View in EDS HTML Full Text PDF Full Text

The Importance of Parents for Key Outcomes among Socio-Economically Disadvantaged Students: Parents' Role in Emergency Remote Education

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: The Importance of Parents for Key Outcomes among Socio-Economically Disadvantaged Students: Parents' Role in Emergency Remote Education
Language: English
Authors: Vogel, Sebastian Nicolas Thomas (ORCID 0000-0003-2611-1860), Stang-Rabrig, Justine (ORCID 0000-0002-7177-0016), McElvany, Nele (ORCID 0000-0001-8649-5523)
Source: Social Psychology of Education: An International Journal. 2023 26(6):1565-1591.
Availability: Springer. Available from: Springer Nature. One New York Plaza, Suite 4600, New York, NY 10004. Tel: 800-777-4643; Tel: 212-460-1500; Fax: 212-460-1700; e-mail: customerservice@springernature.com; Web site: https://link.springer.com/
Peer Reviewed: Y
Page Count: 27
Publication Date: 2023
Document Type: Journal Articles
Reports - Research
Education Level: Secondary Education
Descriptors: Parent Participation, Outcomes of Education, Low Income Students, Socioeconomic Status, Parent Role, Emergency Programs, Distance Education, COVID-19, Pandemics, Secondary School Students, Foreign Countries
Geographic Terms: Germany
DOI: 10.1007/s11218-023-09801-2
ISSN: 1381-2890
1573-1928
Abstract: Parents play an important role in shaping behavioral and motivational outcomes in their child's education, presumably even more so during the COVID-19 pandemic, where concomitant school closures forced students worldwide to learn remotely at home, affecting socio-economically disadvantaged students most negatively. However, it remains unclear how different parent-focused family process variables (demanding-structuring and responsive-motivational parental involvement, responsibility for learning) and structure variables (socio-economic status, immigrant background) relate to important learning-related student outcomes, namely extrinsic and intrinsic motivation and actual participation in learning activities, during emergency remote education. Using questionnaire data from N = 117 German secondary school students (M[subscript age] = 15.14, SD = 0.93; 49.6% female) with a low average socio-economic status, structural equation models revealed associations between higher parental involvement and responsibility and higher motivational and behavioral student outcomes. Furthermore, immigrant background related negatively to some parent process variables, and indirectly negatively to extrinsic motivation. These results highlight parents' role in learning, particularly during emergency remote education.
Abstractor: As Provided
Entry Date: 2023
Accession Number: EJ1401284
Database: ERIC
Full text is not displayed to guests.
FullText Links:
  – Type: pdflink
    Url: https://content.ebscohost.com/cds/retrieve?content=AQICAHj0k_4E0hTGH8RJwT4gCJyBsGNe_WN95AvKlDbXJGqwxwEvrsdpHXT4QiLQ3gpUB6UVAAAA4zCB4AYJKoZIhvcNAQcGoIHSMIHPAgEAMIHJBgkqhkiG9w0BBwEwHgYJYIZIAWUDBAEuMBEEDI-zJLnd51lZYk0StgIBEICBm-_HldOHNh6Lk8ZYlLKTmZqhtcjO58qX0D7Is94hhbxu__ge12j-K7bsNy7_n7NGHqIvx41siIjDoCmkgkTL5jww_-WASrrHuc-jEpk01R5x-gkshG1RXRlzTi3dMZg2_AoFaPTD-pYMjHYXDh0994CiTES-Kbb6IqAH1F6nsXPTUCCT3M_hJUEIh4yyIPYrlbt4nyUjUUBuqC_r
Text:
  Availability: 1
  Value: <anid>AN0173822329;luo01dec.23;2023Nov28.05:13;v2.2.500</anid> <title id="AN0173822329-1">The importance of parents for key outcomes among socio-economically disadvantaged students: Parents' role in emergency remote education </title> <p>Parents play an important role in shaping behavioral and motivational outcomes in their child's education, presumably even more so during the COVID-19 pandemic, where concomitant school closures forced students worldwide to learn remotely at home, affecting socio-economically disadvantaged students most negatively. However, it remains unclear how different parent-focused family process variables (demanding-structuring and responsive-motivational parental involvement, responsibility for learning) and structure variables (socio-economic status, immigrant background) relate to important learning-related student outcomes, namely extrinsic and intrinsic motivation and actual participation in learning activities, during emergency remote education. Using questionnaire data from N = 117 German secondary school students (M<sub>age</sub> = 15.14, SD = 0.93; 49.6% female) with a low average socio-economic status, structural equation models revealed associations between higher parental involvement and responsibility and higher motivational and behavioral student outcomes. Furthermore, immigrant background related negatively to some parent process variables, and indirectly negatively to extrinsic motivation. These results highlight parents' role in learning, particularly during emergency remote education.</p> <p>Keywords: Emergency remote education; Intrinsic motivation; Learning participation; Parental support; Secondary school</p> <p>Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at https://doi.org/10.1007/s11218-023-09801-2.</p> <hd id="AN0173822329-2">Introduction</hd> <p>The worldwide spread of the Sars-CoV-2 virus in the first months of 2020 had a large impact on educational systems internationally. In late March 2020, over 80% of students worldwide were affected by school closures (UNESCO, [<reflink idref="bib117" id="ref1">117</reflink>]). With this sudden shift in students' educational environment from schools to the home, differences in students' family situations influenced students' experience of the home learning situation (e.g., Cullinane & Montacute [<reflink idref="bib26" id="ref2">26</reflink>]; Pensiero et al., [<reflink idref="bib95" id="ref3">95</reflink>]) and key variables for educational success, such as learning engagement (e.g., Lawrence & Fakuade [<reflink idref="bib73" id="ref4">73</reflink>]; Steinmayr et al., [<reflink idref="bib111" id="ref5">111</reflink>]).</p> <p>During emergency remote education (ERE), students' experiences varied greatly. Studies revealed declines for all students on average in many areas, for example learning progress (e.g., Ludewig et al., [<reflink idref="bib85" id="ref6">85</reflink>]) and time spent on schoolwork (e.g., Grewenig et al., [<reflink idref="bib50" id="ref7">50</reflink>]) but especially disadvantaged students were negatively affected (e.g., Dietrich et al., [<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref8">33</reflink>]; Engzell et al., [<reflink idref="bib38" id="ref9">38</reflink>]). Overall, students spent significantly more learning time with their parents than with their teachers (Thorell et al., [<reflink idref="bib116" id="ref10">116</reflink>]), but levels of parental involvement (PI) differed, with disadvantaged and low-achieving students receiving less support from their parents (e.g., Bol, [<reflink idref="bib13" id="ref11">13</reflink>]; Werner & Woessmann, [<reflink idref="bib121" id="ref12">121</reflink>]). Theoretical models emphasize family process and structure variables' importance for learning- and achievement-related student variables (e.g., McElvany et al., [<reflink idref="bib88" id="ref13">88</reflink>]). Accordingly, previous research showed that family process variables like parents' educational support at home positively influence various student outcomes, such as achievement and academic motivation (e.g., Wilder, [<reflink idref="bib122" id="ref14">122</reflink>]; Shukla et al., [<reflink idref="bib109" id="ref15">109</reflink>]). Additionally, while the associations of parental involvement with facets of family background are complex, studies suggest a relation of home involvement specifically to family structure variables like socio-economic status (SES; e.g., Tan, [<reflink idref="bib114" id="ref16">114</reflink>]; Zhang et al., [<reflink idref="bib127" id="ref17">127</reflink>]). These associations might be even more relevant when education takes place in the homes, which requires students to motivate themselves or with help of their parents and pursue learning activities with less or no direct teacher support. Hence, parent and family variables' relation to student outcomes during home learning needs closer investigation. In this study, we specified a model based on the approach by McElvany et al. ([<reflink idref="bib88" id="ref18">88</reflink>]) to examine how, in a sample of especially vulnerable students from primarily disadvantaged socio-economic backgrounds, family process variables, namely demanding-structuring and responsive-motivational PI, as well as parental perceived responsibility for learning, related to students' intrinsic and extrinsic motivation and participation in learning activities during ERE. Additionally, we investigated whether family structure variables SES and immigrant background influenced those variables and relations.</p> <hd id="AN0173822329-3">Theory</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0173822329-4">Lockdown and emergency remote education</hd> <p>In reaction to the rapid spread of the SARS-CoV-2 virus, most countries around the world resorted to school closures, affecting more than 80% of enrolled learners worldwide in late March 2020 (UNESCO, [<reflink idref="bib117" id="ref19">117</reflink>]). This forced an unprecedented sudden shift from face-to-face instruction to alternative educational approaches on schools and students internationally, which Bozkurt et al. ([<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref20">17</reflink>]) summarized under the term <emph>emergency remote education.</emph> Internationally, many schools stayed closed for the remaining school year (UNICEF, [<reflink idref="bib118" id="ref21">118</reflink>]) or, as was the case for Germany, implemented strict infection control measures upon reopening, leading to students attending in-person instruction on alternating days. Thus, ERE remained part of most secondary school students' educational experience for the rest of the 2019/2020 school year not only in Germany but also many other countries worldwide.</p> <p>Examining parents' role during ERE, Thorell et al. ([<reflink idref="bib116" id="ref22">116</reflink>]) found that students spent considerably more learning time with their parents than their teachers, highlighting the importance of adequate parental support. First studies regarding ERE in secondary school confirmed a positive relation between PI and student commitment (Lawrence & Fakuade, [<reflink idref="bib73" id="ref23">73</reflink>]), and parents reported being more involved and spending more time learning for school with their children than before the pandemic (Panaoura, [<reflink idref="bib93" id="ref24">93</reflink>]; Werner & Woessmann, [<reflink idref="bib121" id="ref25">121</reflink>]). However, research also revealed that some parents felt inadequately prepared to support their children (e.g., Andrew et al., [<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref26">3</reflink>]; Haller & Novita, [<reflink idref="bib51" id="ref27">51</reflink>]; S. J. Lee et al., [<reflink idref="bib76" id="ref28">76</reflink>]), with parents from lower socio-economic backgrounds being less confident overall (Cullinane & Montacute, [<reflink idref="bib26" id="ref29">26</reflink>]). Additionally, research on how different PI strategies influenced students' individual learning in ERE is virtually nonexistent. This shows a pressing need for empirical studies examining PI's role for students' motivational and behavioral outcomes during ERE, while simultaneously considering potential influences of family structure variables.</p> <p>Turning now to the student perspective, considering how changes to students' learning environment wrought by ERE affected their schooling experiences is essential. Students' motivation played an integral role for learning processes in ERE (Baber, [<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref30">6</reflink>]; Chiu, [<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref31">21</reflink>]); however, outside the classroom, students could rely less on teachers being the source for motivating them and more than 40% of German secondary school teachers sampled by Schneider et al. ([<reflink idref="bib106" id="ref32">106</reflink>]) reported that motivating students worked (rather) badly. Additionally, over 60% of teachers in that sample indicated that ensuring equal participation of all students worked (rather) badly, which can only partially be explained by technical aspects and difficulties (Schneider et al., [<reflink idref="bib106" id="ref33">106</reflink>]). In line with pre-pandemic research highlighting the importance of students' motivation and self-regulation skills for successful participation in distance education (e.g., Kauffman, [<reflink idref="bib63" id="ref34">63</reflink>]), these findings imply that students bore more responsibility to partake in learning activities. Multiple studies focusing on the effect of pandemic-induced school closures on students have been conducted already (for a review, see Zancajo, [<reflink idref="bib126" id="ref35">126</reflink>]). First evidence from studies in England (Cattan et al., [<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref36">19</reflink>]) and Germany (Grewenig et al., [<reflink idref="bib50" id="ref37">50</reflink>]) showed that both primary and secondary school students spent less time doing schoolwork than before, especially students from marginalized and socio-economically disadvantaged families (Bayrakdar & Guveli, [<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref38">8</reflink>]; Dietrich et al., [<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref39">33</reflink>]). In turn, large-scale studies revealed significant education losses: In Germany, a comparison of fourth graders in 2021, one year after the outbreak of the pandemic, with students of the same grade in 2016 revealed significantly lower reading achievement even after controlling for changes in student composition and other variables, with the former group being estimated to be as much as four to six months of learning behind fourth graders in 2016 (Ludewig et al., [<reflink idref="bib85" id="ref40">85</reflink>]). For the initial period of school closures specifically, Engzell et al. ([<reflink idref="bib38" id="ref41">38</reflink>]) found that Dutch students suffered education losses comparable to the length of school closures across math, spelling, and reading, with losses being even larger for disadvantaged students, implying that students made barely any learning progress during that time. These findings are also in line with results of first literature reviews (e.g., Hammerstein et al., [<reflink idref="bib52" id="ref42">52</reflink>]) and meta-analysis (König & Frey, [<reflink idref="bib67" id="ref43">67</reflink>]) on an international scale, although some of the studies included might be subject to systematic bias and should thus be interpreted carefully. A cross-national parent survey by Zaccoletti et al. ([<reflink idref="bib125" id="ref44">125</reflink>]) showed significant motivation losses in primary and lower secondary school students during ERE. Motivation declines were likewise present in higher education students in the United States and Canada (Aguielera-Hermida, [<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref45">1</reflink>]; Daniels et al., [<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref46">28</reflink>]; Hicks et al., [<reflink idref="bib56" id="ref47">56</reflink>]), and Klapproth et al. ([<reflink idref="bib66" id="ref48">66</reflink>]) found that approximately two-thirds of surveyed German teachers encountered low student motivation as a barrier during ERE. Research focusing on English families (Andrew et al., [<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref49">3</reflink>]) and book checkouts in Danish public libraries (Jæger & Blaabæk, [<reflink idref="bib61" id="ref50">61</reflink>]) revealed that underprivileged students were provided with fewer educational resources at home and pre-pandemic studies imply similar patterns for the German context as well (Geis-Thöne, [<reflink idref="bib48" id="ref51">48</reflink>]). Additionally, studies from Germany (Werner & Woessmann, [<reflink idref="bib121" id="ref52">121</reflink>]), the Netherlands (Bol, [<reflink idref="bib13" id="ref53">13</reflink>]) and the United States (Gao et al., [<reflink idref="bib46" id="ref54">46</reflink>]) showed that especially low-achieving and disadvantaged students received lower levels of support from their parents during ERE.