We examine the parent/teacher relationship through Maslow’s (1943)  Hierarchy of Needs, which theorizes that physiological and safety needs  must be met before someone feels a sense of belonging, and that sense of  belonging and esteem are needed for self-actualization (reaching one’s  full potential). We discuss ways to meet the basic needs of parents with  the purpose of fostering positive collaborative partnerships between  parents and special education teachers

Keith, Deanna L, Dr.

Spaulding, Lucinda S,

English

Liberty University Digital Commons

Liberty UniversityDigitalCommons@LibertyUniversityFaculty Publications and Presentations School of Education11-2011Applying Maslow's Hierarchy to the Parent/Teacher RelationshipDeanna L. Keith Dr.Liberty University, dlkeith@liberty.eduLucinda S, SpauldingLiberty University, lsspaulding@liberty.eduFollow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.liberty.edu/educ_fac_pubsPart of the Education CommonsThis Conference Presentation is brought to you for free and open access by the School of Education at DigitalCommons@Liberty University. It hasbeen accepted for inclusion in Faculty Publications and Presentations by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@Liberty University. Formore information, please contact scholarlycommunication@liberty.edu.Recommended CitationKeith, Deanna L. Dr. and Spaulding, Lucinda S,, "Applying Maslow's Hierarchy to the Parent/Teacher Relationship" (2011). FacultyPublications and Presentations. 214.http://digitalcommons.liberty.edu/educ_fac_pubs/214APPLYING MASLOW’S HIERARCHY  TO THE PARENT/TEACHER RELATIONSHIP  Lucinda S. Spaulding, Ph.D.  Deanna L. Keith, Ed.D. Liberty University Develop a better understanding of Maslow’s Hierarchy as it applies to the parent/teacher relationship  To learn and exchange strategies for fostering positive, working relationships with parents of children with disabilities  PURPOSE OF THIS SESSION   Legal:   Parental involvement in the IEP process is required by law (IDEA,  2004)  Educational:   Research shows that students whose parents are involved in their educational process achieve higher academically than their peers.   Practical:   No one knows a child better than their own parent(s). Their input,  support, and partnership is essential.   Personal/Professional:   Teachers and schools play a powerful role in the life trajectories of students with disabilities and children from poverty  SIGNIFICANCE OF THIS SESSION   Introduction   SES and Disability   Maslow’s Hierarchy   The IEP Meeting   General Strategies   Conclusion  PRESENTATION OVERVIEW SPECIAL EDUCATORS  Define your role/priorities as a special educator:    Define your role/priorities as a parent:   PARENTS ROLES Parents Special Educators Parents Special Educators Or?        CONSIDER…  “Poverty . . . may be a greater hardship than having a child with a disability”  (Thurston & Navarrette, 2003, p. 45).  Poverty and low SES are empirically linked with disability   Study 1 (Blair & Scott, 2002):   Sample: 159, 129 children in the state of Florida   Method: linked birth records with school record data   Findings:   “30% of LD placements among boys and 39% of LD placements among girls were attributable to what can be considered low SES markers” (Blair & Scott, 2002, p. 19).    Study 2 (Thurston & Navarrette, 2003):   Sample: 263 low income mothers from 4 states (Kansas, Tennessee, Texas, Florida)  Method: Descriptive statistics and group comparisons (Chi square)   Findings:   40% of mothers reported having a child with a disability  2x s as many mothers who did not complete 8th grade had a child with a disability POVERTY AND DISABILITY  Poor attendance & participation  Increased frequency of relocations   Poor brain development  I l l iteracy & low achievement   Learners unready to learn  Inadequate parental support   Demand on exceptional education  services    W i s h o n ,  P .  ( 2 0 0 9 ,  N o v e m b e r ) .  W h e n  t h e  e c o n o m y  f a l t e r s :  P o v e r t y ,  c u l t u r e ,  a n d  e d u c a t i o n  [ P o w e r P o i n t s l i d e s ] .  P a p e r  p r e s e n t e d  a t  t h e  a n n u a l  c o n f e r e n c e  o f  t h e  V i r g i n i a  A s s o c i a t i o n  o f  C o l l e g e s  o f  T e a c h e r  E d u c a t i o n  a n d  A s s o c i a t i o n  o f  T e a c h e r  E d u c a t o r s  o f  V i r g i n i a ,  S w e e t  B r i a r ,  V A  IMPACT OF POVERTY ON STUDENTS  Family Impact  Class system – “Haves” and “Have -nots”  The disparity between America’s rich and poor is the largest since 1928    Effects  Family Stress & Dysfunction  Substance Abuse  Gang Activity  Homelessness  Approximately 1 out of every 50 children in America are homeless…about 1.5 million in all.  IMPACT ON FAMILIES  Focused on coping and survival   Little formal education  Low self -esteem/self-confidence  Uncomfortable around teachers  Materially and emotionally stressed          S ee  T h u r s to n ,  L .  P. ,  &  N ava r r ete ,  L .  A .  ( 2 011) .  Ru r a l ,  p ove r t y - l eve l  m o t h er s :  A  c o m p a r a t i ve  s t u d y  o f  t h o se  w i t h  a n d  w i t h o u t  c h i ld r en  w h o  h ave  sp ec ia l  n eed s .  Ru r a l  S p e c i a l  E d u c a t i on  Q u a r ter l y ,  3 0 ( 1 ) ,  3 9 - 4 6 .   CHARACTERISTICS OF PARENTS FROM LOW SES BACKGROUNDS “The IEP process places demands on parents beyond what is often expected in other types of family-school partnerships”  ~ N ew m a n,  2 0 0 5 ,  p .  7 - 4  FURTHERMORE…  Maslow’s (1943) Hierarchy of Needs  “A theory of Human Motivation”    Grounded in psychology, includes elements of motivation   Hierarchy begins with the most basic,  fundamental needs; ends with self -actualization   Basic level needs must be met before there can be a focus on higher level needs are focused    Has been applied to:   Business  Marketing  Counseling  Psychology  MASLOW’S (1943) HIERARCHY  Free and reduced breakfast & lunch   Attention to proper lighting, heating, ergonomics, etc.   School nurse on staff   Focus on school culture and classroom community   School counseling for social/emotional challenges  Student centered classrooms  Gifted programming    APPLIED TO STUDENTS A thorough and systematic review of the literature reveals that Maslow’s Hierarchy has not yet been specifically applied to parents. PARENTS?  PHYSIOLOGICAL   “Can I put food on the table tonight?”     “Will there be enough at the end of the month to pay the electric bill?”   SAFETY  Economic/financial safety  Personal security  Social   “Will this job offer health insurance?”   “Am I safe in this shelter?”   “Will this neighborhood be safer than where we came from?”    SOCIAL/LOVE/BELONGING “Am I dressed right?”   “Will they see my point of view”?  “Why do I come when they have decided everything already?”   “I don’t remember the meaning of the acronyms being used by everyone in this meeting… I feel like they are speaking another language”    ESTEEM  “Will they value my opinion?”   “Do they think I am a bad parent?”     SELF-ACTUALIZATION  “Am I a partner in my child’s educational process?”   “Did I help solve some problems?”    “Parents often view the IEP meeting as an opportunity for educators to brief them on the failures of their chi ld”   (Fish, 2006, p.  57)  THE IEP MEETING  Many parents feel guilty, intimidated, disenfranchised, alienated, and embarrassed  Educators dominate the decision making process   Recipients of information rather than collaborators   Perceive their input is often not welcomed, respected, or valued   Describe their experience at the meeting as traumatic, confusing, and complicated  Reluctant to ask questions or reveal their lack of understanding of the process  Il l  equipped; at a disadvantage because they don’t know the terminology   Desire to be treated as equal partners in the process     Fish ,  W.  