The link between parent involvement and improved academic outcomes for children is well established (Domina 2005; Galendo and Sheldon 2012; Henderson and Mapp 2002; Jeynes 2005). Particularly for children at risk for poor educational outcomes, such as those with Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD), parent involvement may serve as an important protective factor (Mautone et al. 2015). However, only a small number of studies explicitly examine the relationship between parent involvement in their child’s education and symptoms of ADHD. The primary aim of the current study was to examine how child ADHD symptoms of inattention and hyperactivity/impulsivity relate to parents’ involvement in education.

Model of Parent Involvement

A number of theoretical frameworks have described parental involvement as multidimensional. One of the most comprehensive models of parent involvement was developed by (Hoover-Dempsey and Sandler 1995, 1997; Walker et al. 2005). The Hoover-Dempsey and Sandler (HDS) model proposes five different levels that describe why parents become involved, how they become involved, and how parent involvement influences student achievement. The current study focuses specifically on the portion of the model that describes reasons why parents become involved as a predictor of their involvement behaviors as shown in Fig. 1. There are a number of factors at home and school that can influence parents decision to become involved. Hoover-Dempsey and Sandler propose that various personal and contextual motivators predict parental involvement in children’s learning. Personal motivators include parents’ self-efficacy (i.e., parents’ confidence that their involvement will have a positive influence on their child’s education) and their construction of their role (i.e., their beliefs about how they should be involved in their child’s education). Contextual motivators, which are aspects of family life, such as parents’ perceptions regarding their availability of time, level of energy, and parental knowledge and skill, are also predictors of parent involvement. In addition, parents’ perceptions of their invitations to be involved from their child’s school, teacher, and child influence their involvement. These personal and contextual factors motivate parents to become involved in their child’s education (Hoover-Dempsey and Sandler 1995). Empirical tests of this model support the notion that the motivational factors proposed by these authors predict parental involvement (Hoover-Dempsey et al. 1992; Reed et al. 2000). For example, in a sample of 250 pre-K to 6th grade students, role construction, self-efficacy, and invitations from the teacher accounted for 35% of the variance in parent involvement (Reed et al. 2000).

Fig. 1
figure 1

Theoretical model for study based in part on the Hoover-Dempsey and Sandler model of parent involvement (Hoover-Dempsey et al. 2005). This model proposes that parent personal motivators and family life context variables are reasons why parents become involved and predict involvement behaviors

Full size image

The personal and contextual motivators described above predict different types of parent involvement according to the HDS model. Similar to other models of parent involvement (Epstein 1995; Fantuzzo et al. 2004), these authors indicate the parent involvement can take several forms including: (a) parent involvement at home, (b) participation in school-based activities, (c) parent-school communication, and (d) values, aspirations, expectations, and goals for their child. These forms are thought to be distinct from one another. Although these various forms of involvement are often combined in studies (e.g., Reed et al. 2000), when they have been explored separately different findings have emerged. For example, several authors have found that variables such as role construction and parent self-efficacy relate differently to involvement at home versus involvement activities at school (Deslanders and Bertrand 2005; Green et al. 2007; Hoover-Dempsey et al. 1992; Sheldon 2002; Walker et al. 2005). In addition, parent involvement at home has been found to be more frequent than school-based involvement (Green et al. 2007; Walker et al. 2011). These findings suggest that it is important to examine forms of involvement separately. In the current study, we examined how parents’ role construction, self-efficacy, time and energy, and knowledge and skills predicted parents’ involvement at home (see Fig. 1). The role of ADHD symptoms in this relationship is discussed in the next section.

Parent Involvement for Youth with ADHD

Youth with ADHD are at risk for difficulty in school. Young children displaying ADHD symptoms demonstrate lower basic math and early literacy skills and behavioral readiness than their peers (DuPaul et al. 2001; Massetti et al. 2008), and are at risk for long-term academic difficulty. For example, children with elevated inattentive symptoms at age 4–6 demonstrated lower reading, spelling, and math scores 8 years later when compared with a peer comparison group without elevated inattention symptoms (Massetti et al. 2008).