</p> <hd id="AN0173822329-5">Relations between family structure, family process, and individual student variables</hd> <p>To examine how differences between families influenced students' ERE experience, we considered a theoretical model including <emph>individual student variables</emph> as well as <emph>family structure variables</emph> and <emph>family process variables</emph>. This model allows an investigation of the interrelations of all three groups of variables, while simultaneously maintaining an important distinction between them. Especially the separation of family structure and process variables is necessary to fully understand the underlying processes influencing student outcomes during ERE. On the one hand, family structure variables comprise information about the family's background, such as household size, SES or immigrant background (McElvany et al., [<reflink idref="bib88" id="ref55">88</reflink>]; Brown & Mann, [<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref56">18</reflink>]). They can influence both family process variables and individual student outcomes and thus need to be considered, but usually cannot be changed easily. Family process variables on the other hand include parents' beliefs, cultural and communicative practices (Baumert et al., [<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref57">7</reflink>]; Davis-Kean, [<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref58">30</reflink>]), reflecting aspects of the family's cultural and social capital (Bourdieu, [<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref59">16</reflink>]). They are also associated with students' individual outcomes, serving as partial mediators for the effects of family structure variables (e.g., Serbin et al., [<reflink idref="bib108" id="ref60">108</reflink>]; von Otter, [<reflink idref="bib119" id="ref61">119</reflink>]). In contrast to structure variables, parents have more direct control over the process variables. Thus, considering family process variables in ERE is important, especially for identifying factors that allow parents to influence their children's outcomes in a positive way.</p> <p>This theoretical model has been applied in various educational settings (e.g., McElvany et al., [<reflink idref="bib88" id="ref62">88</reflink>]; Baumert et al., [<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref63">7</reflink>]; Davis-Kean, [<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref64">30</reflink>]) and is similarly applicable to the unique circumstances of ERE. A simplified depiction is provided in Fig. 1. Family structure variables like SES and immigrant background can influence both family process and student variables and were consequently included in the analyses. Regarding process variables, we focused on parents' role, including measures of PI and responsibility. As student variables, we included variables we deemed especially relevant for the extraordinary situation of ERE.</p> <p>Graph: Fig. 1 Simplified Model of Family Structure and Process Variables' Relations to Individual Student VariablesNote. Figure adapted from McElvany et al. ([<reflink idref="bib88" id="ref65">88</reflink>]). Indirect effects and intercorrelations are not depicted</p> <hd id="AN0173822329-6">Important individual student variables for emergency remote education</hd> <p>Students' ERE experience had many facets, but learning motivation was especially important due to its role within self-regulated learning and strong association with educational outcomes (e.g., Eom, [<reflink idref="bib39" id="ref66">39</reflink>]; Kriegbaum et al., [<reflink idref="bib71" id="ref67">71</reflink>]; Lim & Yeo, [<reflink idref="bib81" id="ref68">81</reflink>]). We included two central dimensions of school-related learning motivation: <emph>Extrinsic motivation</emph> means pursuing activities to achieve some external outcome, while <emph>intrinsic motivation</emph> comprises doing activities for their own sake, out of enjoyment of the activity or the challenge it entails (Ryan & Deci, [<reflink idref="bib101" id="ref69">101</reflink>]). The associations between extrinsic motivation and other educational outcomes, like achievement and cognitive engagement, are ambiguous (e.g., Lepper et al., [<reflink idref="bib78" id="ref70">78</reflink>]; Taylor et al., [<reflink idref="bib115" id="ref71">115</reflink>]; Walker et al., [<reflink idref="bib120" id="ref72">120</reflink>]), potentially due to varying levels of internal control in different subtypes of extrinsic motivation (Ryan & Deci, [<reflink idref="bib102" id="ref73">102</reflink>]). Intrinsic motivation, in contrast, relates consistently positively to educational outcomes, including academic achievement (Taylor et al., [<reflink idref="bib115" id="ref74">115</reflink>]), classroom engagement and setting challenging learning goals (Froiland & Worrell, [<reflink idref="bib43" id="ref75">43</reflink>]), and meaningful cognitive engagement (Walker et al., [<reflink idref="bib120" id="ref76">120</reflink>]). While not mutually exclusive (Litalien et al., [<reflink idref="bib82" id="ref77">82</reflink>]), direction and significance of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation's relation vary between studies (e.g., Lepper et al., [<reflink idref="bib78" id="ref78">78</reflink>]; Lemos & Veríssimo, [<reflink idref="bib77" id="ref79">77</reflink>]). To sum up, motivation is an important student outcome itself while also relating to other relevant learning variables. However, findings of reduced learning motivation (e.g., Aguielera-Hermida, [<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref80">1</reflink>]; Zaccoletti et al., [<reflink idref="bib125" id="ref81">125</reflink>]), as well as reports by students (Means & Neisler, [<reflink idref="bib89" id="ref82">89</reflink>]) and teachers (Klapproth et al., [<reflink idref="bib66" id="ref83">66</reflink>]) on lack of motivation as a core problem of ERE show the importance of studying students' motivation in this context.</p> <p>Similarly important for ERE is students' <emph>participation in learning activities</emph> when learning at home, outside of their typical classroom environment. Learning activities are tasks that learners partake in to pursue intended learning outcomes in an educational setting (Conole, [<reflink idref="bib24" id="ref84">24</reflink>]). Previous studies found a positive association between active participation in school learning and academic achievement (Finn & Cox, [<reflink idref="bib41" id="ref85">41</reflink>]; Schnitzler et al., [<reflink idref="bib107" id="ref86">107</reflink>]). Moreover, research focused on online learning demonstrated positive relations between participation in learning activities and course and learning satisfaction (Cheng & Chau, [<reflink idref="bib20" id="ref87">20</reflink>]; Im & Kang, [<reflink idref="bib58" id="ref88">58</reflink>]). Therefore, students' frequency of participation in learning activities is an important variable for education both inside and outside the regular classroom setting. Due to the importance of these student variables and the unique home learning situation, investigating how family process variables, especially parental variables presumably central to fostering these student outcomes, affected them during ERE is crucial.</p> <hd id="AN0173822329-7">Relevant family process variables</hd> <p>Theory and empirical research point out that several central student variables are associated with certain family process variables (e.g., Dettmers et al., [<reflink idref="bib32" id="ref89">32</reflink>]; J. S. Lee & Bowen, [<reflink idref="bib74" id="ref90">74</reflink>]; see also home literacy environment research, e.g., Dong et al., [<reflink idref="bib34" id="ref91">34</reflink>]; Niklas & Schneider, [<reflink idref="bib92" id="ref92">92</reflink>]). Of all potentially influential family process variables, parents' role in their children's education seems especially important during ERE. Parents had to partially assume the teacher's role (Knopik et al., [<reflink idref="bib68" id="ref93">68</reflink>]; Thorell et al., [<reflink idref="bib116" id="ref94">116</reflink>]), leading to them assuming the role of a proxy educator (e.g., Davis et al., [<reflink idref="bib29" id="ref95">29</reflink>]), and while most parents reported home learning support from schools (S. J. Lee et al., [<reflink idref="bib76" id="ref96">76</reflink>]) to a satisfying extent (Cullinane & Montacute, [<reflink idref="bib26" id="ref97">26</reflink>]; Garbe et al., [<reflink idref="bib47" id="ref98">47</reflink>]), many still struggled to adequately assist their children (Andrew et al., [<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref99">3</reflink>]).</p> <p>One important aspect to consider is <emph>parental involvement</emph> in their children's ERE. Much interest in PI originated from the Coleman report, which highlighted the importance of family and parental influences for students' school success (Coleman et al., [<reflink idref="bib23" id="ref100">23</reflink>]; Jeynes, [<reflink idref="bib60" id="ref101">60</reflink>]), but the term still lacks a singular definition (Wilder, [<reflink idref="bib122" id="ref102">122</reflink>]). Reynolds ([<reflink idref="bib98" id="ref103">98</reflink>]) captured this ambiguity by defining PI as "any interactions between a parent and child that may contribute to the child's development or to direct parent participation with a child's school in the interest of the child" (p. 442). This clearly depicts PI as an umbrella term for a multitude of parent behaviors, rather than a singular homogenous construct.</p> <p>A relevant distinction is commonly made between involvement at home and at school (e.g., Kaplan Toren & Seginer [<reflink idref="bib62" id="ref104">62</reflink>]; Reynolds, [<reflink idref="bib98" id="ref105">98</reflink>]; Tan, [<reflink idref="bib114" id="ref106">114</reflink>]), with the former being especially important for ERE since opportunities for parental school involvement became severely restricted. Previous research showed positive associations between aspects of home involvement and several student outcomes, such as academic achievement (e.g., Y. Li et al., [<reflink idref="bib80" id="ref107">80</reflink>]; Wilder, [<reflink idref="bib122" id="ref108">122</reflink>]), motivational variables (e.g., Berti et al., [<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref109">11</reflink>]; Régner et al., [<reflink idref="bib99" id="ref110">99</reflink>]) and learning effort and time (e.g., Dumont et al., [<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref111">37</reflink>]; Matsuoka et al., [<reflink idref="bib87" id="ref112">87</reflink>]), although negative relations emerged with strongly interfering PI (e.g., Dumont et al., [<reflink idref="bib36" id="ref113">36</reflink>]; Gonida & Cortina, [<reflink idref="bib49" id="ref114">49</reflink>]). Few studies investigated PI in remote education specifically, but a research synthesis suggested a similarly important role in virtual distance education compared to on-site education in schools (Hasler Waters et al., [<reflink idref="bib53" id="ref115">53</reflink>]). Moreover, in Borup's ([<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref116">14</reflink>]) qualitative research, teachers at a distance education high school identified monitoring performance, motivating the student and organizing learning schedules as the most important forms of parental engagement. However, these studies regarded schools where students voluntarily enrolled in virtual schooling, unlike ERE. Building on the home involvement model by Dumont et al. ([<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref117">37</reflink>]) as well as findings by Borup ([<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref118">14</reflink>]), we considered two factors to cover a broad range of different PI strategies. <emph>Demanding-structuring parental involvement</emph> comprises behaviors aimed at providing structure, setting rules and formulating clear expectations regarding the child's schoolwork. In contrast, <emph>responsive-motivational parental involvement</emph> focuses on parents meeting their children's needs regarding ERE, emotionally supporting, and motivating them.</p> <p>Another important family process variable is perceived <emph>parental responsibility</emph> for their child's learning during ERE, capturing how much responsibility for their child's learning success parents ascribe to themselves, as opposed to teachers or the students themselves. While research on the association between perceived responsibility and student outcomes is scarce, several studies have found a positive association with PI (e.g., Helker & Wosnitza, [<reflink idref="bib54" id="ref119">54</reflink>]; Park & Holloway, [<reflink idref="bib94" id="ref120">94</reflink>]). Helker and Wosnitza ([<reflink idref="bib54" id="ref121">54</reflink>]) additionally found positive relations with students' relatedness, competence and autonomy, which are prerequisites for intrinsic motivation according to self-determination theory (Ryan & Deci, [<reflink idref="bib101" id="ref122">101</reflink>]), thus indicating that perceived responsibility affects student outcomes independently of its relation with PI. In ERE, where parents had to compensate for students' reduced teacher contacts (Knopik et al., [<reflink idref="bib68" id="ref123">68</reflink>]; Thorell et al., [<reflink idref="bib116" id="ref124">116</reflink>]), whether parents felt responsible for their child's learning was presumably of even greater importance and should therefore be considered as a relevant factor affecting students' ERE experience.</p> <hd id="AN0173822329-8">Relevant family structure variables</hd> <p>When examining the relation between family process and individual student variables, it is also important to consider family structure variables that influence family process variables and, indirectly or directly, students' educational outcomes. One structure variable of interest is <emph>socio-economic status</emph>. Specifically, we examine parents' occupations, which not only captures information about the family's economic status but is also closely related to parents' level of education (e.g., Ganzeboom, [<reflink idref="bib44" id="ref125">44</reflink>]; J. Lee et al., [<reflink idref="bib75" id="ref126">75</reflink>]). Various international studies have shown more negative effects of ERE for socio-economically disadvantaged students at all school levels. During ERE, they spent comparatively less time learning (Dietrich et al., [<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref127">33</reflink>]; Bayrakdar & Guveli, [<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref128">8</reflink>]), received less support from schools (Cullinane & Montacute, [<reflink idref="bib26" id="ref129">26</reflink>]) and had less access to important resources (Gao et al., [<reflink idref="bib46" id="ref130">46</reflink>]) than their peers from less disadvantaged families, underlining the importance of investigating socio-economically disadvantaged students specifically.</p> <p>Extant research on SES's relation to PI is ambiguous. Some studies showed no relations (e.g., Dumont et al., [<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref131">37</reflink>]; Yotyodying & Wild, [<reflink idref="bib124" id="ref132">124</reflink>] for German sub-sample), or associations of lower SES with more home PI (e.g., Park & Holloway, [<reflink idref="bib94" id="ref133">94</reflink>]; Sui-Chu & Willms, [<reflink idref="bib112" id="ref134">112</reflink>]). Most studies, however, found that higher SES related to more PI (e.g., Çoban, [<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref135">22</reflink>]; Tan, [<reflink idref="bib114" id="ref136">114</reflink>]; Zhang et al., [<reflink idref="bib127" id="ref137">127</reflink>]) as well as more supportive and less interfering involvement strategies (e.g., Cooper et al., [<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref138">25</reflink>]; X. Li et al., [<reflink idref="bib79" id="ref139">79</reflink>]). Qualitative research pointed out that parents from higher-SES backgrounds get more involved because they are more confident in their educational capabilities and see themselves as teachers' equals (e.g., Lareau, [<reflink idref="bib72" id="ref140">72</reflink>]). For ERE, Sari et al. ([<reflink idref="bib104" id="ref141">104</reflink>]) found a positive association between SES and parents' self-rated ability to help their teenage children with schoolwork. This relation turned insignificant when parents' education was included as mediator, again demonstrating the close association of SES and parents' education. In summary, assuming a positive relation of SES and PI during ERE seems most plausible. Additionally, SES and parents' perceived educational responsibility appear to be unrelated (Curry & Adams, [<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref142">27</reflink>]), and qualitative research suggests that low-SES parents see a high responsibility for parents to be involved in their child's educational process (Drummond & Stipek, [<reflink idref="bib35" id="ref143">35</reflink>]). Regarding student outcomes, students from low-SES households spent less time on schoolwork during ERE (Dietrich et al., [<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref144">33</reflink>]) than students from high-SES households as measured by father's vocational degree, suggesting an overall lower participation in learning activities. Students from lower SES backgrounds also showed reduced levels of motivation in general (Kormos & Kiddle, [<reflink idref="bib70" id="ref145">70</reflink>]) and learning motivation in ERE specifically (Poulain et al., [<reflink idref="bib97" id="ref146">97</reflink>]).