W.  (2006) .  Percept ions of  parents  of  students  with  aut ism towards the IEP meet ing:  A case study of  one family  support  group chapter .  Educat ion,  127 (1) ,  56 -68.    Fish,  W. W. (2008).  The IEP meeting:  Perceptions of parents of students who receive special  education services.  Preventing School  Fai lure,  53 (1) ,  8 -14.   RESEARCH ABOUT PARENTS PERCEPTIONS OF THE IEP MEETING  Practice reframing: “Reframing provides a way for teachers to build a new perspective and vocabulary around the child and family. . .  .  Most negative behaviors can be viewed from a positive perspective” (p. 208)   State the behavior in observable terms, rather than labeling the type of behavior (e.g., “he threw a chair at a peer” rather than “he is violent and dangerous”)  Talk to the parents about the IEP meeting (the purpose, welcome them to bring information)   Make parents aware of any potential conflicts ahead of time   Ask parents if they have any concerns they would like you to address in the meeting  Provide parents with clearly labeled DRAFT reports that will be discussed at the meeting     PLANNING FOR THE MEETING Weishaar, P. M. (2010). Twelve ways to incorporate strengths-based planning into the IEP process. The Clearing House, 83, 207 – 210.  Make nametags if it is a large group or there are people who the parents may not know  Seat the parents next to the person taking notes and share the notes with the parents   Begin the meeting with each person in attendance making a statement about the student’s strengths and abilities.   Address participants respectfully and professionally.   Solicit parent input about goals for the future (discuss what the student can do and what you want the student to be able to do).  PRESENTATION AT THE IEP MEETING Weishaar, P. M. (2010). Twelve ways to incorporate strengths-based planning into the IEP process. The Clearing House, 83, 207 – 210.   “Remember that IEP team decisions have a profound effect on the student and family.”  THE IEP MEETING Weishaar, P. M. (2010). Twelve ways to incorporate strengths-based planning into the IEP process. The Clearing House, 83, 207 – 210. STRATEGIES FOR DEVELOPING PARTNERSHIPS WITH PARENTS For:  • teachers • schools • administrators • teacher educators KNOW YOUR STUDENTS’ PARENTS  Subgroups of Parents Ideas for Involvement Two-Career Parents Put things in print.  These parents will read and keep informed. Involved Parents These parents are at school.  The issue may be over involvement.  Sometimes boundaries are necessary. Non-Working and uninvolved Parents This occurs at both end of economic spectrum. Phone banks where parents call for updates. Home contact is powerful. Surrogate Parents These are grandparents, foster parents, etc. Often need emotional support (e.g., assign mentor who touches base with them monthly). Payne, R.K. (2005). A framework for understanding poverty (4th ed.). Highlands, TX: aha! Process, Inc. HIDDEN RULES OF ECONOMIC CLASS Poverty Middle Class Wealth Possessions People Things “One of a Kind” objects, legacies, pedigrees Personality Is for entertainment, sense of humor is highly valued Is for acquisition and stability. Achievement is highly valued Is for connections, financial, political, social connections highly valued Clothing Clothing valued for individual style and expression of personality. Clothing valued for its quality and acceptance into the norms of middle class. Label important. Clothing valued for its artistic sense and expression. Designer important. Time Present most important. Decision  made for moment based on feelings or survival. Future most important.  