Prior research has indicated that parent involvement in youth with ADHD may be different from youth without ADHD in terms of both quantity and quality. Specifically, previous research has found that parents of youth with ADHD report lower levels of parent involvement on some, but not all, components of this multidimensional construct (Rogers et al. 2009b). In a sample of 101 youth ages 8–12, parents of children with ADHD (n = 53) reported lower levels of self-efficacy and time and energy than parents of non-affected youth, despite similar levels of beliefs regarding their role in their child’s education and their perceived knowledge and skills (Rogers et al. 2009b). Although the size of the differences was small in this study, the findings suggest systematic differences between students with and without ADHD in personal and contextual motivators for parental involvement. These investigators also found that fathers of youth with ADHD reported less active participation in their child’s education and placed more pressure on their child to perform academically (Rogers et al. 2009b). In children ages 8–12, controlling parental involvement was associated with higher inattentive and hyperactive/impulsive symptoms (Rogers et al. 2009c). However, only inattention mediated the relationship between controlling parental involvement and achievement; hyperactivity/impulsivity did not predict lower achievement. Likewise, supportive involvement predicted both reduced levels of inattention and hyperactivity/impulsivity; however, only inattention mediated the link between supportive parent involvement and achievement. In another study, Robledo-Ramón and Garcia-Sánchez (2012) found that parents of children with ADHD (ages 9–14) in Spain reported higher levels of parental involvement in education than parents of children with learning disabilities and a typical achievement group. Collectively these studies suggest that parents of children with ADHD may be involved in their children’s learning for different reasons and in unique ways compared to families of typically developing children; however, a comprehensive understanding of the nature of these differences remains unclear.

Purpose of Current Study

The extant literature leaves several questions unanswered in our understanding of how ADHD is related to parental involvement in children’s learning. First, there is limited research examining the relationship between parents’ involvement in their children’s education and ADHD. The prior studies were conducted with children age 8–14, leaving an important gap when it comes to understanding these relationships in younger children, particularly during the early years of formal education when home-school relationships are first formed. In addition to a limited number of studies available, there is little research to examine how ADHD symptoms may interact with established models of parent involvement that suggest that personal and contextual variables influence parent involvement behaviors. As hypothesized by Hoover-Dempsey and Sandler and others, parental beliefs are thought to be one predictor of parents’ decision to become involved in their child’s education (see Fig. 1). This study will build on the extant literature on parent involvement by examining whether ADHD symptoms of inattention and hyperactivity/impulsivity moderate the relationship between personal and contextual motivators for involvement (level 1 of the HDS model) and forms of parental involvement behaviors (level 2 of the HDS model). An understanding of how ADHD may interact with parent beliefs and behaviors will be helpful in creating or revising interventions aimed at improving parent involvement among youth with ADHD.

This study also contributes to the literature by examining how the separate domains of ADHD symptoms (inattention and hyperactivity/impulsivity) interact with parent involvement motivators and behaviors. There are key differences between the specific symptoms of ADHD and school-related outcomes. For example, inattention has been consistently associated with academic underachievement (Massetti et al. 2008) when compared to hyperactivity/impulsivity. In addition, although research is limited, differences in the relationships between specific ADHD symptoms and parental involvement have been identified (Rogers et al. 2009c).

Research Question and Hypothesis

To address the limitations with the prior research, the following research question was addressed: does inattention or hyperactivity/impulsivity moderate the relationship between personal and contextual motivators (i.e., self-efficacy, role construction, time and energy, knowledge and skills) for involvement and parent involvement behaviors at home? A depiction of the research question can be seen in Fig. 1. We anticipate that inattention, but not hyperactivity/impulsivity will moderate the relationships between parent and contextual motivators and parental involvement behaviors at home. This is based on findings which have suggested a weaker relationship between hyperactivity/impulsivity and parent involvement factors (Rogers et al. 2009c), as well as the stronger associations between inattention and academic functioning more broadly. Our study will be exploratory when it comes to the comparison across personal and contextual motivators. Although Rogers and colleagues (2009b) found differences between parents of children with and without ADHD diagnoses regarding levels of self-efficacy and time and energy, it is unclear how these motivators will interact with ADHD symptoms to influence involvement behaviors. Given links between both ADHD symptoms and parent involvement with socioeconomic status (SES; e.g., Englund et al. 2004; Hill et al. 2004; Kohl et al. 2000), SES was controlled for in all analyses.