</p> <p>A second family structure variable of interest is the family's <emph>immigrant background</emph>. Especially when divergent cultural or language backgrounds are given, immigrant students' achievement and psychosocial outcomes in school can be negatively affected (e.g., Marks, [<reflink idref="bib86" id="ref147">86</reflink>]; Motti-Stefanidi et al., [<reflink idref="bib90" id="ref148">90</reflink>]), depending on factors like cultural identity and orientation, stereotyping and experiences of ethnic discrimination (e.g., Baysu et al., [<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref149">9</reflink>]; Frankenberg et al., [<reflink idref="bib42" id="ref150">42</reflink>]; Wong et al., [<reflink idref="bib123" id="ref151">123</reflink>]). In contrast, both parental psychological engagement and behavioral involvement (Kim et al., [<reflink idref="bib65" id="ref152">65</reflink>]) as well as meaningful relationships in school (Suárez-Orozco et al., [<reflink idref="bib113" id="ref153">113</reflink>]) can be considered as protective factors countering the aforementioned negative effects. With the shift to remote education, and thus reduced contact to teachers and peers, relationships in school presumably became less relevant, while the importance of sufficient parental support, especially for immigrant students, rose. However, while far from a homogenous group, most immigrant parents face additional challenges compared to native-born parents, such as language barriers, adjusting to a different culture and the loss of social capital accumulated in the country of origin (e.g., Antony-Newman, [<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref154">4</reflink>]). Additionally, immigrant parents often lack experience with the host country's educational system, hampering supporting their children regarding school. Accordingly, most previous research found immigrant background negatively related to aspects of PI like homework support (Dumont et al., [<reflink idref="bib36" id="ref155">36</reflink>]; Rønning, [<reflink idref="bib100" id="ref156">100</reflink>]). Qualitative studies suggest that cultural differences and language difficulties often cause differences in immigrant parents' PI, leading to more informal strategies of involvement and an impaired ability to help their children with homework directly when compared to their native-born counterparts for example (Pérez Carreón et al., [<reflink idref="bib96" id="ref157">96</reflink>]; Sainsbury & Renzaho, [<reflink idref="bib103" id="ref158">103</reflink>]), while schools' narrow criteria for judging PI uphold them (López et al., [<reflink idref="bib84" id="ref159">84</reflink>]). Therefore, disparities should arise for more formal, structural aspects of involvement. Parents' perceived responsibility for education, however, seems unrelated to immigrant background but instead dependent on parents' own level of experience with the school system (Kohl et al., [<reflink idref="bib69" id="ref160">69</reflink>]). With respect to student variables, Steinmayr et al. ([<reflink idref="bib111" id="ref161">111</reflink>]) showed that immigrant background was not directly related to either students' motivation or participation in learning activities during ERE. However, the research presented earlier suggests a potential indirect negative association with student outcomes mediated by PI.</p> <hd id="AN0173822329-9">Research questions and hypotheses</hd> <p>Important student outcomes like learning motivation and participation in learning activities, which in turn relate to other central facets of students' learning experience and are highly relevant for educational success, are influenced by parent variables, such as PI and perceived responsibility for the child's learning. However, it is unclear how the aforementioned constructs relate to each other under the special circumstances of ERE that became the norm for many students during the COVID-19 pandemic. Additionally, family structure variables need to be considered, and findings that socio-economically disadvantaged students were affected more negatively by ERE underline the importance of examining the aforementioned variables in this particular group. Based on theory and prior empirical findings, we formulated the following research questions and hypotheses:</p> <p>Research Question 1) How are student outcome variables (extrinsic motivation, intrinsic motivation, participation in learning activities) during ERE related to parent-focused family process variables (demanding-structuring PI, responsive-motivational PI, parental responsibility for learning) in a sample of predominantly socio-economically disadvantaged high school students?</p> <hd id="AN0173822329-10">Hypothesis 1)</hd> <p>All parent-focused family process variables are positively related to the individual student variables when considered simultaneously.</p> <p>Research Question 2) What are the relations between parent-focused family process variables (demanding-structuring PI, responsive-motivational PI, parental responsibility for learning) and family structure variables (SES, immigrant background) during ERE in a predominantly socio-economically disadvantaged sample?</p> <hd id="AN0173822329-11">Hypothesis 2a)</hd> <p>Family SES is positively related to both dimensions of PI, but not statistically significantly related to parental responsibility for learning.</p> <hd id="AN0173822329-12">Hypothesis 2b)</hd> <p>The family's immigrant background is negatively related to demanding-structuring PI, but not statistically significantly related to responsive-motivational PI and parental responsibility for learning.</p> <p>Research Question 3) How are the family structure variables (SES, immigrant background) associated with student outcome variables (extrinsic motivation, intrinsic motivation, participation in learning activities) during ERE, directly and indirectly, in a predominantly socio-economically disadvantaged sample?</p> <hd id="AN0173822329-13">Hypothesis 3a)</hd> <p>Family SES is directly positively related to the student outcomes.</p> <hd id="AN0173822329-14">Hypothesis 3b)</hd> <p>The family's immigrant background is not directly related to the student outcomes. There is an indirect negative association between immigrant background and the student variables via demanding-structuring PI.</p> <hd id="AN0173822329-15">Methods</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0173822329-16">Participants and procedure</hd> <p>A total of 126 students took part in the study, nine were excluded because of missing values on all outcome variables of interest. Thus, the final sample comprised 117 students from ninth (56 students), 10th (38 students), and 11th grades (23 students). The students' ages ranged from 14 to 18 years, with an average age of 15.14 years (<emph>SD</emph> = 0.93), and 49.6% of the sample was female (male: 47.0%, diverse: 3.4%). The study was conducted in August 2020 in six classes and, in the 11th grade, learning groups from one school in an urban area with below-average income in North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany. The school was a <emph>Gesamtschule</emph> (comprehensive school), one of several secondary school types students can visit after completing four years of elementary school. Compared with other secondary schools which usually comprise only one of three school tracks (vocational, intermediate, academic), this school type is characterized by the differentiation between school tracks within one school, meaning that students from different secondary school tracks are educated together most of the time (for a more in-depth overview, see for example Becker et al., [<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref162">10</reflink>]). Based on the language spoken at home (see 3.2 Measures), 40.2% of students had an immigrant background which is close to the average for comprehensive schools in North Rhine-Westphalia for that school year (<emph>M</emph> = 44.4%; Information und Technik Nordrhein-Westfalen, [<reflink idref="bib59" id="ref163">59</reflink>]). The sample's SES was measured using the <emph>International Socio-Economic Index of Occupational Status</emph> (Ganzeboom, [<reflink idref="bib44" id="ref164">44</reflink>]; see 3.2 Measures) and was relatively low (<emph>M</emph> = 38.5, <emph>SD</emph> = 15.2) compared to a representative sample of German comprehensive schools in 2015 (<emph>M</emph> = 46.6; Autorengruppe Bildungsberichterstattung, [<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref165">5</reflink>]). All data were gathered in August 2020 using paper-and-pencil self-report student questionnaires to retrospectively assess the students' ERE experiences during the first school closure period due to COVID-19 during the preceding school year. A teacher was trained as test administrator beforehand and administered the questionnaires in the classroom during regular instructional time. Students were given 30 minutes to answer the questionnaire. Participation in the study was voluntary and students provided written consent before participation.</p> <hd id="AN0173822329-17">Measures</hd> <p>Descriptive information, reliabilities and example items for all measures can be found in Table 1. As individual student variables, we assessed <emph>extrinsic learning motivation</emph>, or students' motivation based on external incentives, with three items taken from the German version of the PIRLS 2001 survey (Bos et al., [<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref166">15</reflink>]) and adapted to assess the specific ERE situation. <emph>Intrinsic learning motivation</emph>, capturing students' joy when learning, was also measured with three items from the German version of the PIRLS 2001 survey (Bos et al., [<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref167">15</reflink>]) and adapted for ERE. A confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) supported the assumed two-dimensional factor structure of learning motivation as opposed to a global model (2-factor model: χ²(<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref168">7</reflink>,<reflink idref="bib113" id="ref169">113</reflink>) = 10.52, <emph>p</emph> =.161; RMSEA = 0.07; CFI = 0.98; AIC = 2090.39; global model: χ²(<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref170">9</reflink>,<reflink idref="bib113" id="ref171">113</reflink>) = 42.71, <emph>p</emph> <.001; RMSEA = 0.18; CFI = 0.81; AIC = 2118.59). Students' frequency of <emph>participation in learning activities</emph> was assessed with nine items developed for the purpose of this study, focusing on a variety of core educational activities like discussing lesson content with the teacher, practicing things learned in ERE, or acquiring knowledge of new learning content.</p> <p>Table 1 <emph>Descriptive Information, Reliabilities and Example Items for Measures</emph></p> <p> <ephtml> <table frame="hsides" rules="groups"><thead><tr><th align="left"><p>Measure</p></th><th align="left"><p><italic>n</italic></p></th><th align="left"><p><italic>M</italic></p></th><th align="left"><p><italic>SD</italic></p></th><th align="left"><p>α</p></th><th align="left"><p>Example</p></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td align="left"><p>Extrinsic learning motivation</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>113</p></td><td align="left"><p>3.47 <sup>a</sup></p></td><td align="left"><p>1.10</p></td><td align="left"><p>0.76</p></td><td align="left"><p>During remote education, I wanted to be praised by my teachers.</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>Intrinsic learning motivation</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>112</p></td><td align="left"><p>2.90 <sup>a</sup></p></td><td align="left"><p>0.98</p></td><td align="left"><p>0.67</p></td><td align="left"><p>During remote education, I enjoyed learning more and more new things.</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>Participation in learning activities</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>117</p></td><td align="left"><p>2.84 <sup>b</sup></p></td><td align="left"><p>0.77</p></td><td align="left"><p>0.82</p></td><td align="left"><p>How often did you do the following things during remote education: Repeat learning content?</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>Demanding-structuring PI</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>117</p></td><td align="left"><p>3.03 <sup>c</sup></p></td><td align="left"><p>0.72</p></td><td align="left"><p>0.86</p></td><td align="left"><p>My parents expected me to really engage with the remote education tasks.</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>Responsive-motivational PI</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>117</p></td><td align="left"><p>2.45 <sup>c</sup></p></td><td align="left"><p>0.78</p></td><td align="left"><p>0.88</p></td><td align="left"><p>My parents motivated me to engage the remote education tasks.</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>Parental responsibility for learning</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>114</p></td><td align="left"><p>2.69 <sup>c</sup></p></td><td align="left"><p>0.92</p></td><td align="left"><p>-</p></td><td align="left"><p>My parents felt very much responsible that I learn things during remote education.</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>SES</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>117</p></td><td align="left"><p>38.22 <sup>d</sup></p></td><td align="left"><p>15.90</p></td><td align="left"><p>-</p></td><td align="left"><p>What occupation are your parents currently working in? Mother:</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>Immigrant background</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>117</p></td><td align="left"><p>0.40 <sup>e</sup></p></td><td align="left"><p>-</p></td><td align="left"><p>-</p></td><td align="left"><p>How often do you speak German at home?</p></td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p> <sups>a</sups> 1 = <emph>not at all</emph> to 5 = <emph>exactly right</emph>. <sups>b</sups> 1 = <emph>never</emph> to 5 = <emph>all the time</emph>. <sups>c</sups> 1 = <emph>completely disagree</emph> to 4 = <emph>completely agree</emph>. <sups>d</sups> Coded from free-text answers. <sups>e</sups> 1 = <emph>I always or almost always speak German at home</emph> to 4 = <emph>I never speak German at home</emph>, dummy-coded as 0 = <emph>no immigrant background</emph> (<emph>exclusively/ mostly German at home)</emph>, 1 = <emph>immigrant background (exclusively/ mostly a different language at home)</emph></p> <p>Regarding family process variables, <emph>parental demanding-structuring involvement</emph> addressed how involved parents were during ERE by setting expectations and providing a clear structure. It was assessed with seven items from the German National Educational Panel Study (NEPS; Blossfeld et al., [<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref172">12</reflink>]) and Dumont et al. ([<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref173">37</reflink>]), adapted for ERE. We assessed <emph>parental responsive-motivational involvement</emph>, capturing parents' emotional and motivational support of their children during ERE, with items from NEPS (Blossfeld et al., [<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref174">12</reflink>]), the MARKUS study (Helmke & Jäger, [<reflink idref="bib55" id="ref175">55</reflink>]) and one item specifically developed for the study. All seven items were adapted to fit the ERE situation. A CFA supported the two-dimensional factor structure of PI, as opposed to a global model (2-factor model: χ²(<reflink idref="bib74" id="ref176">74</reflink>,<reflink idref="bib117" id="ref177">117</reflink>) = 119.05, <emph>p</emph> <.001; RMSEA = 0.07; CFI = 0.94; AIC = 3882.37; global model: χ²(<reflink idref="bib77" id="ref178">77</reflink>,<reflink idref="bib117" id="ref179">117</reflink>) = 272.30, <emph>p</emph> <.001; RMSEA = 0.15; CFI = 0.73; AIC = 4029.62). Furthermore, we assessed the students' judgement of <emph>parental perceived responsibility for learning</emph> during ERE with one self-constructed item.</p> <p>As family structure variables, we assessed families' <emph>socio-economic status</emph> with the updated version of the International Socio-Economic Index of Occupational Status (ISEI; Ganzeboom, [<reflink idref="bib44" id="ref180">44</reflink>]; see also Ganzeboom et al., [<reflink idref="bib45" id="ref181">45</reflink>]). ISEI scores range from 10 to 90, with higher values indicating higher SES. To determine ISEI scores, the participants answered four items about their parents' occupation, and we considered the higher of the two parent scores (HISEI) to determine SES. For <emph>n</emph> = 17 cases, no meaningful information on parents' occupation was provided; therefore, we estimated values with multiple imputation instead. Finally, we used one item regarding the family's language spoken at home as an indicator of <emph>immigrant background</emph>.</p> <hd id="AN0173822329-18">Analytic approach</hd> <p>All statistical analyses were conducted with IBM SPSS Statistics (Version 27.0) and M<emph>plus</emph> 8.1 (Muthén & Muthén, [<reflink idref="bib91" id="ref182">91</reflink>]). Due to sample composition, we conducted multiple analyses of variance (MANOVA) to check for potential influences of students' gender, grade in school and living in a single-parent household on the family process variables and student outcomes, including only main effects (Online Resource 1). In consequence, living in a single-parent household was included as a control variable for the family process variables.