.16 1.22 1.26 

Father, stepmother vs. two bio/adopt. parents ...... 0.87 0.89 0.87 0.90 0.68 0.70 

Mother’s employment

Full time vs. part time ........................ 0.86 0.87 0.95 0.95 0.72 * 0.74 

Looking for work vs. part time ................. 0.88 0.89 0.84 0.82 0.66 0.67 

Not working vs. part time ..................... 0.91 0.92 0.99 0.99 0.65 * 0.68 

Parent involvement in school

Mother

Moderate vs. low ............................ 0.88 0.86 1.23 1.21 1.62 * 1.48 

High vs. low ............................... 0.98 0.92 1.39 * 1.30 * 2.39 * 1.95 

Father

Moderate vs. low ............................ 1.22 * 1.20 1.28 * 1.26 * 1.30 1.16 

High vs. low ............................... 1.35 * 1.30 * 1.48 * 1.40 * 1.58 * 1.35 

Family social capital

Number of in-home activities share with child ..... 1.00 1.13 * 1.06 

Number of out-of-home activities share with child . . 1.09 * 1.05 1.48 

Told story in past week or family history in past 1.07 1.06 0.97 

month ........................................

F(15,66)=11.14 F(18,63)=9.35 F(15,66)=8.41 F(18,63)=8.32 F(15,66)=29.13 F(18,63)=

* p < .05

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1996 National Household Education Survey.
151

Table B3. — Adjusted odds ratios of student outcomes, by child and family characteristics, children living in two-parent familie

1996

Gets mostly A's Enjoys school Particip. extracurr. act. Ever repe

Characteristic Model 1 Model 2 Model 1 Model 2 Model 1 Model 2 Model 1 

Child’s race and ethnicity

Black, non-Hispanic vs. white, non-Hispanic ......... 0.70 * 0.64 * 1.49 * 1.42 * 1.19 0.90 1.04 

Hispanic vs. white, non-Hispanic .................. 0.93 0.87 1.19 1.17 0.92 0.79 0.76 

Child’s sex (male) ................................ 0.49 * 0.51 * 0.56 * 0.58 * 0.89 0.97 1.97 * 

Child’s grade level

Grades 6-8 vs. grades 9-12 ....................... 1.39 1.52 * 1.11 0.94 1.02 1.04 0.87 

Mother’s education ............................... 1.23 * 1.21 * 1.07 1.04 1.26 * 1.20 * 0.83 * 

Father’s education ............................... 1.17 * 1.12 * 1.05 0.99 1.23 * 1.17 * 0.84 * 

Household income ................................ 1.02 1.01 0.99 0.99 1.04 1.03 0.91 * 

Family type

Mother, stepfather vs. two bio/adopt. parents ......... 0.70 * 0.75 * 1.11 0.94 .81 0.93 1.62 * 

Father, stepmother vs. two bio/adopt. parents ......... 0.69 0.76 0.62 * 0.63 * .96 1.11 1.48 

Mother’s employment

Full time vs. part time ........................... 0.87 0.88 1.11 1.12 0.77 * 0.82 1.48 * 

Looking for work vs. part time .................... 1.36 1.34 1.38 1.32 0.79 0.82 1.23 

Not working vs. part time ........................ 1.04 1.08 1.04 1.05 0.85 0.89 1.35 * 

Parent involvement in school

Mother

Moderate vs. low ............................... 1.28 * 1.25 1.23 * 1.16 1.31 * 1.25 0.83 

High vs. low ................................... 1.30 * 1.16 1.58 * 1.40 * 2.46 * 2.05 * 0.76 

Father

Moderate vs. low ............................... 1.21 * 1.17 1.34 * 1.26 * 1.48 * 1.38 * 0.79 

High vs. low ................................... 1.46 * 1.43 * 1.63 * 1.51 * 1.88 * 1.70 * 0.76 

Family social capital

Child will graduate from 4-year college (yes vs. no) .... 4.22 * 2.44 * 1.79 * 

Confidence that someone can help with homework ..... 1.01 * 1.08 * 0.99 

Discussed education plans with child (yes vs. no) ...... 1.11 1.01 0.93 

Number of activities participated in with child ........ 1.14 * 1.22 * 0.96 

Frequency with which a parent helps with homework ... 0.80 * 0.99 0.96 

Child gets homework (no homework vs. any homework) 0.64 1.19 0.67 

Family ties to the community

Frequency with which parent attends religious services . 1.01 0.98 1.20 * 

A parent regularly participates in community service 1.23 * 1.20 * 1.60 * 

activity (yes vs. no) .............................