Methods and Materials

Participants

A sample of 122 kindergarten students, their parents, and their teachers (n = 33) with complete data on the measures used in the current study were included in this study. Participants were part of a larger study that originally recruited a sample of 181 students in the fall of kindergarten. Participants were recruited from 14 schools in the Southeastern United States and Eastern Canada. After schools agreed to participate in the study, teachers were recruited via an administrator or psychologist at their school. Participating teachers sent home consent forms with all students in their class. Inclusion criteria at both sites were as follows: (a) students must be on the roster in a classroom of participating teachers, (b) students and their parents must be fluent in English (determined in coordination with the child’s teacher), and (c) the student must have parent consent. Demographic information for participants included in the current study in the US and Canada and across the total sample is summarized in Table 1. More than half of the sample was male (56.3%), white (63.6%), and a majority of parents were mothers (94.2%).

Table 1 Child and family demographics
Full size table

Measures

Demographic

Parents reported on their demographic information in the fall of kindergarten. A socioeconomic variable was created using a sum of responses on the parental education and family income variables, with higher scores indicating higher education and income.

Parent Support for Learning Scale (PSLS; Rogers et al. 2014; Rogers et al. 2009a, 2009b, 2009c)

The PSLS assesses parental involvement in educational activities with their child at home. It includes items related both to parent behaviors, as well as the tone of the interactions. The development of the scale was based on existing scales including the Family-School Questionnaire (Midgett 2000). Parents completed this measure in the spring of kindergarten. The PSLS has 18 items and item responses range from 1 (Strong Disagree) to 5 (Strongly Agree). Example items include: “I often bring home educational activities for our family”, “I read to my child before he/she goes to sleep”, and “I try to make my child feel confident in his/her school work”. Because there is not a published factor analysis of this measure with parents, we conducted a confirmatory factor analysis with the scale. The CFA was carried out using Mplus 7.21 (Muthén and Muthén 1998–2018). The data were analyzed as categorical using the WLSMV estimator. The fit of the model (X2 = 334.286, df = 135; CFI = 0.93; RMSEA = 0.095) was adequate. Alpha for the PSLS was 0.89 in the current study. Mean scale scores, standard deviations, and alphas for this sample for all measures are reported in Table 2.

Table 2 Descriptive statistics and correlation matrix for key variables
Full size table

Parent Involvement Project Parent Questionnaire (PIPQ; Walker et al. 2005)

The PIPQ measures personal motivators and contextual factors for parents’ educational involvement, including parents self-efficacy, role construction, time and energy, and knowledge and skills for involvement. The PIPQ was completed by the parents in the spring of kindergarten. Four subscale from the PIPQ-M were used in the current study: Parental Self-Efficacy (5 items), Parental Role Construction—Role Activity Beliefs (10 items), Parental Time and Energy (5 items), and Parental Knowledge and Skills (6 items). Each of these scales corresponds with Level 1 of the HDS model. Parents completed ratings on a 6-point scale that ranged from Disagree Very Strongly to Agree Very Strongly, with higher scores indicating higher levels of agreement. Parental Self-Efficacy is parents’ belief that they are able to help their child educationally (“I know how to help my child do well in school”). Role Construction asks parents about what they believe is their role in their child’s education (“I believe it’s my responsibility to help my child with schoolwork”). Parental Time and Energy provides information on parents’ perception of the resources they have available to help their child with educational activities (“I have enough time and energy to help out at my child’s school”). Finally, parents also report on their perceived Knowledge and Skills to support their child’s educational activities (“I have the skills to help out at my child’s school”). The reliability and validity of these scales has been established through a line of research summarized by Walker et al. (2005) that started with interviews and moved to the development of questionnaires. The questionnaires were revised as necessary through factor analytic methods. The internal reliabilities in past research and the current study ranged from questionable (self-efficacy in the current study) to good: Role Construction prior research a = 0.80 (0.79 in current study); Self-Efficacy = 0.78 (0.61 current study), Time and Energy = 0.84 (0.79 current study), and Knowledge and Skills = 0.83 (0.75 current study). Mean scale scores, standard deviations, and alphas for this sample for all measures are reported in Table 2.