</p> <p>Structural equation models were specified in all analyses. Based on the intraclass correlations for family process variables (all ≤ 0.023) and student outcomes (all ≤ 0.018), we decided against clustering the data by school classes. Goodness of fit was evaluated with χ², CFI, RMSEA and its 90% confidence intervals (Hu & Bentler, [<reflink idref="bib57" id="ref183">57</reflink>]; Schermelleh-Engel et al., [<reflink idref="bib105" id="ref184">105</reflink>]), while the AIC (Akaike, [<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref185">2</reflink>]) was used to compare models. Missing data were handled with full information maximum likelihood estimation where applicable. Due to the sample size, all variables were modeled as manifest indicators. To answer our first research question, we specified a model including all family process variables as independent variables and all student outcomes as dependent variables (Model 1). For research questions 2 and 3, we additionally incorporated the family structure variables and regression paths for their relations with all family process variables, as well as direct and indirect associations with all individual student variables (Model 2). Both models included intercorrelations between the family structure, family process, and individual student variables, respectively. We additionally calculated a model regarding only family structure and process variables to verify the findings of the general model (Online Resource 2).</p> <hd id="AN0173822329-19">Results</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0173822329-20">Descriptive results</hd> <p>Table 2 displays bivariate correlations for all measures. Students reported significantly more demanding-structuring than responsive-motivational PI on average, <emph>t</emph>(<reflink idref="bib116" id="ref186">116</reflink>) = 8.60, <emph>p</emph> <.001, <emph>d</emph> = 0.80, and significantly higher extrinsic compared to intrinsic learning motivation, <emph>t</emph>(<reflink idref="bib111" id="ref187">111</reflink>) = 5.58, <emph>p</emph> <.001, <emph>d</emph> = 0.53. In this mostly low-SES group of students, no relation was found between the family structure variables SES and immigrant background.</p> <p>Table 2 <emph>Bivariate Correlations of Measures</emph></p> <p> <ephtml> <table frame="hsides" rules="groups"><thead><tr><th align="left"><p>Measure</p></th><th align="left"><p>1</p></th><th align="left"><p>2</p></th><th align="left"><p>3</p></th><th align="left"><p>4</p></th><th align="left"><p>5</p></th><th align="left"><p>6</p></th><th align="left"><p>7</p></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td align="left"><p>1. Extrinsic learning motivation</p></td><td align="left"><p>-</p></td><td align="left" /><td align="left" /><td align="left" /><td align="left" /><td align="left" /><td align="left" /></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>2. Intrinsic learning motivation</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>.48<sup>***</sup></p></td><td align="left"><p>-</p></td><td align="left" /><td align="left" /><td align="left" /><td align="left" /><td align="left" /></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>3. Participation in learning activities</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>.39<sup>***</sup></p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>.50<sup>***</sup></p></td><td align="left"><p>-</p></td><td align="left" /><td align="left" /><td align="left" /><td align="left" /></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>4. Demanding-structuring PI</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>.34<sup>***</sup></p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>.39<sup>***</sup></p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>.43<sup>***</sup></p></td><td align="left"><p>-</p></td><td align="left" /><td align="left" /><td align="left" /></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>5. Responsive-motivational PI</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>.16<sup>†</sup></p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>.50<sup>***</sup></p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>.48<sup>***</sup></p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>.52<sup>***</sup></p></td><td align="left"><p>-</p></td><td align="left" /><td align="left" /></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>6. Parental responsibility for learning</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>.29<sup>**</sup></p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>.29<sup>**</sup></p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>.38<sup>***</sup></p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>.45<sup>***</sup></p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>.34<sup>***</sup></p></td><td align="left"><p>-</p></td><td align="left" /></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>7. SES</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>-.09</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>.00</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>-.11</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>.08</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>.04</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>-.09</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>-</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>8. Immigrant background</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>-.03</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>-.04</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>-.10</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>-.21<sup>*</sup></p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>-.02</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>-.18<sup>†</sup></p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>-.04</p></td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p> <sups>†</sups> <emph>p</emph> <.10. <sups>*</sups><emph>p</emph> <.05. <sups>**</sups><emph>p</emph> <.01. <sups>***</sups><emph>p</emph> <.001</p> <hd id="AN0173822329-21">Relations between family process variables and individual student variables</hd> <p>The relation between the family process and individual student variables specified in Model 1 is depicted in Fig. 2[<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref188">1</reflink>]. The model was saturated. Demanding-structuring PI was statistically significantly positively related to extrinsic learning motivation and marginally statistically significantly positively related to participation in learning activities, meaning that higher levels of demanding-structuring PI were associated with students' higher extrinsic learning motivation and more frequent participation in learning activities. Responsive-motivational PI had a statistically significant positive relation to intrinsic learning motivation as well as participation in learning activities, meaning that students reporting higher levels of responsive-motivational PI also reported being more intrinsically motivated and took part in learning activities more often. Lastly, parental responsibility for learning was positively associated with students' participation in learning activities and marginally significantly with extrinsic learning motivation, indicating that students were more extrinsically motivated and participated in more learning activities when they believed that their parents felt more responsible for their learning. All family process variables, as well as all student outcomes, displayed significant positive correlations with one another.</p> <p>Graph: Fig. 2 Relations Between Family Process Variables and Individual Student Outcomes (Model 1)Note. Regression coefficients are standardized. Non-significant paths are not depicted. Dashed arrows represent paths significant at p <.10 †p <.10. *p <.05. **p <.01. ***p <.001</p> <p>The data partially support Hypothesis 1 that parent-related family process variables were significantly positively related to students' motivation and participation in learning activities during ERE, but not all relations between family process variables and individual student outcomes were statistically significant. The model explained 14.4% of the variance in extrinsic learning motivation, 27.0% of the variance in intrinsic learning motivation, and 30.2% of the variance in participation in learning activities. Therefore, variations in student outcome variables during ERE, especially intrinsic motivation and participation in learning activities, could be explained to a substantial extent by differences in parent-focused family process variables.</p> <hd id="AN0173822329-22">Complex model of relations between family structure and process variables and individual stud...</hd> <p>The relations among family structure, family process and individual student variables specified in Model 2 are depicted in Fig. 3[<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref189">2</reflink>]. Fit indices indicated an excellent model fit to the data (χ²(<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref190">5</reflink>,<reflink idref="bib114" id="ref191">114</reflink>) = 2.28, <emph>p</emph> =.81; RMSEA = 0.00, 90% CI [0.00, 0.08]; CFI = 1.00). Relations between family process variables and student variables were similar to Model 1, although effect sizes differed slightly and the association between parental responsibility for learning and extrinsic learning motivation no longer reached statistical significance. A statistically significant negative association between immigrant background and demanding-structuring PI emerged, as did a marginally significant relation with perceived parental responsibility for learning, meaning that students from immigrant backgrounds reported less demanding-structuring involvement and perceived responsibility by their parents on average. Neither SES nor immigrant background were statistically significantly associated with any student variable directly. However, analyses revealed a fully mediated indirect negative influence of immigrant background on extrinsic learning motivation, β = − 0.09, <emph>p</emph> =.033, mainly via demanding-structuring PI, β = − 0.06, <emph>p</emph> =.089. In other words, children from immigrant families showed lower extrinsic learning motivation on average because they experienced less demanding-structuring PI.</p> <p>Graph: Fig. 3 Relations Between Family Structure and Process Variables and Individual Student Outcomes (Model 2)Note. The influence of living in a single-parent household on family process variables was controlled for. Regression coefficients are standardized. Non-significant paths are not depicted. Dashed arrows represent paths significant at p <.10 †p <.10. *p <.05. **p <.01. ***p <.001</p> <p>Contrary to Hypothesis 2a, we found no statistically significant relation between SES and any family process variable. Immigrant background was significantly negatively related to demanding-structuring PI, but also, unexpectedly, to parental responsibility for learning, thus only partially supporting Hypothesis 2b. Since no statistically significant relation between SES and the student outcomes was found, Hypothesis 3a was not supported. An indirect relation between immigrant background and extrinsic learning motivation partially supported Hypothesis 3b. Overall, the model explained 16.8% of variance in extrinsic learning motivation, 25.0% of the variance in intrinsic learning motivation, and 30.0% of the variance in participation in learning activities, but only small amounts of variance in demanding-structuring (8.7%), responsive-motivational PI (2.9%), and parental responsibility for learning (8.1%), indicating that within this group of students with relatively low SES, family structure variables played only a minor role in education-related family processes during ERE.</p> <hd id="AN0173822329-23">Discussion</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0173822329-24">Discussion of findings</hd> <p>In light of the relevance of students' learning motivation and learning activities for educational success, this study aimed at determining what role parent-focused family process variables (demanding-structuring and responsive-motivational PI, parental perceived responsibility for learning) played in shaping students' motivational and behavioral outcomes (extrinsic and intrinsic learning motivation, participation in learning activities) in socio-economically disadvantaged school environments during the extraordinary situation of ERE. We also sought to explore how family process and individual student variables related to family structure variables (SES, immigrant background), and the potential mediating role of family process variables for this group of particularly vulnerable students. We applied structural equation modeling to address the posed research questions.</p> <p>The results confirmed positive associations between process variables and student outcomes in our sample (Hypothesis 1), in line with earlier findings regarding PI at home (e.g., Dumont et al., [<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref192">37</reflink>]; Shukla et al., [<reflink idref="bib109" id="ref193">109</reflink>]) and parental responsibility for learning (Helker & Wosnitza, [<reflink idref="bib54" id="ref194">54</reflink>]) in the absence of a worldwide pandemic. Analyses revealed that participation in learning activities had at least marginally statistically significant associations with all parent process variables. Extrinsic motivation was positively associated with demanding-structuring PI and marginally significantly with perceived responsibility, whereas intrinsic motivation was positively related to responsive-motivational PI. Self-determination theory (Ryan & Deci, [<reflink idref="bib101" id="ref195">101</reflink>]) explains these results: Responsive-motivational PI meets students' individual needs without restricting their autonomy, a key condition for intrinsic motivation, which is not only an important outcome itself but also positively related to a variety of other school outcomes (e.g., Froiland & Worrell, [<reflink idref="bib43" id="ref196">43</reflink>]; Taylor et al., [<reflink idref="bib115" id="ref197">115</reflink>]), underlining the importance of responsive-motivational PI especially. Demanding-structuring PI on the other hand limits autonomy by providing clear structures and expectations, thus introducing more external incentives. While this introduction of heteronomy through demanding-structuring PI could, in theory, also be detrimental to intrinsic motivation, the results did not suggest such a relation.</p> <p>Contrary to our expectations, no statistically significant relation between SES and either dimension of PI emerged (Hypothesis 2a), adding to previous conflicting findings (e.g., Park & Holloway, [<reflink idref="bib94" id="ref198">94</reflink>]; Sari et al., [<reflink idref="bib104" id="ref199">104</reflink>]; Tan, [<reflink idref="bib114" id="ref200">114</reflink>]). Our results are of particular interest, as we focused on a socio-economically disadvantaged school environment with few mid- to high-SES families, which might explain the absent relation between SES and family processes. As expected, immigrant background was negatively associated with demanding-structuring (e.g., Rønning, [<reflink idref="bib100" id="ref201">100</reflink>]), but not responsive-motivational PI (Hypothesis 2b). This contradicts findings on responsive PI by Dumont et al. ([<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref202">37</reflink>]), but not qualitative findings by Kavanagh and Hickey ([<reflink idref="bib64" id="ref203">64</reflink>]) regarding parents speaking a different language at home than the language of instruction, who often believed home involvement should, similar to lessons in school, occur in the instructional language. Feeling mostly unable to support their children in that way, they instead relied on more informal types of involvement. Therefore, parents with an immigrant background in our sample, which was assessed via family language, might have felt less competent in providing a structure similar to regular schooling (demanding-structuring PI), but not in motivating their child and offering emotional support (responsive-motivational PI). Furthermore, an unexpected negative relation between immigrant background and parental responsibility emerged, contrasting previous research (e.g., Curry & Adams, [<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref204">27</reflink>]). Lack of familiarity with the German school system might explain this relation. Kohl et al. ([<reflink idref="bib69" id="ref205">69</reflink>]), comparing Turkish immigrant with German native-born mothers, found that the former's perceived responsibility for their children's schooling was lower only when they had attended German schools for less than three years themselves. Other research likewise suggests that differences within the immigrant population, for example culture of origin (Sainsbury & Renzaho, [<reflink idref="bib103" id="ref206">103</reflink>]; de Haan, [<reflink idref="bib31" id="ref207">31</reflink>]), may further explain varying relations between immigrant background and parent variables.