Decision made against future ramifications.  Traditions and past history most important. Decision made partially on basis of tradition decorum. Education Valued and revered as abstract but not as reality. Education is about facts.  Crucial for climbing success ladder and making money. Necessary tradition for making and maintaining connections. Language Casual register.  Language is about survival. Formal register. Language is about negotiation. Formal register. Language is about connection. Driving Forces Survival, relationships, entertainment. Work and achievement. Financial, political, social, connections. Destiny Believes in fate. Cannot do much to mitigate chance. Believes in choice. Can change future with good choices now. Noblesse oblige. Payne, R.K. (2005). A framework for understanding poverty (4th ed.). Highlands, TX: aha! Process, Inc.  Make a “good phone call home” the first week of school. Note only positives!   Ask parents their preferred mode of communication (phone, email, agenda, conference, etc.)   Schedule meetings according to their schedules   Compliment their parenting skills   Ask for their input and suggestions   Ask them what works at home  Use language that reinforces you are a partnership/team in the educational process of their child   Prepare parents for taking an active role in the IEP meeting   Be sensitive to cultural diverse values    STRATEGIES: ON THE PERSONAL LEVEL  STRATEGIES:  PARENT/TEACHER CONFERENCES   Know questions/techniques to facilitate conferences   Stay away from judgments; use data   Identify vague qualifiers   “It’s better”…..better than what?   Identify fuzzy verbs  “always”  Identify the emotion in a statement   Identify the hidden rules or beliefs   Ensure translators are available   Assist with transportation and child -care for parents with young children   Educate families about special education law   Offer programs for fathers and extended families   Provide life skills and life management workshops   Offer computer classes  Targeted outreach to parents of children with disabilities   Support groups   Forums for sharing and receiving information and support   Connect parents to services and programs in the local community    STRATEGIES: SCHOOL LEVEL  Release time  Special recognition  Compensatory funding  Scheduling accommodations  Moral support       From:   Rock, M. L. (2000). Parents as equal partners: Balancing the scales in IEP development. TEACHING Exceptional Children, 32 (6), 30-37.    STRATEGIES: ADMINISTRATIVE  Teach strategies to improve parent involvement   Explore dif ficult social and cultural issues   Field experiences in schools with critical needs   Field experiences in schools with cultural dif ferences   Provide Relevant and Enriching Professional Development   Student reflections that examine the impact of their dif ferences from others   Examine the impact of poverty on learning & development   Use culturally relevant curriculum  Develop students of culture and dif ference  STRATEGIES/IMPLICATIONS FOR TEACHER TRAINING ADDITIONAL STRATEGIES?   Dabkowski ,  D .  M. ,  (2004) .  Encouraging act ive  parent  par t ic ipat ion in  IEP team meet ings .  Teaching  Except ional  Chi ldren ,  36,  34 -39 .   Duf f ie ld ,  B .  & Love l l ,  P.  (2008) .  The  economic cr is is  h i ts  home:  The  unfo ld ing  increase  in  ch i ld  and youth  homelessness .  Ret r ieved f rom Nat iona l  Associat ion for  the  Homeless  Ch i ldren and Youth  and F i r s t  Focus :  h t tp ://www.naehcy.org/d l/TheEconomicCr is isH i t sHome.pdf   Fish ,  W.  W.  (2006) .  Percept ions  of  parents  of  s tudents  wi th  aut ism towards  the  IEP meet ing :  A  case  study  of  one  fami ly  suppor t  group chapter.  Educat ion ,  127 (1 ) ,  56 -68.    Fish ,  W.  W.  (2008) .  