ADHD Symptom Checklist-4 (ADHD-SC4; Gadow and Sprafkin 2008)

The ADHD-SC4 was completed by parents and teachers in the spring of kindergarten. Clinicians typically use ratings from parents and teachers in examining ADHD (Pelham et al. 2005). Including raters from home and school helps meet the criterion that ADHD be present across settings (APA 2013). In addition, the presence of symptoms in preschool across settings place children at greater risk for continued behavioral difficulty over time (O’Neill et al. 2014). Therefore, we combined rating scale data from parents and teachers in the current study. The scores from parents and teachers were averaged and used as one indicator of inattention and hyperactivity/impulsivity. For seven participants, either the parent or teacher rating was missing, but the other rater data were present. In these cases, rater data from one rater were used. In addition, given that one of the only studies on this topic found differences between the subset of ADHD symptoms (i.e., inattention, hyperactivity/impulsivity), we will also examine these symptom domains separately. The ADHD-SC4 includes 18 items that correspond to the nine inattentive symptoms and the nine hyperactivity/impulsivity symptoms listed in the DSM-IV (e.g., “Difficulty paying attention”), which are the same as the criteria included in the DSM-5. Ratings of behavior frequency are selected on a 4-point scale (0 = Never, 1 = Sometimes, 2 = Often, 3 = Very Often). The subscales correlate appropriately with similar subscales on well-established measures such as the Teacher Report Form and the IOWA Conners Teacher’s Rating Scale. Two-week test-retest reliability coefficients of the ADHD inattentive type symptom severity scores of the teacher-completed checklist were strong (0.84 for inattention and 0.85 for hyperactivity/impulsivity; Gadow and Sprafkin 2008). Mean scale scores, standard deviations, and alphas for this sample for all measures are reported in Table 2. Alphas for inattention (a = 0.94) and hyperactivity/impulsivity (a = 0.95) in the current sample were strong.

Procedures

All study procedures were approved by the Institutional Review Boards of the institutions of the first and second authors. Data for this study were collected in the spring of the 2011–2012 school year. Once schools agreed to participate in the study, teachers were recruited. Participating teachers sent home consent forms with all students in their class. Informed consent was obtained from all parent and teacher participants included in the study. After consent was obtained, parent questionnaires were sent home with each participating student; the parents were asked to return the packets in the sealable envelope to the school (or to contact the Principal Investigator if they wanted an alternative location). Parents were sent a $10 gift card when their packets were returned. Teachers completed packets for each participating student in their classroom (M = 5.36, SD = 2.17). Teachers received a $10 gift card for each student packet they completed.

Analyses

Descriptive analyses of the variables of interest were run using SPSS 22. To answer the question of whether ADHD symptoms moderated the effects of parent attitudes on parent involvement behavior, moderation was tested Mplus 7.21 (Muthén and Muthén 1998–2018). In these analyses, observed variables were used due to sample size. A series of eight moderation analyses were run with the dependent variable (parent involvement activities at home), two moderating variables (inattention and hyperactivity/impulsivity), and five independent variables (SES, role construction, self-efficacy, parental knowledge and skills, parental time and energy). Because data were nested within classrooms we used the TYPE = COMPLEX function in Mplus with the cluster being defined as the classroom teacher.

Results

Descriptive statistics and correlations between all variables are summarized in Table 2. The combined parent and teacher ratings of inattention (M = 0.69; SD = 0.56) and hyperactivity/impulsivity (M = 0.63; SD = 0.95) were reported to occur between “never” (score of 0) and “sometimes” (score of 1). The average levels of the personal and contextual variables all indicated agreement with positive statements. Parents reported that they “agree” (M = 5.14; SD = 0.64) with statements of self-efficacy, such as “I know how to help my child do well in school” and statements of knowledge and skills (M = 5.27; SD = 0.52), such as “I know how to supervise my child’s homework”. Parents’ average scores for role construction (M = 4.73; SD = 0.57) and time and energy (M = 4.80; SD = 0.79) fell between scores of “agree just a little” and “agree”. Average ratings for parental home involvement were between “agree” and “strongly agree” (M = 4.42; SD = 0.42). Inattention and hyperactivity/impulsivity were both negatively associated with self-efficacy and parent home involvement. Each of the personal motivators and life context variables were positively associated with one another, as well as parent home involvement.