</p> <p>The expected negative relation between SES and student outcomes, based on theory and previous research (e.g., Dietrich et al., [<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref208">33</reflink>]; Kormos & Kiddle, [<reflink idref="bib70" id="ref209">70</reflink>]), could not be found (Hypothesis 3a). One possible explanation might again be the sample's low SES overall. Immigrant background was not directly associated with any student outcome, in line with our expectations and findings by Steinmayr et al. ([<reflink idref="bib111" id="ref210">111</reflink>]), and related indirectly negatively to extrinsic learning motivation (Hypothesis 3b).</p> <p>To summarize, the model of family structure, family process and individual student variables we adapted from McElvany et al. ([<reflink idref="bib88" id="ref211">88</reflink>]) based on prior literature proved suitable for examining relations among those variables during ERE, particularly regarding variation in the student variables. Analyses revealed positive relations between parent variables and student outcomes, while underlining the importance of considering family structure variables as potential influences during the unique ERE situation.</p> <hd id="AN0173822329-25">Limitations and strengths</hd> <p>Several points of limitation should be considered for the present study. Due to its cross-sectional design, causal assumptions cannot be verified with the data, and the lack of a second time point of data collection before ERE means that we cannot directly draw comparisons between the situations of regular schooling and ERE, meaning that while our findings are still valid and important for low-SES students in this situation, we cannot say for sure whether they are unique to ERE. Another limitation is the recruitment approach and the resulting relatively small sample size. First, while there were advantages to recruiting the sample from just one school, as discussed below, this in turn also means that appropriate caution needs to be applied when generalizing the results, as the findings might be biased by factors specific to that school. Second, additional post-hoc Monte Carlo analyses showed that the sample provided insufficient statistical power to reliably reveal smaller effects potentially present in the population. Moreover, for Model 2 we cannot rule out systematic parameter or standard error biases occurring due to sample size. Nonetheless, we found evidence for many of the assumed relations, especially between family process variables and student outcomes, which suggests that our findings are robust and would be found in larger samples as well. Additionally, the similarity of findings regarding the overall model and the partial models (Model 1; Online Resource 2) as well as additional Bayesian model estimation (Online Resource 3) suggest that the full model was not plagued by systematic bias.</p> <p>Gathering self-reported student data meant relying on students' knowledge of the parent variables of interest. This unfortunately led to a substantial amount of missing information on parents' education, which was in turn excluded from our analyses. Although parental education and SES are strongly related (J. Lee et al., [<reflink idref="bib75" id="ref212">75</reflink>]), including the former as well would have been desirable. Other potential problems associated with retrospective self-report measures include misremembering, social desirability or skewed self-perceptions. However, the use of student's assessment is justified since Liu et al. ([<reflink idref="bib83" id="ref213">83</reflink>]) found only minimal differences in reported PI during ERE between a sample of Chinese middle schoolers and their parents. Additionally, not just for ERE, students' assessment of PI is potentially more important for individual student outcomes than an objective measurement of involvement.</p> <p>Collecting data at a comprehensive school allowed us to include students from different German secondary school tracks within a single school and ensure comparability with other countries' single-track school systems. Additionally, while coming at the cost of a relatively small sample size, focusing on this particular school enabled us to assess a socio-economically disadvantaged population specifically. Judging from previous research, students from disadvantaged backgrounds are more negatively affected by ERE (e.g., Zancajo, [<reflink idref="bib126" id="ref214">126</reflink>]), making it especially important to investigate how family background and parental behavior influence ERE outcomes among these students.</p> <p>Another strength of the present study is the application of structural equation modeling. While most previous studies regarding ERE utilized descriptive statistics, correlations or regression analyses, SEM allows for a more comprehensive approach of testing complex assumptions about the relations between family structure, process and student variables. Additionally, previous studies investigating family structure and student variables during ERE rarely also incorporated parent-focused process variables, particularly PI (e.g., Lawrence & Fakuade, [<reflink idref="bib73" id="ref215">73</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0173822329-26">Directions for future research</hd> <p>Continued study of the investigated variables with larger sample sizes is needed to confirm our findings and reveal associations previously undiscovered due to limited statistical power. The additional Bayesian estimation of Model 2 presented in Online Resource 3 detected (marginally) significant paths that weren't present in the model based on frequentist estimation presented in the main analyses, giving an indication which relations may have been overlooked. However, if anything, such hidden additional associations would mean that our results somewhat underestimate the importance of parents for adolescents of somewhat lower SES, and the general conclusions that we draw from our findings and present in our discussion would be of even greater importance.</p> <p>Importantly, while our results are relevant for the ERE situation, the design of our study does not allow to conclude whether they are unique to this special situation. Thus, a comparison with students in face-to-face instruction is needed to give further insights regarding how these relations might differ between regular instruction and the unique ERE situation. Including not just the students', but also the parents' perspective on the ERE situation, for example by conducting interviews about their experience during ERE, could provide important insights extending beyond our findings as well. Future research should additionally cover a broader range of SES, ages and educational levels, but also other vulnerable groups like special education needs students, to investigate whether our findings apply to other populations as well. Additional family structure and process variables should be considered, such as parents' education and educational aspirations for their child. Moreover, variables capturing differences between immigrant families, like parents' experiences with the host country's school system, should be included in future research as well to further investigate the unexpected findings regarding immigrant background. Lastly, while our study focused on a sample of socio-economically disadvantaged students to answer the important question how family and parent variables related to student outcomes in this particularly vulnerable group during ERE, the lack of a comparison group means we cannot be certain whether the found relations are unique for disadvantaged students, or whether similar results would be found for the general student population. Future studies should therefore include an additional group of students from an average socio-economic environment to allow for the comparison of the relations of family structure and process variables with student outcomes in both groups.</p> <hd id="AN0173822329-27">Implications for practice</hd> <p>The study results have important practical implications. First and foremost, parents are important for keeping their children motivated and participating in learning activities when investigating these constructs during ERE, possibly compensating the reduced student-teacher interactions. Accordingly, students whose parents felt responsible for their learning success reported more positive outcomes. Schools can encourage this by clearly communicating parents' responsibilities and supporting families in dealing with them. Additionally, both demanding-structuring and responsive-motivational PI were positively associated with desirable student outcomes, revealing the importance of different forms of parental support behaviors. Thus, schools providing information to parents on different ways to support their children at home can bring about more positive student outcomes, which can be important during both ERE and in-person instruction. Further barriers to PI arise from parents lacking confidence in their ability to adequately support their children (e.g., Cullinane & Montacute, [<reflink idref="bib26" id="ref216">26</reflink>]), and especially low-SES parents often being unable to work from home (Felstead & Reuschke, [<reflink idref="bib40" id="ref217">40</reflink>]), important factors to consider when developing strategies to ensure every parent can appropriately support their child that can be assumed to be especially relevant during ERE. For example, schools might offer online courses or materials informing parents about the importance of being involved while simultaneously imparting strategies for adequate involvement. For such low-threshold informative programs and PI interventions, it is central to consider the circumstances that may prevent parents from participating, not only in ERE situations, to reach as many parents as possible.</p> <p>Such programs might be especially valuable for immigrant parents, since immigrant background was negatively related to both perceived responsibility and demanding-structuring PI. These negative associations presumably result from parents' lack of experience with the school system (Kohl et al., [<reflink idref="bib69" id="ref218">69</reflink>]) as well as cultural and language differences (Pérez Carreón et al., [<reflink idref="bib96" id="ref219">96</reflink>]; Sainsbury & Renzaho, [<reflink idref="bib103" id="ref220">103</reflink>]). Therefore, these parents, and their children in turn, would profit from schools providing information on school procedures and PI strategies, ideally offered in multiple languages and an easily accessible format.</p> <hd id="AN0173822329-28">Conclusions</hd> <p>Taken together, this study contributes to current research by examining the importance of parents being involved in their children's learning in different ways, providing structures and clear expectations as well as emotional and motivational support, and their perceived responsibility for their child's learning in a sample of children experiencing ERE. Additionally, PI and perceived responsibility were related to immigrant background, a family structure variable. The findings especially have important implications for future research; furthermore, they can act as first indicators in the complex matter of preparing educational systems for future educational crises. All in all, the present study focused on a situation that was determined by one of the most disruptive events in education globally in recent years, the implementation of emergency remote education measures to counter the COVID-19 pandemic, and helped gain insights into the relation of family and parent variables with individual student outcomes.</p> <hd id="AN0173822329-29">Acknowledgements</hd> <p>We thank Orcun Cinel, Victoria Rzepczyk and Theresa Schlitter for their support in planning and conducting the study.</p> <hd id="AN0173822329-30">Funding</hd> <p>Open Access funding enabled and organized by Projekt DEAL.</p> <hd id="AN0173822329-31">Electronic Supplementary Material</hd> <p>Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.</p> <p>Graph: Supplementary Material 1</p> <p>Graph: Supplementary Material 2</p> <p>Graph: Supplementary Material 3</p> <hd id="AN0173822329-32">Publisher's Note</hd> <p>Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.</p> <ref id="AN0173822329-33"> <title> References </title> <blist> <bibl id="bib1" idref="ref45" type="bt">1</bibl> <bibtext> Aguielera-Hermida, A. P. (2020). College students' use and acceptance of emergency online learning due to COVID-19. International Journal of Educational Research Open, 1, Article 100011. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedro.2020.100011</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib2" idref="ref185" type="bt">2</bibl> <bibtext> Akaike H. A new look at the statistical model identification. IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control. 1974; 19; 6: 716-723. 10.1109/TAC.1974.1100705</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib3" idref="ref26" type="bt">3</bibl> <bibtext> Andrew A, Cattan S, Costa-Dias M, Farquharson C, Kraftman L, Krutikova S, Phimister A, Sevilla A. Family time use and home learning during the COVID-19 lockdown (IFS Report R178). The Institute for Fiscal Studies. 2020. 10.1920/re.ifs.2020.0178</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib4" idref="ref154" type="bt">4</bibl> <bibtext> Antony-Newman M. Parental involvement of immigrant parents: A meta-synthesis. Educational Review. 2019; 71; 3: 362-381. 10.1080/00131911.2017.1423278</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib5" idref="ref165" type="bt">5</bibl> <bibtext> Autorengruppe Bildungsberichterstattung (2018). Bildung in Deutschland 2018: Ein indikatorengestützter Bericht mit einer Analyse zu Wirkungen und Erträgen von Bildung [Education in Germany 2018: An indicator supported report with an analysis of impacts and yields of education]. wbv Publikation. https://doi.org/10.3278/6001820fw</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib6" idref="ref30" type="bt">6</bibl> <bibtext> Baber H. Determinants of students' perceived learning outcome and satisfaction in online learning during the pandemic of COVID19. Journal of Education and e-Learning Research. 2020; 7; 3: 285-292. 10.20448/journal.509.2020.73.285.292</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib7" idref="ref57" type="bt">7</bibl> <bibtext> Baumert J, Watermann R, Schümer G. Disparitäten der Bildungsbeteiligung und des Kompetenzerwerbs [Disparities in educational participation and attainment]. Zeitschrift für Erziehungswissenschaft. 2003; 6; 1: 46-71. 10.1007/s11618-003-0004-7</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib8" idref="ref38" type="bt">8</bibl> <bibtext> Bayrakdar, S, & Guveli, A. (2020). Inequalities in home learning and schools' provision of distance teaching during school closure of COVID-19 lockdown in the UK. EconStor. https://hdl.handle.net/10419/227790</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib9" idref="ref149" type="bt">9</bibl> <bibtext> Baysu G, Phalet K, Brown R. Dual identity as a two-edged sword: Identity threat and minority school performance. Social Psychology Quarterly. 2011; 74; 2: 121-143. 10.1177/0190272511407619</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Becker M, Neumann M, Dumont H. Recent developments in school tracking practices in Germany: An overview and outlook on future trends. Orbis Scholae. 2016; 10; 3: 9-25. 10.14712/23363177.2017.8</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Berti C, Mameli C, Speltini G, Molinari L. Teacher justice and parent support as predictors of learning motivation and visions of a just world. Issues in Educational Research. 2016; 26; 4: 543-560</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Blossfeld, H. P, Roßbach, H. G, & von Maurice, J. (2011). Education as a lifelong process: The German National Educational Panel Study (NEPS). Zeitschrift für Erziehungswissenschaft, Special issue 14.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Bol, T. (2020). Inequality in homeschooling during the Corona crisis in the Netherlands. First results from the LISS Panel.https://doi.org/10.31235/osf.io/hf32q</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Borup J. Teacher perceptions of parental engagement at a cyber high school. Journal of Research on Technology in Education. 2016; 48; 2: 67-83. 10.1080/15391523.2016.1146560</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Bos W, Lankes EM, Prenzel M, Schwippert K, Valtin R, Voss A, Walther G. IGLU: Skalenhandbuch zur Dokumentation der Erhebungsinstrumente. 2005: [IGLU; Scale manual for documentation of the survey intsruments]. Waxmann</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Bourdieu, P. (1986). The forms of capital (R. Nice, Trans). In J. G. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of theory and research for the sociology of education (pp. 241–258). Greenwood Press. (Original work published in 1983).</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Bozkurt A, Insung J, Xiao J, Vladimirschi V, Schuwer R, Egorov G, Lambert SR, Al-Freih M, Pete J, Olcott D Jr, Rodes V, Aranciaga I, Bali M, Alvarez AV Jr, Roberts J, Pazurek A, Raffaghelli JE, Panagiotou N, de Coëtlogon P, Paskevicius M. A global outlook to the interruption of education due to COVID-19 pandemic: Navigating in a time of uncertainty and crisis. Asian Journal of Distance Education. 