The  IEP meet ing :  percept ions  of  parents  of  s tudents  who rece ive  specia l  educat ion ser v ices .  Prevent ing  School  Fa i lure ,  53 (1 ) ,  8 -14 .   Gi lber t ,  G .  (2008) .  Rich  and poor  in  Amer ica.  Santa Barbara,  CA:  ABC -CLIO ,  Inc   Kalyanpur,  M. ,  Harr y,  B . ,  & Skr t ic ,  T.  (2000) .  Equi t y  and advocacy  expectat ions  of  cul tural l y  d iverse  fami l ies ’  par t ic ipat ion in  specia l  educat ion.  In ternat ional  Journa l  o f  D isab i l i ty,  Development  and Educat ion ,  47 ,  119-1 36.   Maslow,  A .  H .  (1954) .  A  theor y  of  human mot ivat ion .  Psycho log ica l  Review,  50 (4 ) ,  370-396.   Mor t ie r,  K . ,  Hunt ,  P. ,  Leroy,  M. ,  Van de  Put te ,  I . ,  & Van Hove ,  G.  (2010) .  Communi t ies  of  pract ice  in  inc lus ive  educat ion .  Educat iona l  Stud ies ,  36(3) ,  345–355.   Newman,  L .  (2005) .  Fami ly  invo lvement  in  the  educat iona l  deve lopment  of  youth  with  d isabi l i t ies .  A  specia l  topic  repor t  of  f ind ings  f rom the  Nat ional  Longi tud ina l  Trans i t ion Study  -2  (NLTS2) .   Payne,  R.K.  (2005) .  A  f ramework for  unders tanding pover ty  (4th  ed. ) .  H igh lands ,  TX:  aha!  Process ,  Inc .   Rock ,  M.  L .  (2000) .  Parents  as  equal  par tners :  Balancing  the  scales  in  IEP deve lopment .  TEACHING Except iona l  Chi ldren,  32 (6 ) ,  30 -37.  RESOURCES  Rosenberg,  M.S . ,  West l ing ,  D .L .  & McLeskey,  J .  (2008) .  Spec ial  educat ion for  today’s  teachers .  Upper  Saddle  River,  NJ :  Pearson Educat ion,  Inc .   Salembier,  G , .  & Furney ,  K .  S .  (1997) .  Fac i l i tat ing par t ic ipat ion:  Parents ’  percept ions of  thei r  invo lvement in  the IEP/t ransi t ion p lanning  process.  Career  Development  for  Except ional  Ind iv iduals ,  20 (1 ) ,  29 -42.    Thurston,  L .  P. ,  & Navarrete ,  L .  A .  (2011) .  Rural ,  pover ty - level  mothers :  A  comparat ive  s tudy of  those wi th  and wi thout  chi ldren who have spec ia l  needs.  Rura l  Spec ial  Educat ion Quar ter ly ,  30 (1 ) ,  39 -46.   Todd,  S . ,  Bromley,  J . ,  Ioannou ,  K . ,  Harr ison,  J . ,  Mel lor,  C . ,  Tay lor,  E . ,  & Crabt ree,  E .  (2010) .  Us ing  group -based parent  t ra in ing inter vent ions  wi th  parents  of  chi ldren with d isabi l i t ies :  A  descr ipt ion of  process ,  content  and outcomes in  c l in ica l  pract ice .  Chi ld  and Adolescent  Mental  Heal th ,  15 (3 ) ,  171–175.  do i :  10 .1111/j .1475-3588.2009.00553.x .    U.S .  Depar tment  of  Educat ion,  Of f ice  of  E lementar y and Secondar y  Educat ion,  Student  Achievement and School  Accountabi l i ty  Programs.  (2009)  Educat ion for  homeless ch i ldren and youths  program. Retr ieved f rom http ://www2.ed.gov/programs/homeless/data -comp-04-07.pdf   Weishaar,  P.  M.  (2010) .  Twelve ways  to  incorporate  st rengths -based p lanning  into  the IEP process .  The Clear ing House ,  83 ,  207–210.   Wishon,  P.  (2009,  November) .  When the economy fa l ters :  Pover ty,  cu l ture,  and educat ion [PowerPoint  s l ides] .  Paper  presented at  the annual  conference of  the V i rg in ia  Associat ion of  Co l leges of  Teacher  Educat ion and Associat ion of  Teacher  Educators  of  V i rg in ia ,  Sweet  Br iar,  VA   RESOURCES  Lucinda S. Spaulding  lsspaulding@liberty.edu  http://works.bepress.com/lucinda_spaulding/   Deanna L. Keith  dlkeith@liberty.edu  http://works.bepress.com/deanna_keith/  CONTACT US 

Applying Maslow\u27s Hierarchy to the Parent/Teacher Relationship

https://digitalcommons.liberty.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1236&amp;context=educ_fac_pubs

Applying Maslow\u27s Hierarchy to the Parent/Teacher Relationship

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Liberty University Digital Commons