F(16,65)=23.49 F(24,57)=21. F(16,65)=18.7 F(24,57)=14.7 F(16,65)=15.0 F(24,57)=15.6 F(16,65)=12.4 

* p < .05

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1996 National Household Education Survey.
152

Table B4. — Adjusted odds ratios of student outcomes, by child and family characteristics, children living in single-parent fami

1996

Father-only families Moth

Characteristic A's school a grade A's Enj

Gets mostly Enjoys Ever repeated Gets mostly 

Child’s race and ethnicity

Black, non-Hispanic vs. white, non-Hispanic ..................... 0.82 1.15 0.99 0.80 

Hispanic vs. white, non-Hispanic ............................... 0.48 0.84 0.82 1.01 

Child’s sex (male) ............................................ 0.48 * 0.73 1.95 * 0.49 * 

Child’s grade level ............................................

Grades 6-8 vs. grades 1-5 ..................................... 0.78 0.63 2.86 * 0.73 * 

Grades 9-12 vs. grades 1-5 .................................... 0.76 0.73 3.16 * 0.55 * 

Parent’s education ............................................ 1.51 * 0.94 0.73 * 1.09 

Household income ............................................ 0.93 1.00 0.97 1.01 

Mother’s employment

Full time vs. part time ....................................... NA NA NA 1.17 

Looking for work vs. part time ................................. NA NA NA 0.80 

Not working vs. part time ..................................... NA NA NA 1.31 

Parent’s involvement in school

Moderate vs. low ........................................... 1.88 * 0.87 1.07 1.07 

High vs. low ............................................... 1.84 * 1.73 0.95 1.57 * 

F(9,72)=3.30 F(9,72)=2.31 F(9,72)=2.09 F(12,69)=14.81 F(1

* p < .05

SOURCE: U. S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1996 National Household Education Survey.
153

Table B5. —

1996

Characteristic Enjoys school Particip. extracurr. a

Model 1 Model 2 Model 2 Model 1 

Black, non-Hispanic vs. white, non-Hispanic ......... 1.03 1.07 0.36 * 

Hispanic vs. white, non-Hispanic .................. 0.37 0.67 0.51 0.55 

Child’s sex (male) 1.05 1.06 0.66 1.25 

................................ 1.80 1.73* 0.74 1.25 0.99 

Household income 0.90 0.90 1.06 0.96 

Moderate vs. low .............................. 1.36 0.68 1.99 1.95 

High vs. low 1.12 1.13 2.03 2.34 

Number of in-home activities share with child ........ 0.68 1.57

Number of out-of-home activities share with child .... 1.01 1.54

Told story in past week or family history in past month . 0.57 1.79

F(7,74)=1.44 F(10,71)=1.11 F(10,71)=2.09 F(7,74)=1.29 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1996 National Household Education Survey.
Table B6. — Adjusted odds ratios of student outcomes, by child and family characteristics, children living in single-mother f

Characteristic Gets mostly A's Particip. extracurr. a

Model 2 Model 1 Model 1 Mode

Child’s race and ethnicity

..... 0.90 1.27 1.25 * 1.49 

.............. 1.17 0.81 0.83 0.91 

Child’s sex (male) ............................. * 0.63* * 0.68 1.12 1.14 

Mother’s education ............................ 1.06 1.14 1.36 * 

Household income ............................. 1.03 1.01 1.07 * 

Full time vs. part time ....................... 1.32 0.85 1.77 * 

Looking for work vs. Part time ................ 0.83 1.01 1.84 1.79 

Not working vs. part time 1.54 1.55 0.71 1.27 

Moderate vs. low ........................... 0.68 0.69 * 1.36 

High vs. low .............................. 0.95 1.15 2.27 * 

Family social capital

.... 1.09 ** 1.07

Number of out-of-home activities share with child . 1.00 1.67 

Told story in past week or family history in past 0.94 0.66

month .......................................