2020; 15; 1: 1-126. 10.5281/zenodo.3878572</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Brown JE, Mann L. The relationship between family structure and process variables and adolescent decision making. Journal of Adolescence. 1990; 13: 25-37. 10.1016/0140-1971(90)90039-A</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Cattan, S, Farquharson, C, Krutikova, S, Phimister, A, Salisbury, A, & Sevilla, A. (2021). Inequalities in responses to school closures over the course of the first COVID-19 lockdown (IFS Working paper 21/04). The Institute for Fiscal Studies. https://doi.org/10.1920/wp.ifs.2021.421</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Cheng G, Chau J. Exploring the relationships between learning styles, online participation, learning achievement and course satisfaction: An empirical study of a blended learning course. British Journal of Educational Technology. 2016; 47; 2: 257-278. 10.1111/bjet.12243</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Chiu TKF. Applying the self-determination theory (SDT) to explain student engagement in online learning during the COVID-19 pandemic. Journal of Research on Technology in Education. 2022; 54; S1: S14-30. 10.1080/15391523.2021.1891998</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Çoban Ö. Relationships between students' socioeconomic status, parental support, students' hindering, teachers' hindering and students' literacy scores: PISA 2018. World Journal of Education. 2020; 10; 4: 45-59. 10.5430/wje.v10n4p45</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Coleman, J. S, Campbell, E. Q, Hobson, C. J, McPartland, J, Mood, A. M, Weinfeld, F. D, & York, R. L. (1966). Equality of educational opportunity. US Government Printing Office.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Conole, G. (2007). Describing learning activities: Tools and resources to guide practice. In E. Beetham, & R. Sharpe (Eds.), Rethinking pedagogy for a digital age: Designing and delivering e-learning (pp. 81–91). Routledge.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Cooper H, Lindsay JJ, Nye B. Homework in the home: How student, family, and parenting-style differences relate to the homework process. Contemporary Educational Psychology. 2000; 25: 464-487. 10.1006/ceps.1999.1036</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Cullinane, C, & Montacute, R. (2020). COVID-19 and social mobility impact brief #1: School shutdown. The Sutton Trust. https://<ulink href="http://www.suttontrust.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/School-Shutdown-Covid-19.pdf">www.suttontrust.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/School-Shutdown-Covid-19.pdf</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Curry KA, Adams CM. Parent social networks and parent responsibility: Implications for school leadership. Journal of School Leadership. 2014; 24: 918-948. 10.1177/105268461402400504</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Daniels LM, Goegan LD, Parker PC. The impact of COVID-19 triggered changes to instruction and assessment on university students' self-reported motivation, engagement and perceptions. Social Psychology of Education. 2021; 24: 299-318. 10.1007/s11218-021-09612-3</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Davis CR, Grooms J, Ortega A, Rubalcaba JAA, Vargas E. Distance learning and parental mental health during COVID-19. Educational Researcher. 2021; 50; 1: 61-64. 10.3102/0013189X20978806</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Davis-Kean P. The influence of parent education and family income on child achievement: The indirect role of parental expectations and the home environment. Journal of Family Psychology. 2005; 19; 2: 294-304. 10.1037/0893-3200.19.2.294</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> de Haan M. The reconstruction of parenting after migration: A perspective from cultural translation. Human Development. 2011; 54: 376-399. 10.1159/000334119</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Dettmers, S, Yotyodying, S, & Jonkmann, K. (2019). Antecedants and outcomes of parental homework involvement: How do family-school parnterships affect parental homework involvement and student outcomes? Frontiers in Psychology, 10, Article 1048. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01048</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Dietrich H, Patzina A, Lerche A. Social inequality in the homeschooling efforts of German high school students during a school closing period. European Societies. 2021; 23; 1: 348-369. 10.1080/14616696.2020.1826556</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Dong Y, Wu SXY, Dong WY, Tang Y. The effects of home literacy environment on children's reading comprehension development: A meta-analysis. Educational Sciences: Theory and Praxis. 2020; 20; 2: 63-82. 10.12738/jestp.2020.2.005</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Drummond KV, Stipek D. Low-income parents' beliefs about their role in children's academic learning. The Elementary School Journal. 2004; 104; 3: 197-213. 10.1086/499749</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Dumont H, Trautwein U, Lüdtke O, Neumann M, Niggli A, Schnyder I. Does parental homework involvement mediate the relationship between family background and educational outcomes?. Contemporary Educational Psychology. 2012; 37: 55-69. 10.1016/j.cedpsych.2011.09.004</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Dumont H, Trautwein U, Nagy G, Nagengast B. Quality of parental homework involvement: Predictors and reciprocal relations with academic functioning in the reading domain. Journal of Educational Psychology. 2014; 106; 1: 144-161. 10.1037/a0034100</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Engzell, P, Frey, A, & Verhagen, M. (2021). Learning loss due to school closures during the COVID-19 pandemic. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 118(17), Article e2022376118. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2022376118</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Eom S. The effects of student motivation and self-regulated learning strategies on student's perceived e-learning outcomes and satisfaction. Journal of Higher Education Theory and Practice. 2019; 19; 7: 29-42. 10.33423/jhetp.v19i7.2529</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Felstead, A, & Reuschke, D. (2020). Homeworking in the UK: Before and during the 2020 lockdown. Wales Institute of Social and Economic Research. https://<ulink href="http://www.cardiff.ac.uk/%5f%5fdata/assets/pdf%5ffile/0003/2432676/Homeworking-in-the-UK-Before-and-during-the-2020-lockdown.pdf">www.cardiff.ac.uk/%5f%5fdata/assets/pdf%5ffile/0003/2432676/Homeworking-in-the-UK-Before-and-during-the-2020-lockdown.pdf</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Finn JD, Cox D. Participation and withdrawal among fourth-grade pupils. American Educational Research Journal. 1992; 29; 1: 141-162. 10.3102/00028312029001141</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Frankenberg E, Kupper K, Wagner R, Bongard S. Immigrant youth in Germany: Psychological and sociocultural adaptation. European Psychologist. 2013; 18; 3: 158-168. 10.1027/1016-9040/a000154</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Froiland JM, Worrell FC. Intrinsic motivation, learning goals, engagement, and achievement in a diverse high school. Psychology in the Schools. 2016; 53; 3: 321-336. 10.1002/pits.21901</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ganzeboom, H. (2010, May 1). A new international socio-economic index [ISEI] of occupational status for the international standard classification of occupation 2008 [ISCO-08] constructed with data from the ISSP 2002–2007 [Paper presentation]. Annual Conference of International Social Survey Programme, Lisbon, Portugal.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ganzeboom HB, De Graaf PM, Treiman DJ. A standard international socio-economic index of occupational status. Social science research. 1992; 21; 1: 1-56. 10.1016/0049-089X(92)90017-B</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Gao, N, Lafortune, J, & Hill, L. (2020). Who is losing ground with distance learning in California? Public Policy Institute of California. https://<ulink href="http://www.ppic.org/wp-content/uploads/who-is-losing-ground-with-distance-learning-in-california-october-2020.pdf">www.ppic.org/wp-content/uploads/who-is-losing-ground-with-distance-learning-in-california-october-2020.pdf</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Garbe A, Ogurlu U, Logan N, Cook P. COVID-19 and remote learning: Experiences of parents with children during the pandemic. American Journal of Qualitative Research. 2020; 4; 3: 45-65. 10.29333/ajqr/8471</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Geis-Thöne, W. (2020). Häusliches Umfeld in der Krise: Ein Teil der Kinder braucht mehr Unterstützung [Home environment in crisis: A part of the children needs more support] (IW-Report 15/2020). Institut der Deutschen Wirtschaft. <ulink href="http://hdl.handle.net/10419/216213">http://hdl.handle.net/10419/216213</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Gonida EN, Cortina KS. Parental involvement in homework: Relations with parent and student achievement-related motivational beliefs and achievement. British Journal of Educational Psychology. 2014; 84: 376-396. 10.1111/bjep.12039</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Grewenig E, Lergetporer P, Werner K, Woessmann L, Zierow L. COVID-19 and educational inequality: How school closures affect low- and high-achieving students. European Economic Review. 2021; 140: 103920. 10.1016/j.euroecorev.2021.103920</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Haller, T, & Novita, S. (2021). Parents' perception of school support during COVID-19: What satisfies parents? Frontiers in Education, 6, Article 700441. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2021.700441</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hammerstein, S, König, C, Dreisörner, T, & Frey, A. (2021). Effects of COVID-19-related school closures on student achievement-a systematic review. Frontiers in Psychology, Article 4020. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.746289</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hasler Waters, L, Menchaca, M. P, & Borup, J. (2014). Parental involvement in K-12 online and blended learning. In R. E. Ferdig, & K. Kennedy (Eds.), Handbook of research on K-12 online and blended learning (pp. 303–323). ETC Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Helker K, Wosnitza M. The interplay of students' and parents' responsibility judgements in the school context and their associations with student motivation and achievement. International Journal of Educational Research. 2016; 76: 34-49. 10.1016/j.ijer.2016.01.001</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Helmke, A, & Jäger, R. S. (Eds.). (2002). Das Projekt MARKUS – Mathematik-cesamterhebung Rheinland-Pfalz: Kompetenzen, unterrichtsmerkmale, schulkontext [The MARKUS project – Mathematics comprehensive study Rhineland-Palatinate: Competencies, class features, school context]. Verlag Empirische Pädagogik.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hicks, L. J, Caron, E. E, & Smilek, D. (2021). SARS-CoV-2 and learning: The impact of a global pandemic on undergraduate learning experiences. Scholarship of Teaching and Learning in Psychology. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1037/stl0000250</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hu LT, Bentler PM. Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal. 1999; 6; 1: 1-55. 10.1080/10705519909540118</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Im, T, & Kang, M. (2019). Structural relationships of factors which impact on learner achievement in online learning environments. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 20(1). https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v20i1.4012</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Information und Technik Nordrhein-Westfalen (2020, October 14). Anteil der Schülerinnen und Schüler mit Zuwanderungsgeschichte in NRW auf 38,2% gestiegen (Proportion of students with a history of migration in NRW risen to 38.2%) [Press release]. https://www.it.nrw/node/101241/pdf</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Jeynes, W. H. (2011). Parental involvement and academic success. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203843444</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Jæger, M. M, & Blaabæk, E. H. (2020). Inequality in learning opportunities during Covid-19: Evidence from library takeout. Research in Social Stratification and Mobility, 68, Article 100524. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rssm.2020.100524</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kaplan Toren N, Seginer R. Classroom climate, parental educational involvement, and student school functioning in early adolescence: A longitudinal study. Social Psychology of Education. 2015; 18: 811-827. 10.1007/s11218-015-9316-8</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kauffman, H. (2015). A review of predictive factors of student success in and satisfaction with online learning. Research in Learning Technology, 23, Article 26507. https://doi.org/10.3402/rlt.v23.26507</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kavanagh L, Hickey TM. "You're looking at this different language and it freezes you out straight away": Identifying challenges to parental involvement among immersion parents. Language and Education. 2013; 27; 5: 432-450. 10.1080/09500782.2012.714388</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kim, Y, Mok, S. Y, & Seidel, T. (2020). Parental influences on immigrant students' achievement-related motivation and achievement: A meta-analysis. Educational Research Review, 30, Article 100327. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2020.100327</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Klapproth F, Federkeil L, Heinschke F, Jungmann T. Teachers' experiences of stress and their coping strategies during COVID-19 induced distance teaching. Journal of Pedagogical Research. 2020; 4; 4: 444-452. 10.33902/JPR.2020062805</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> König C, Frey A. The impact of COVID-19-related school closures on student achievement – A meta-analysis. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice. 2022; 41; 1: 16-22. 10.1111/emip.12495</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Knopik T, Błaszczak A, Maksymiuk R, Oszwa U. Parental involvement in remote learning during the COVID-19 pandemic – Dominant approaches and their diverse implications. European Journal of Education. 2021; 56: 623-640. 10.1111/ejed.12474</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kohl K, Jäkel J, Spiegler O, Willard JA, Leyendecker B. Eltern und Schule – Wie beurteilen türkischstämmige und deutsche Mütter sowie deutsche Lehrkräfte elterliche Verantwortung und Beteiligung? [Parents and school – how do mothers of turkish and german descent as well as german teachers judge parent responsibility and involvement?]. Psychologie in Erziehung und Unterricht. 2014; 61: 96-111. 10.2378/peu2013.art21d</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kormos J, Kiddle T. The role of socio-economic factors in motivation to learn English as a foreign language: The case of Chile. System. 2013; 41: 399-412. 10.1016/j.system.2013.03.006</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kriegbaum K, Becker N, Spinath B. The relative importance of intelligence and motivation as predictors of school achievement: A metaanalysis. Educational Research Review. 2018; 25: 120-148. 10.1016/j.edurev.2018.10.001</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Lareau A. Social class differences in family-school relationships: The importance of cultural capital. Sociology of Education. 1987; 60: 73-85. 10.2307/2112583</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Lawrence, K. C, & Fakuade, O. V. (2021). Parental involvement, learning participation and online learning commitment of adolescent learners during the COVID-19 lockdown. Research in Learning Technology, 29, Article 2544. https://doi.org/10.25304/rlt.v29.2544</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Lee JS, Bowen NK. Parent involvement, cultural capital, and the achievement gap among elementary school children. American Educational Research Journal. 2006; 43; 2: 193-218. 10.3102/00028312043002193</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Lee J, Zhang Y, Stankov L. Predictive validity of SES measures for student achievement. Educational Assessment. 2019; 24; 4: 305-326. 10.1080/10627197.2019.1645590</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Lee SJ, Ward KP, Chang OD, Downing KM. Parenting activities and the transition to home-based education during the COVID-19 pandemic. Children and Youth Services Review. 2021; 122: 105585. 10.1016/j.childyouth.2020.105585</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Lemos MS, Veríssimo L. The relationships between intrinsic motivation, extrinsic motivation, and achievement, along elementary school. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences. 