Originally Posted by HowlerKarma
Quote
They actually state 4 types of involvement that matter most: reading books to young children, discussing complex issues with children, parents reading for enjoyment themselves and meeting with teachers, volunteering at school, helping with homework.
They suggest that parents volunteering at school is sometimes associated with lower achievement because it is a reactive response to the kid's struggles.

I have another hypothesis here-- SOME parents (especially in that higher SES group) are volunteering because it is about their own egos.

These are the "class parents" who basically play Martha Stewart all year long any time the teacher allows it.

It's not a surprise to me in the least that such activity doesn't do a darned thing to elevate their child's performance. For most of that group (and I've seen a few) it's not about their kids. I mean-- parenting isn't. For them, parenting (like everything else) is about fulfilling their own personal agenda.

Their kids are-- to make a generalization-- often simply objects, stage props in their drama of Perfect Parenting.


I think that people volunteer in the schools for a variety of reasons, definitely some of them are doing this. I have a friend who's kid's school is very high SES and their PTA raises thousands of dollars every year with fancy silent auction formals and things like that. My kids' school PTA is nothing like this and raises nowhere near as much money.

Another hypothesis is that middle class neighborhoods have a lot of well educated stay at home moms who once held jobs and careers. Trading that for full time parenting can leave some feeling empty and PTA involvement can fill that void. Also not about the child's performance (but imo, also not necessarily harmful or irrelevant).

Unfortunately, the Slate article provides no real data on American parents. Just makes a lot of generalizations about them instead.