Stephany Cuevas, EdM Presentation at 2016 Science of HOPE In this session, participants will be introduced to family and community engagement research in order to begin to interrogate why we need to partner with families and communities in service work. Participants will be exposed to different narratives and perspectives about families and communities and will be engaged in conversations about how to push beyond deficit thinking and stereotypes, which often deter partnership opportunities. Additionally, participants will be introduced to frameworks, including research-based best practices, which allow us to understand how to do partnership work in a mutually benefiting and respectful matter.

1. Beyond Clients and
Boundaries: The Importance of
Family and Community
Engagement in Service Work
Stephany Cuevas, Ed.M.
Harvard University
@estefa_nee

2. Today’s
Session
Family and Community
Engagement 101
Barriers to Engagement
Power of Partnerships and
Organizing
Discussion and Q&A

4. Family and
Community
Engagement 101

8. What do we
mean by “family
engagement”?
Family engagement is any
way that a child’s adult
caretaker (biological
parents, foster parents.
siblings, grandparents,
etc.) effectively supports
learning and healthy
development.

9. Involvement vs. Engagement
The latin root of the word "involvement" is “involvere” which means to
wrap around, cover or envelop; roll, cause to roll.
The latin root of the word "engagement" is “engare” which means to
make a formal agreement, to contract with; to pledge; an obligation to
do something.
(Mapp, 2012)

10. Families are engaged as:
•Supporters
of
their
children’s
learning
•Encouragers
of
an
achievement
iden3ty,
a
posi3ve
self
image,
and
a
“can
do”
spirit
•Monitors
of
their
children’s
3me,
behavior,
boundaries
and
resources
•Models
of
lifelong
learning
and
enthusiasm
for
educa3on
•Advocates
for
improved
learning
opportuni3es
for
their
children
and
at
their
schools
•Decision-­‐makers/choosers
of
educa3onal
op3ons
for
their
child,
the
school,
and
community
•Collaborators
with
school
staff
and
members
of
the
community
(Mapp, 2012)

11. Ecological Model
Bronfenbrenner, 1979

12. Barriers to Family Engagement
Low-income parents, parents of color, and immigrant parents face different
barriers in their engagement (Holcomb-McCoy, 2010; Fordham, 1996; Gándara, 1995;
Savitz-Romer, 2012; Suarez-Orozco, Suarez-Orozco, & Todorova, 2008; Zarate et al., 2011)
Lack of knowledge of process
Underresourced schools
Distrusting relationships with schools
Language barriers
Unfamiliarity with American society and education system

13. Redefining Family Engagement: Responses
to Barriers
High academic expectations
Encourage students to seek out resources (e.g. college access programs)
Share own personal stories of hardships and immigration
Have explicit conversations dreams and aspirations
Convey the importance of hard work and education
(Ceja,
2004;
Delgado-­‐Gaitan,
1994;
Lopez,
2001;
Savitz-­‐Romer
&
Bouffard,
2012;
Yosso,
2005;
Zarate
et
al.,
2011)

14. Funds of
Knowledge
(Moll, Amanti, Neff, &
Gonzalez, 2001, p.133)
“The historically
accumulated and
culturally developed
bodies of knowledge
and skills essential
for household or
individual functioning
and well-being.”

15. “Service systems require clients and community organizations
require citizens. Thats is why service systems are often
antithetical to powerful communities. Systems are hierarchical
and not democratic. They harness people’s power to execute
the plan of a central authority. Community organizations are
the vehicles that harness the potential power of the citizens to
create and execute their own plan. Citizens make power by
coming together and take power by acting together on issues
(McKnight, 1991, p. 41).”

16. Are services are
bad for people?

17. Relationships
Relational trust
Shared power

18. A Match on
Dry Grass
Mark K. Warren, Karen L. Mapp, and the Community Organizing
and School Reform Project

19. Mark Warren, Karen Mapp & 15
doctoral students, Harvard
Graduate School of Education
4-year, 6-site qualitative study of CO
efforts in school reform, focusing
on processes and strategies
- Northwest Bronx Community &
Clergy Coalition – NYC
- Southern Echo – Mississippi
Delta
- PACT – San Jose (PICO)
- One LA-IAF in Los Angeles
- LSNA – Chicago
- Padres y Jovenes Unidos –
Denver

21. The Roots
- Strong organizing has
deep roots in tradition
- Organizing vs.
mobilizing
- Drawing on collective
values and extant ties
- Engage values and
interests into action

22. The Trunk
- The core processes
of organizing
- Build new
relationships and
expand identities
- Relationships for long
term change versus
silver bullet or top-
down reform

23. The Environment
- Organizers’ sensitivity
to local experiences,
needs, knowledge
- Availability of allies
(e.g., alliances with
educators)

24. The Leaves
- The effects of
organizing
- Transformational
change versus
transactional change
- Transformation at 3
levels: individuals,
community, and
institutional

32. It is critical, therefore, that we distinguish between creative
conflict and negative dissonance between family and
school. The former is inevitable in changing society and
adaptive to the development and socialization of children.
The latter is dysfunctional to child growth and acculturation
and degrading to families, communities, and culture.
Educational practitioners, who are daily engaged in trying
to shape and clarify their relationship with parents and
community, must especially learn to discern the positive
and negative faces of conflict.- Sarah Lawrence-Lightfoot

33. Thank you!
CONTACT
INFORMATION
Stephany Cuevas
stc656@mail.harvard.edu