2014; 112: 930-938. 10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.01.1251</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Lepper MR, Corpus JH, Iyengar SS. Intrinsic and extrinsic motivational orientations in the classroom: Age differences and academic correlates. Journal of Educational Psychology. 2005; 97; 2: 184-196. 10.1037/0022-0663.97.2.184</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Li X, Yang H, Wang H, Jia J. Family socioeconomic status and home-based parental involvement: A mediation analysis of parental attitudes and expectations. Children and Youth Services Review. 2020; 116: 105111. 10.1016/j.childyouth.2020.105111</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Li Y, Hu T, Ge T, Auden E. The relationship between home-based parental involvement, parental educational expectation and academic performance of middle school students in mainland China: A mediation analysis of cognitive ability. International Journal of Educational Research. 2019; 97: 139-153. 10.1016/j.ijer.2019.08.003</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Lim SL, Yeo KJ. The relationship between motivational constructs and self-regulated learning: A review of literature. International Journal of Evaluation and Research in Education. 2021; 10; 1: 330-335. 10.11591/ijere.v10i1.21006</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Litalien D, Morin AJS, Gagné M, Vallerand RJ, Losier GF, Ryan RM. Evidence of a continuum structure of academic self-determination: A two-study test using a bifactor-ESEM representation of academic motivation. Contemporary Educational Psychology. 2017; 51: 67-82. 10.1016/j.cedpsych.2017.06.010</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Liu K, Yang Y, Li M, Li S, Sun K, Zhao Y. Parents' and adolescents' perception of parental involvement and their relationship with depression among chinese middle school students during the COVID-19 pandemic. Children and Youth Services Review. 2021; 129: 106190. 10.1016/j.childyouth.2021.106190</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> López GR, Scribner JD, Mahitivanichcha K. Redefining parental involvement: Lessons from high-performing migrant-impacted schools. American Educational Research Journal. 2001; 38; 2: 253-288. 10.3102/00028312038002253</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ludewig U, Kleinkorres R, Schaufelberger R, Schlitter T, Lorenz R, König C, Frey A, McElvany N. COVID-19 pandemic and student reading achievement: Findings from a school panel study. Frontiers in Psychology. 2022; 13: 876485. 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.876485</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Marks GN. Accounting for immigrant non-immigrant differences in reading and mathematics in twenty countries. Ethnic and Racial Studies. 2005; 28; 5: 925-946. 10.1080/01419870500158943</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Matsuoka R, Nakamuro M, Inui T. Emerging inequality in effort: A longitudinal investigation of parental involvement and early elementary school-aged children's learning time in Japan. Social Science Research. 2015; 54: 159-176. 10.1016/j.ssresearch.2015.06.009</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> McElvany N, Becker M, Lüdtke O. Die Bedeutung familiärer Merkmale für Lesekompetenz, Wortschatz, Lesemotivation und Leseverhalten [The role of family variables in reading literacy, vocabulary, reading motivation, and reading behavior]. Zeitschrift für Entwicklungspsychologie und Pädagogische Psychologie. 2009; 41; 3: 121-131. 10.1026/0049-8637.41.3.121</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Means B, Neisler J. Teaching and learning in the time of COVID: The student perspective. Online Learning. 2021; 25; 1: 8-27. 10.24059/olj.v25i1.2496</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Motti-Stefanidi F, Masten A, Asendorpf JB. School engagement trajectories of immigrant youth: Risks and longitudinal interplay with academic success. International Journal of Behavioral Development. 2015; 39; 1: 32-42. 10.1177/0165025414533428</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Muthén, L. K, & Muthén, B. O. (2018). Mplus (Version 8.1) [Computer software]. Muthén & Muthén. https://<ulink href="http://www.statmodel.com">www.statmodel.com</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Niklas F, Schneider W. Home literacy environment and the beginning of reading and spelling. Contemporary Educational Psychology. 2013; 38: 40-50. 10.1016/j.cedpsych.2012.10.001</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Panaoura R. Parental involvement in children's mathematics learning before and during the period of the COVID-19. Social Education Research. 2021; 2; 1: 65-74. 10.37256/ser.212021547</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Park S, Holloway SD. No parent left behind: Predicting parental involvement in adolescents' education within a sociodemographically diverse population. The Journal of Educational Research. 2013; 106: 105-119. 10.1080/00220671.2012.667012</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Pensiero, N, Kelly, T, & Bokhove, C. (2020). Learning inequalities during the Covid-19 pandemic: How families cope with home-schooling. University of Southampton research report. https://doi.org/10.5258/SOTON/P0025</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Pérez Carreón GP, Drake C, Barton AC. The importance of presence: Immigrant parents' school engagement experiences. American Educational Research Journal. 2005; 42; 3: 465-498. 10.3102/00028312042003465</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Poulain, T, Meigen, C, Sobek, C, Ober, P, Igel, U, Körner, A, Kiess, W, & Vogel, M. (2021). Loss of childcare and classroom teaching during the Covid-19-related lockdown in spring 2020: A longitudinal study on consequences on leisure behavior and schoolwork at home. Plos One, 16(3), Article e0247959. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0247949</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Reynolds AJ. Comparing measures of parental involvement and their effects on academic achievement. Early Childhood Research Quarterly. 1992; 7: 441-462. 10.1016/0885-2006(92)90031-S</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Régner I, Loose F, Dumas F. Students' perceptions of parental and teacher academic involvement: Consequences on achievement goals. European Journal of Psychology of Education. 2009; 24; 2: 263-277. 10.1007/BF03173016</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Rønning M. Who benefits from homework assignments?. Economics of Education Review. 2011; 30: 55-64. 10.1016/j.econedurev.2010.07.001</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ryan RM, Deci EL. Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: Classic definitions and new directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology. 2000; 25: 54-67. 10.1006/ceps.1999.1020</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ryan, R. M, & Deci, E. L. (2020). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation from a self-determination theory perspective: Definitions, theory, practices, and future directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 61, Article 101860. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2020.101860</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Sainsbury WJ, Renzaho AMN. Educational concerns of Arabic speaking migrants from Sudan and Iraq to Melbourne: Expectations on migrant parents in Australia. International Journal of Educational Research. 2011; 50: 291-300. 10.1016/j.ijer.2011.10.001</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Sari, E, Bittmann, F, & Homuth, C. (2021). Explaining inequalities of homeschooling in Germany during the first COVID-10 lockdown. SocArXiv. https://doi.org/10.31235/osf.io/vsdq4</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Schermelleh-Engel K, Moosbrugger H, Müller H. Evaluating the fit of structural equation models: Tests of significance and descriptive goodness-of-fit measures. Methods of Psychological Research Online. 2003; 8; 2: 23-74</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Schneider, R, Sachse, K. A, Schipolowski, S, & Enke, F. (2021). Teaching in times of COVID-19: The evaluation of distance teaching in elementary and secondary schools in Germany. Frontiers in Education, 6, Article 702406. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2021.702406</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Schnitzler K, Holzberger D, Seidel T. All better than being disengaged: Student engagement patterns and their relations to academic self-concept and achievement. European Journal of Psychology of Education. 2021; 36: 627-652. 10.1007/s10212-020-00500-6</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Serbin LA, Stack DM, Kindon D. Academic success across the transition from primary to secondary schooling among lower-income adolescents: Understanding the effects of family resources and gender. Journal of Youth and Adolescence. 2013; 42: 1331-1347. 10.1007/s10964-013-9987-4</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Shukla SY, Tombari AK, Toland MD, Danner FW. Parental support for learning and high school students' academic motivation and persistence in mathematics. Journal of Educational and Developmental Psychology. 2015; 5; 1: 44-56. 10.5539/jedp.v5n1p44</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Smid SC, McNeish D, Miočević M, van de Schoot R. Bayesian versus frequentist estimation for structural equation models in small sample contexts: A systematic review. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal. 2020; 27; 1: 131-161. 10.1080/10705511.2019.1577140</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Steinmayr R, Lazarides R, Weidinger AF, Christiansen H. Teaching and learning during the first COVID-19 school lockdown: Realization and associations with parent-perceived students' academic outcomes. Zeitschrift für Pädagogische Psychologie. 2021; 35; 2–3: 1-22. 10.1024/1010-0652/a000306</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Sui-Chu EH, Willms JD. Effects of parental involvement on eight-grade achievement. Sociology of Education. 1996; 69: 126-141. 10.2307/2112802</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Suárez-Orozco C, Rhodes J, Milburn M. Unraveling the immigrant paradox: Academic engagement and disengagement among recently arrived immigrant youth. Youth & Society. 2009; 41; 2: 151-185. 10.1177/0044118X09333647</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Tan CY. Involvement practices, socio-economic status, and student science achievement: Insights from a typology of home and school involvement patterns. American Educational Research Journal. 2019; 56; 3: 899-924. 10.3102/0002831218807146</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Taylor G, Jungert T, Mageau GA, Schattke K, Dedic H, Rosenfield S, Koestner R. A self-determination theory approach to predicting school achievement over time: The unique role of intrinsic motivation. Contemporary Educational Psychology. 2014; 39: 342-358. 10.1016/j.cedpsych.2014.08.002</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Thorell LB, Skoglund C, de la Peña AG, Baeyens D, Fuermaler ABM, Groom MJ, Mammarella IC, van der Oord S, van den Hoofdakker BJ, Luman M, de Miranda DM, Siu AFY, Steinmayr R, Idrees I, Soares LS, Sörlin M, Luque JL, Moscardino UM, Roch M, Christiansen H. Parental experiences of homeschooling during the COVID-19 pandemic: Differences between seven European countries and between children with and without mental health conditions. European Child & Adolescent Psychiatry. 2021. 10.1007/s00787-020-01706-1</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> UNESCO. (2020, March 4). Education: From disruption to recovery. Retrieved April 15, 2021, from https://en.unesco.org/covid19/educationresponse</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> UNICEF. (2021). COVID-19 and school closures: One year of education disruption. https://data.unicef.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/COVID19-and-school-closures-report.pdf</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> von Otter C. Family resources and mid-life level of education: A longitudinal study of the mediating influence of childhood parental involvement. British Educational Research Journal. 2014; 40; 3: 555-574. 10.1002/berj.3111</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Walker CO, Greene BA, Mansell RA. Identification with academics, intrinsic/ extrinsic motivation, and self-efficacy as predictors of cognitive engagement. Learning and Individual Differences. 2006; 16: 1-12. 10.1016/j.lindif.2005.06.004</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Werner, K, & Woessmann, W. (2021). The legacy of Covid-19 in education (CESifo Working Paper 9358). Munich Society for the Promotion of Economic Research. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3945280</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Wilder S. Effects of parental involvement on academic achievement: A meta-synthesis. Educational Review. 2014; 66; 3: 377-397. 10.1080/00131911.2013.780009</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Wong CA, Eccles JC, Sameroff A. The influence of ethnic discrimination and ethnic identification on african american adolescents' school and socioemotional adjustment. Journal of Personality. 2003; 71; 6: 1197-1232. 10.1111/1467-6494.7106012</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Yotyodying S, Wild E. Antecedents of different qualities of home-based parental involvement: Findings from a cross-cultural study in Germany and Thailand. Learning Culture and Social Interaction. 2014; 3: 98-110. 10.1016/j.lcsi.2014.02.002</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Zaccoletti S, Camacho A, Correia N, Aguiar C, Mason L, Alves RA, Daniel JR. Parents' perceptions of student academic motivation during the COVID-19 lockdown: A cross-country comparison. Frontiers in Psychology. 2020; 11: 592670. 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.592670</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Zancajo, A. (2021). The impact of the Covid-19 pandemic on education: Rapid review of the literature. The British Academy. https://<ulink href="http://www.thebritishacademy.ac.uk/documents/3226/COVID-decade-The-impact-on-education-Rapid-review-Adrian-Zancajo-Glasgow.pdf">www.thebritishacademy.ac.uk/documents/3226/COVID-decade-The-impact-on-education-Rapid-review-Adrian-Zancajo-Glasgow.pdf</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Zhang F, Jiang Y, Huang S, Ming H, Ren Y, Wang L. Family socioeconomic status, parental involvement and academic achievement: The moderating role of adolescents' subjective social mobility. Journal of Early Adolescence. 2021; 41; 9: 1425-1454. 10.1177/02724316211002254</bibtext> </blist> </ref> <ref id="AN0173822329-34"> <title> Footnotes </title> <blist> <bibtext> To check for potential parameter and standard error bias due to the relatively small sample size, we conducted a post-hoc Monte Carlo analysis which indicated no systematic bias.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> To check for potential parameter and standard error bias due to the relatively small sample size, we conducted a post-hoc Monte Carlo analysis. Since the analysis could not rule out the presence of systematic biases, we further conducted an additional Bayesian model estimation including prior information which is less susceptible to bias in small samples (Smid et al., [110]). Results can be found in Online Resource 3 and were generally similar to the results reported here, implying that potential biases due to sample size were small. Some additional paths reached significance, implying that some smaller effects might have gone undetected or underestimated in our main analyses due to sample size and the statistical power resulting from it.</bibtext> </blist> </ref> <aug> <p>By Sebastian Nicolas Thomas Vogel; Justine Stang-Rabrig and Nele McElvany</p> <p>Reported by Author; Author; Author</p> <p></p> <p>Sebastian N. T. Vogel is a researcher and doctoral candidate at the Center for Research on Education and School Development (IFS) at TU Dortmund University. Their research interests include personal, social and institutional determinants of school success, diversity in educational settings and educational transitions.</p> <p>Justine Stang-Rabrig is a postdoctoral researcher at the Center for Research on Education and School Development (IFS) at TU Dortmund University. She earned her doctoral degree in Psychology in 2017. Her recent work focuses on themes like attitudes, stereotype threat, instructional quality and well-being.</p> <p>Nele McElvany is the executive director of the Center for Research on Education and School Development (IFS) and vice-president for research at TU Dortmund University. As Professor of Empirical Educational Research, she focuses on educational processes from psychological and pedagogical perspectives. Her work on individual, social and institutional conditions of educational processes and outcomes is nationally and internationally recognized.