Parents evenings, it could be argued, are a less-than-ideal way of communicating with families in 2017. But this is not such a big issue in some countries. In fact, when I visited Finland, one teacher commented that they hadn’t seen a parent for a while - because most communication was done electronically.
I’m not for one minute saying parents evenings are bad and must go, but we should be able to communicate with parents much better. Since my month-long educational visit to Finland and Estonia in 2014, I’ve become more and more convinced that a significant way to improve educational outcomes for children lies in improving communication between school and home.
Schools in both countries use computer programs that link parents, teachers and pupils. These allow teachers to input brief summaries of lessons, log attendance, set homework or test dates, record grades and send messages to both parents and pupils.
The programs are easy to use and largely do everything a teacher, parent or pupil would want, within one platform. When parents and pupils log on, they can see everything that has been uploaded by the teacher, from lesson summaries and grades through to the latest coursework. Parents can find out if homework is due and when tests are set for, without ever having to ask their child. The main advantage is that parents are kept in the loop about what their child is learning, and can regularly track their child’s progress. Therefore, parents can play a much greater role in supporting their child throughout their time in school - particularly beneficial in the early years of education, when parents are more often equipped to help children.
One solution to rule them all
It appears that most schools in Scotland use a combination of official and unofficial computer programs to communicate with parents and pupils, including SEEMiS, Edmodo, Twitter and ClassDojo, to name but a few. All have positives, but also limitations, meaning many teachers often rely on a combination of programs.
The idea of one simple-to-use computer program that incorporates the best aspects of all these systems would appear to have a number of benefits. A standardised model for schools should, for example, improve the consistency of communication with parents and pupils across Scotland. Families would know exactly where to find information, and if a child moves school they would be familiar with the system of communication.
To my knowledge, no formal study has ever been undertaken to measure the impact of these computer programs in Finland and Estonia on raising attainment. Nevertheless, teachers in both countries believe that the programs help parents track their child’s progress. Also, teachers, parents and pupils benefit from knowing that all school-related information is in one place, accessible 24/7 from computers or smartphones.
Many schools still rely on paper report cards, sent home periodically via a child, hoping they’ll get to the parent or carer, not left at the bottom of a school bag
Perhaps we don’t have to look as far as our European friends to see that better communication between teachers and parents can reap better educational rewards for children. A recent study by researchers at Queen’s University in Belfast, Texting Parents, found that better communication between schools and parents using text messaging improved progress in maths by the equivalent of one month of teaching.
During the study, parents in 36 secondary schools in England received text messages (about three per month) updating them of test dates, whether homework was submitted on time and providing brief summaries of what was being learned at school. In addition to the improvement in maths, researchers also found that better communication led to a reduction in absenteeism - presumably because the children knew the links between home and school were stronger than before. The study also revealed that many schools liked the immediacy of the communication, and the vast majority of parents were accepting of the content, frequency and timings of the texts.
Give us a break
Critics of such initiatives often cite the lack of time teachers have to input summaries of lessons, homework or grades, and the workload it would create. These are undoubtedly valid points. However, perhaps we should be following Finland and Estonia’s lead here by introducing breaks between lessons, allowing teachers time to communicate more constructively with parents. Schools in Finland and Estonia have 10-15-minute breaks between all lessons, which ensures that teachers can input updates and keep parents informed.
Unfortunately, this looks a distant dream for Scotland, given moves by some local authorities to reduce the school week to a four-and-a-half days. Online communication and breaks between lessons go hand-in-hand: teachers simply would not have the time otherwise.
Many schools still rely on paper report cards, sent home periodically via a child, hoping they’ll get to the parent or carer, not left at the bottom of a school bag. I honestly feel if in Scotland we had put as much effort and resources into addressing home-school communication as we have into adapting the curriculum, we’d have had more success in raising attainment and improving the education system more generally.
Schools in Scotland could learn valuable lessons from how Finland and Estonia have embraced technology to enhance communication with parents and increase families’ involvement in their child’s education. By giving parents the tools to follow their child’s progress, our schools stand a far better chance of realising the Scottish government’s priority to raise attainment and close the gap between rich and poor.
Dr Neil McIntyre is a chemistry teacher at Webster’s High School in Kirriemuir, Angus