F(13,68)=2.86 F(10,71)=3.57 F(10,71)=4.98 F(13,68)

* p < .05
155

Table B7. — Adjusted odds ratios of student outcomes, by child and family characteristics, children living in single-father fam

1996

Gets mostly A's Enjoys school Particip. extracurr. act. Ever rep

(Youth File)

Characteristic Model 1 Model 2 Model 1 Model 2 Model 1 Model 2 Model 1 

Child’s race and ethnicity

Black, non-Hispanic vs. white, non-Hispanic ......... 0.63 0.57 1.19 1.20 0.61 0.21 1.23 

Hispanic vs. white, non-Hispanic .................. 0.59 0.58 0.90 0.84 1.51 1.36 0.81 

Child’s sex (male) ............................... 0.26 * 0.28 * 0.76 0.75 0.73 0.76 1.60 

Child’s grade level

Grades 6-8 vs. grades 9-12 ....................... 1.07 1.11 0.88 0.71 1.34 1.36 0.95 

Father’s education .............................. 1.43 * 1.22 1.08 0.94 1.58 * 1.57 0.76 

Household income ............................... 0.96 1.00 0.94 0.95 0.93 0.95 0.94 

Father’s involvement in school

Moderate vs. low ............................... 1.99 1.60 1.11 0.84 0.64 0.59 1.06 

High vs. low .................................. 2.23 * 1.58 1.65 1.13 2.46 2.46 0.76 

Family social capital

Child will graduate from 4-year college (yes vs. no) .... 18.92 * 2.25 1.75 

Confidence that someone can help with homework .... 0.92 1.04 0.85 

Discussed education plans with child (yes vs. no) ..... 0.76 1.03 0.71 

Number of activities participated in with child ........ 1.19 1.31 0.96 

Frequency with which a parent helps with homework . . 0.70 1.00 0.80 

Child gets homework (no homework vs. any homework) 5.42 2.53 0.30 

Family ties to the community

Frequency with which parent attends religious 1.06 1.11 1.02 

services ......................................

A parent regularly participates in community service 1.06 1.19 1.43 

activity (yes vs. no) .............................

F(8,73)=3.24 F(16,65)=2.0 F(8,73)=0.5 F(16,65)=0.6 F(18,73)=2.1 F(16,65)=1.4 F(8,73)=0.77 

* p < .05

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1996 National Household Education Survey.
156

Table B8. — Adjusted odds ratios of student outcomes, by child and family characteristics, children living in single-mother fam

12, 1996

Gets mostly A's Enjoys school Particip. extracurr. act. 

Characteristic Model 1 Model 2 Model 1 Model 2 Model 1 Model 2 

Child’s race and ethnicity

Black, non-Hispanic vs. white, non-Hispanic ......... 0.90 0.86 1.27 1.25 1.60 * 1.49 * 

Hispanic vs. white, non-Hispanic .................. 1.17 1.21 0.81 0.83 0.84 0.91 

Child’s sex (male) ................................. 0.63 * 0.63 * 0.68 * 0.68 * 1.12 1.14 

Mother’s education ................................ 1.07 1.06 1.14 1.14 1.36 * 1.28 * 

Household income ................................. 1.03 1.03 1.01 1.01 1.07 * 1.06 

Mother’s employment ..............................

Full-time vs. part time .......................... 1.34 1.32 0.85 0.87 1.77 * 1.67 * 

Looking for work vs. part time .................... 0.84 0.83 1.01 1.01 1.84 1.79 

Not working vs. part time ........................ 1.54 1.55 0.70 0.71 1.27 1.25 

Mother’s involvement in school

Moderate vs. low .............................. 0.72 0.68 0.69 0.64 * 1.36 1.17 

High vs. low .................................. 1.09 0.95 1.15 1.05 2.27 * 1.62 

Family social capital

Number of in-home activities share with child ........ 1.09 1.20 * 1.07 

Number of out-of-home activites share with child ..... 1.14 * 1.00 1.67 * 

Told story in past week or family history in past month . 0.93 0.94 0.66 

F(10,71)=2.79 F(13,68)=2.86 F(10,71)=3.57 F(13,68)=3.74 F(10,71)=4.98 F(13,68)=9

* p < .05

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1996 National Household Education Survey.
157

Table B9. — Adjusted odds ratios of selected student outcomes, by child and resident family characteristics, nonresident fath

children’s schools, and whether nonresident fathers paid any child support: students in grades 1-12, 1996

Characteristic Model 1 Model 2 Model 3 Model 1 Model 2 Model 3 Mod

Gets mostly A's Enjoys school 

1 2 2 1 2 2 

Child's race and ethnicity

 Black, non-Hispanic vs. white, non-Hispanic 0.79* 0.82 0.83 1.32* 1.28* 1.32* 1.2

 Hispanic vs. white, non-Hispanic .......... 1.00 1.03 1.04 0.97 1.01 1.02 1.