</p> </aug> <nolink nlid="nl1" bibid="bib117" firstref="ref1"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl2" bibid="bib26" firstref="ref2"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl3" bibid="bib95" firstref="ref3"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl4" bibid="bib73" firstref="ref4"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl5" bibid="bib111" firstref="ref5"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl6" bibid="bib85" firstref="ref6"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl7" bibid="bib50" firstref="ref7"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl8" bibid="bib33" firstref="ref8"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl9" bibid="bib38" firstref="ref9"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl10" bibid="bib116" firstref="ref10"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl11" bibid="bib13" firstref="ref11"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl12" bibid="bib121" firstref="ref12"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl13" bibid="bib88" firstref="ref13"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl14" bibid="bib122" firstref="ref14"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl15" bibid="bib109" firstref="ref15"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl16" bibid="bib114" firstref="ref16"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl17" bibid="bib127" firstref="ref17"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl18" bibid="bib17" firstref="ref20"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl19" bibid="bib118" firstref="ref21"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl20" bibid="bib93" firstref="ref24"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl21" bibid="bib51" firstref="ref27"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl22" bibid="bib76" firstref="ref28"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl23" bibid="bib21" firstref="ref31"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl24" bibid="bib106" firstref="ref32"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl25" bibid="bib63" firstref="ref34"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl26" bibid="bib126" firstref="ref35"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl27" bibid="bib19" firstref="ref36"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl28" bibid="bib52" firstref="ref42"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl29" bibid="bib67" firstref="ref43"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl30" bibid="bib125" firstref="ref44"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl31" bibid="bib28" firstref="ref46"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl32" bibid="bib56" firstref="ref47"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl33" bibid="bib66" firstref="ref48"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl34" bibid="bib61" firstref="ref50"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl35" bibid="bib48" firstref="ref51"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl36" bibid="bib46" firstref="ref54"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl37" bibid="bib18" firstref="ref56"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl38" bibid="bib30" firstref="ref58"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl39" bibid="bib16" firstref="ref59"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl40" bibid="bib108" firstref="ref60"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl41" bibid="bib119" firstref="ref61"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl42" bibid="bib39" firstref="ref66"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl43" bibid="bib71" firstref="ref67"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl44" bibid="bib81" firstref="ref68"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl45" bibid="bib101" firstref="ref69"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl46" bibid="bib78" firstref="ref70"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl47" bibid="bib115" firstref="ref71"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl48" bibid="bib120" firstref="ref72"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl49" bibid="bib102" firstref="ref73"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl50" bibid="bib43" firstref="ref75"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl51" bibid="bib82" firstref="ref77"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl52" bibid="bib77" firstref="ref79"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl53" bibid="bib89" firstref="ref82"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl54" bibid="bib24" firstref="ref84"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl55" bibid="bib41" firstref="ref85"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl56" bibid="bib107" firstref="ref86"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl57" bibid="bib20" firstref="ref87"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl58" bibid="bib58" firstref="ref88"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl59" bibid="bib32" firstref="ref89"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl60" bibid="bib74" firstref="ref90"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl61" bibid="bib34" firstref="ref91"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl62" bibid="bib92" firstref="ref92"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl63" bibid="bib68" firstref="ref93"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl64" bibid="bib29" firstref="ref95"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl65" bibid="bib47" firstref="ref98"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl66" bibid="bib23" firstref="ref100"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl67" bibid="bib60" firstref="ref101"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl68" bibid="bib98" firstref="ref103"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl69" bibid="bib62" firstref="ref104"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl70" bibid="bib80" firstref="ref107"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl71" bibid="bib11" firstref="ref109"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl72" bibid="bib99" firstref="ref110"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl73" bibid="bib37" firstref="ref111"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl74" bibid="bib87" firstref="ref112"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl75" bibid="bib36" firstref="ref113"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl76" bibid="bib49" firstref="ref114"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl77" bibid="bib53" firstref="ref115"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl78" bibid="bib14" firstref="ref116"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl79" bibid="bib54" firstref="ref119"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl80" bibid="bib94" firstref="ref120"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl81" bibid="bib44" firstref="ref125"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl82" bibid="bib75" firstref="ref126"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl83" bibid="bib124" firstref="ref132"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl84" bibid="bib112" firstref="ref134"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl85" bibid="bib22" firstref="ref135"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl86" bibid="bib25" firstref="ref138"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl87" bibid="bib79" firstref="ref139"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl88" bibid="bib72" firstref="ref140"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl89" bibid="bib104" firstref="ref141"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl90" bibid="bib27" firstref="ref142"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl91" bibid="bib35" firstref="ref143"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl92" bibid="bib70" firstref="ref145"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl93" bibid="bib97" firstref="ref146"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl94" bibid="bib86" firstref="ref147"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl95" bibid="bib90" firstref="ref148"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl96" bibid="bib42" firstref="ref150"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl97" bibid="bib123" firstref="ref151"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl98" bibid="bib65" firstref="ref152"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl99" bibid="bib113" firstref="ref153"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl100" bibid="bib100" firstref="ref156"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl101" bibid="bib96" firstref="ref157"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl102" bibid="bib103" firstref="ref158"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl103" bibid="bib84" firstref="ref159"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl104" bibid="bib69" firstref="ref160"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl105" bibid="bib10" firstref="ref162"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl106" bibid="bib59" firstref="ref163"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl107" bibid="bib15" firstref="ref166"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl108" bibid="bib12" firstref="ref172"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl109" bibid="bib55" firstref="ref175"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl110" bibid="bib45" firstref="ref181"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl111" bibid="bib91" firstref="ref182"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl112" bibid="bib57" firstref="ref183"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl113" bibid="bib105" firstref="ref184"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl114" bibid="bib64" firstref="ref203"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl115" bibid="bib31" firstref="ref207"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl116" bibid="bib83" firstref="ref213"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl117" bibid="bib40" firstref="ref217"></nolink>
Header DbId: eric
DbLabel: ERIC
An: EJ1401284
AccessLevel: 3
PubType: Academic Journal
PubTypeId: academicJournal
PreciseRelevancyScore: 0
IllustrationInfo
Items – Name: Title
  Label: Title
  Group: Ti
  Data: The Importance of Parents for Key Outcomes among Socio-Economically Disadvantaged Students: Parents' Role in Emergency Remote Education
– Name: Language
  Label: Language
  Group: Lang
  Data: English
– Name: Author
  Label: Authors
  Group: Au
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Vogel%2C+Sebastian+Nicolas+Thomas%22">Vogel, Sebastian Nicolas Thomas</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2611-1860">0000-0003-2611-1860</externalLink>)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Stang-Rabrig%2C+Justine%22">Stang-Rabrig, Justine</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7177-0016">0000-0002-7177-0016</externalLink>)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22McElvany%2C+Nele%22">McElvany, Nele</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8649-5523">0000-0001-8649-5523</externalLink>)
– Name: TitleSource
  Label: Source
  Group: Src
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SO" term="%22Social+Psychology+of+Education%3A+An+International+Journal%22"><i>Social Psychology of Education: An International Journal</i></searchLink>. 2023 26(6):1565-1591.
– Name: Avail
  Label: Availability
  Group: Avail
  Data: Springer. Available from: Springer Nature. One New York Plaza, Suite 4600, New York, NY 10004. Tel: 800-777-4643; Tel: 212-460-1500; Fax: 212-460-1700; e-mail: customerservice@springernature.com; Web site: https://link.springer.com/
– Name: PeerReviewed
  Label: Peer Reviewed
  Group: SrcInfo
  Data: Y
– Name: Pages
  Label: Page Count
  Group: Src
  Data: 27
– Name: DatePubCY
  Label: Publication Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2023
– Name: TypeDocument
  Label: Document Type
  Group: TypDoc
  Data: Journal Articles<br />Reports - Research
– Name: Audience
  Label: Education Level
  Group: Audnce
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22Secondary+Education%22">Secondary Education</searchLink>
– Name: Subject
  Label: Descriptors
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Parent+Participation%22">Parent Participation</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Outcomes+of+Education%22">Outcomes of Education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Low+Income+Students%22">Low Income Students</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Socioeconomic+Status%22">Socioeconomic Status</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Parent+Role%22">Parent Role</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Emergency+Programs%22">Emergency Programs</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Distance+Education%22">Distance Education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22COVID-19%22">COVID-19</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Pandemics%22">Pandemics</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Secondary+School+Students%22">Secondary School Students</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Foreign+Countries%22">Foreign Countries</searchLink>
– Name: Subject
  Label: Geographic Terms
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Germany%22">Germany</searchLink>
– Name: DOI
  Label: DOI
  Group: ID
  Data: 10.1007/s11218-023-09801-2
– Name: ISSN
  Label: ISSN
  Group: ISSN
  Data: 1381-2890<br />1573-1928
– Name: Abstract
  Label: Abstract
  Group: Ab
  Data: Parents play an important role in shaping behavioral and motivational outcomes in their child's education, presumably even more so during the COVID-19 pandemic, where concomitant school closures forced students worldwide to learn remotely at home, affecting socio-economically disadvantaged students most negatively. However, it remains unclear how different parent-focused family process variables (demanding-structuring and responsive-motivational parental involvement, responsibility for learning) and structure variables (socio-economic status, immigrant background) relate to important learning-related student outcomes, namely extrinsic and intrinsic motivation and actual participation in learning activities, during emergency remote education. Using questionnaire data from N = 117 German secondary school students (M[subscript age] = 15.14, SD = 0.93; 49.6% female) with a low average socio-economic status, structural equation models revealed associations between higher parental involvement and responsibility and higher motivational and behavioral student outcomes. Furthermore, immigrant background related negatively to some parent process variables, and indirectly negatively to extrinsic motivation. These results highlight parents' role in learning, particularly during emergency remote education.
– Name: AbstractInfo
  Label: Abstractor
  Group: Ab
  Data: As Provided
– Name: DateEntry
  Label: Entry Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2023
– Name: AN
  Label: Accession Number
  Group: ID
  Data: EJ1401284
PLink https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=eric&AN=EJ1401284
RecordInfo BibRecord:
  BibEntity:
    Identifiers:
      – Type: doi
        Value: 10.1007/s11218-023-09801-2
    Languages:
      – Text: English
    PhysicalDescription:
      Pagination:
        PageCount: 27
        StartPage: 1565
    Subjects:
      – SubjectFull: Parent Participation
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Outcomes of Education
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Low Income Students
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Socioeconomic Status
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Parent Role
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Emergency Programs
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Distance Education
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: COVID-19
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Pandemics
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Secondary School Students
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Foreign Countries
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Germany
        Type: general
    Titles:
      – TitleFull: The Importance of Parents for Key Outcomes among Socio-Economically Disadvantaged Students: Parents' Role in Emergency Remote Education
        Type: main
  BibRelationships:
    HasContributorRelationships:
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Vogel, Sebastian Nicolas Thomas
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Stang-Rabrig, Justine
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: McElvany, Nele
    IsPartOfRelationships:
      – BibEntity:
          Dates:
            – D: 01
              M: 01
              Type: published
              Y: 2023
          Identifiers:
            – Type: issn-print
              Value: 1381-2890
            – Type: issn-electronic
              Value: 1573-1928
          Numbering:
            – Type: volume
              Value: 26
            – Type: issue
              Value: 6
          Titles:
            – TitleFull: Social Psychology of Education: An International Journal
              Type: main
ResultId 1