Child's sex (male) ....................... 0.49* 0.49* 0.48* 0.63* 0.61* 0.61* 1.8

Child's grade level

 Grades 6-8 vs. Grades 1-5 ................ 0.74* 0.73* 0.78* 0.62* 0.59* 0.63* 1.8

 Grades 9-12 vs. Grades 1-5 ............... 0.50* 0.52* 0.59* 0.48* 0.44* 0.53* 2.6

Education of mother/guardian ............. 1.12* 1.12* 1.08 1.15* 1.19* 1.14* 0.7

Household income ....................... 1.01 1.01 1.01 1.01 1.00 1.00 0.9

Family type

 Single-mother vs. stepfather family ......... 0.90 0.90 0.89 0.90 0.90 0.88 0.

 Nonparent/guardian vs. stepfather family .... 0.88 0.90 0.

Nonresident father's involvement in school

 Moderate/high ......................... 1.39* 1.38* 1.28 1.34* 1.25 1.15 0.5

 One activity ........................... 1.31* 1.34* 1.30* 1.22 1.16 1.12 0.6

 No contact in last year ................... 0.90 0.85 0.86 1.23 1.26 1.28 0.

 Never contact with child ................. 1.08 1.14 1.14 1.17 1.11 1.12 0.

Nonresident father paid any child support in 1.17 1.20* 1.17 1.17 1.19 1.16 0.7

last year ...............................

Involvement of resident mother ............ 1.17* 1.22* 

F(14,67)=11.02) F(13,68)=11.35 F(14,67)=11.22 F(14,67)=8.17 F(13,68)=8.55 F(14,67)=10.23 F(14,67

*p<.05

1

 Model 1 applies to all children with nonresident fathers. Some of these children live with foster parents or other nonparent guardians.

iological or adoptive mothers and have nonresident fathers.

 Models 2 and 3 apply to all children who live with their b

2

SOURCE U. S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1996 National Household Education Survey.
158

Table B10.— Adjusted odds ratios of selected student outcomes, by child and resident family characteristics, nonresident 

children schools, and whether nonresident fathers paid any child support: Students in grades 1-5, 1996.

Gets mostly A's Enjoys school Participates in extracurricul

activity

Characteristic Model 1 Model 2 Model 3 Model 1 Model 2 Model 3 Model 1 Model 2 Model 

1 2 2 1 2 2 1 2 

Child's race and ethnicity

 Black, non-Hispanic vs. white, non-Hispanic

................................... 0.84 0.87 0.89 1.25 1.15 1.16 1.49* 1.70* 1.84

 Hispanic vs. white, non-Hispanic ...... 1.06 1.19 1.19 0.82 0.84 0.84 0.77 0.76 0.76 

Child's sex (male) ................... 0.61* 0.66* 0.66* 0.63* 0.65* 0.64* 1.01 1.04 1.03 

Education of mother/guardian ......... 1.06 1.07 1.06 1.21* 1.22* 1.21* 1.42* 1.39* 1.30

Household income ................... 1.03 1.04 1.03 1.01 1.00 1.00 1.09* 1.12* 1.11

Family type ........................

 Single-mother vs. stepfather family ..... 0.99 0.98 0.96 0.90 0.90 0.89 0.90 0.89 0.83 

 Nonparent/guardian vs. stepfather family 0.97 0.68* 1.79* 

Nonresident father’s involvement in school

 Moderate/high ..................... 1.30 1.35 1.32 1.07 1.01 0.99 1.51 1.55 1.40 

 One activity ....................... 1.19 1.20 1.19 1.27 1.13 1.11 1.79* 1.80 1.70 

 No contact in last year ............... 1.00 0.90 0.91 1.06 1.02 1.03 1.38 1.46 1.55 

 Never contact with child ............. 0.88 0.91 0.91 0.99 0.93 0.93 1.05 1.00 0.98 

Nonresident father paid any child support 

in last year ......................... 0.99 0.98 0.96 1.14 1.11 1.09 1.28 1.31 1.25 

Involvement of resident mother ........ 1.11 1.07 1.40

F(12,69)= F(11,70)= F(12,69)= F(12,69)= F(11,70)= F(12,69)= F(12,69)= F(11,70)= F(12,69

1.85 1.78 1.68 3.33 3.12 2.75 7.00 5.90 6.91 

*p<.05

 Model 1 applies to all children with nonresident fathers. Some of these children live with foster parents or other nonparent guardians.

1

 Models 2 and 3 apply to all children who live with their biological or adoptive mothers and have nonresident fathers.

2

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1996 National Household Education Survey.
159

Table B11.— Adjusted odds ratios of selected student outcomes, by child and resident family characteristics, nonresident 

children schools, and whether nonresident fathers paid any child support: Students in grades 6-12, 1996

Gets mostly A's Enjoys school Par

Characteristic Model 1 Model 2 Model 3 Model 1 Model 2 Model 3 Mod

1 2 2 1 2 2 

Child's race and ethnicity

 Black, non-Hispanic vs. white, non-Hispanic . . 0.73* 0.73* 0.74* 1.39* 1.40* 1.45* 

 Hispanic vs. white, non-Hispanic ........... 0.91 0.88 0.90 1.12 1.17 1.21 

Child's sex (male) ........................ 0.38* 0.35* 0.35* 0.64* 0.58* 0.58* 

Child's grade level

 Grades 6-8 vs. Grades 9-12 ................ 1.48* 1.42* 1.30 1.31* 1.31* 1.16 

Education of mother/guardian .............. 1.16* 1.15* 1.12* 1.12* 1.15* 1.11 

Household income ........................ 1.00 0.99 0.98 1.01 1.01 1.00 

Family type

 Single-mother vs. stepfather family .......... 0.84 0.83 0.82 0.89 0.88 0.88 

 Nonparent/guardian vs. stepfather family ..... 0.81 1.08 

Nonresident father's involvement in school

 Moderate/high .......................... 1.54* 1.42 1.25 1.70* 1.58* 1.31 

 One activity ............................ 1.42* 1.45* 1.36 1.22 1.22 1.14 

 No contact in last year .................... 0.79 0.80 0.80 1.40 1.49* 1.52* 

 Never contact with child .................. 1.36 1.45 1.48 1.36 1.28 1.31 

Nonresident father paid any child support 

in last year .............................. 1.39* 1.46* 1.42* 1.20 1.27 1.22 

Involvement of resident mother ............. 1.25* 1.35* 

F(13,68) F(12,69) F(13,68) F(13,68) F(12,69) F(13,68) F(13

=10.04 =10.86 =11.98 =3.13 =3.61 =5.27 =4.

*p<.05

 Model 1 applies to all children with nonresident fathers. Some of these children live with foster parents or other nonparent guardians.

1

 Models 2 and 3 apply to all children who live with their biological or adoptive mothers and have nonresident fathers.

2

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1996 National Household Education Survey.
160

Table B11.— Adjusted odds ratios of selected student outcomes, by child and resident family characteristics, nonresident 

children schools, and whether nonresident fathers paid any child support: Students in grades 6-12, 1996—c

Ever repeated a grade Ever susp

Characteristic Model 1 Model 2 Model 3 Model 1 M

1 2 2 1 

Child's race and ethnicity

 Black, non-Hispanic vs. white, non-Hispanic ...... 1.27 1.19 1.19 1.60* 

 Hispanic vs. white, non-Hispanic ............... 1.09 1.11 1.09 0.66* 

Child's sex (male) ............................ 1.75* 1.84* 1.82* 2.80* 

Child's grade level ............................

 Grades 6-8 vs. Grades 9-12 .................... 0.72* 0.78 0.84 0.64* 

Education of mother/guardian .................. 0.82* 0.82* 0.84* 0.84* 

Household income ............................ 0.93* 0.93* 0.93* 0.97 

Family type

 Single-mother vs. stepfather family .............. 0.90 0.90 0.90 1.28 

 Nonparent/guardian vs. stepfather family ......... 0.91 1.20

Nonresident father's involvement in school

 Moderate/high .............................. 0.52* 0.50* 0.57* 0.41* 

 One activity ................................ 0.62 0.59* 0.62 0.50* 

 No contact in last year ........................ 0.88 0.97 0.98 0.83 

 Never contact with child ...................... 0.76 0.79 0.78 0.62* 

Nonresident father paid any child support in 0.68* 0.68* 0.69* 0.55* 

last year ....................................

Involvement of resident mother ................. 0.85* 

F(13,68)=7.58 F(12,69)=8.14 F(13,68)=7.74 F(13,68)=10.42 F(1

*p<.05

 Model 1 applies to all children with nonresident fathers. Some of these children live with foster parents or other nonparent guardians.

1

 Models 2 and 3 apply to all children who live with their biological or adoptive mothers and have nonresident fathers.

2

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1996 National Household Education Survey.