Inattention Models

As shown in Table 3, inattention was a significant, negative predictor of parent involvement in three out of the four models (role construction, time and energy, knowledge and skills). None of the parent motivators were significant predictors of parental home involvement, whereas parent SES was a significant, positive predictor in all models except for knowledge and skills. The interaction effects indicated that inattention moderated the relationship between parent’s perceptions of their personal and contextual motivators (role construction, time and energy, and knowledge and skills) and their involvement at home. The relationships of each of the parental motivators with parent involvement was consistently positive; however, the relationship between the parental motivators and parental home involvement was stronger for those with higher levels of inattentive symptoms. The R2 value for these models ranged from 0.28 to 0.41.

Table 3 Child inattention, parental motivators, and parental involvement at home
Full size table

Hyperactivity/Impulsivity Models

For hyperactivity/impulsivity, each of the personal and contextual motivators was a significant and positive predictor of parent involvement at home (Table 4). SES was a significant predictor of involvement in the self-efficacy, role construction, and time and energy models. Hyperactivity/impulsivity was not a significant predictor of parents’ home involvement in any of the models and no interaction effects were significant. The R2 value for these models ranged from 0.26 to 0.36.

Table 4 Child hyperactivity/impulsivity, parental motivators, and parental involvement at home
Full size table

Discussion

The goal of this study was to explore the role of ADHD symptoms in the association between parental motivators/family context variables and parental involvement in children’s learning at home during kindergarten. The association between parents’ perception of their knowledge and skills, role construction, and time and energy with parental involvement in the home was moderated by children’s inattention, but not hyperactivity/impulsivity. The relationship between self-efficacy and parental home involvement was not moderated by either set of symptoms. These findings indicate that the links between parental motivators and involvement became stronger as children’s levels of inattention increased. Specifically, for parents of children with high levels of inattention, parent’s responses to items like “I believe it’s my responsibility to help my child with schoolwork” (role construction), “I have enough time and energy to help out at my child’s school” (time and energy), and “I know how to explain things to my child about his or her homework” (knowledge and skills) are strongly linked to their level of involvement.

Past research has demonstrated that inattentive symptoms of ADHD demonstrate the strongest link with academic underachievement (Fergusson and Horwood 1995; Polderman et al. 2010) and other important indicators of school success, such as motivation and engagement (Ogg et al. 2016). In the present study, the role of inattention in parental involvement was also more prominent than the role of hyperactivity/impulsivity. This finding is important because it suggests that strategies schools use to engage parents of children with inattention may need to be modified, whereas for students with hyperactivity/impulsivity, standard approaches to parental involvement may be effective. It is also particularly important that teachers are aware of how parents’ motivations for being involved in their child’s education may be associated with their children’s inattention. In particular, among parents of children with high levels of inattention, their motivators for involvement in helping their child academically is strongly linked to their involvement activities. In a study that has examined levels of parental motivators in parents of older children with and without ADHD, no differences were found in parents’ reports of role construction or knowledge and skills (Rogers et al. 2009b). In contrast, parents of children diagnosed with ADHD reported significantly lower levels of time and energy compared to parents of children without this diagnosis (Rogers et al. 2009b). This study informs research not only on level differences, but also on how inattention interacts with aspects of the parent’s involvement beliefs and behaviors. With replication, these findings can be useful in designing effective parent involvement interventions for youth displaying ADHD symptoms.

The relationship between self-efficacy and inattention and hyperactivity/impulsivity was unique from the other personal and contextual motivators. Specifically, in examining correlations, self-efficacy was the only motivator significantly correlated with inattention and hyperactivity/impulsivity. This finding is consistent with prior research that has found an association between lower levels of self-efficacy among parents of children with ADHD (Rogers et al. 2009b). Thus, parents of youth with high levels of inattention and hyperactivity/impulsivity may have low levels of self-efficacy when it comes to supporting their child in school. However, the relationship between self-efficacy and parental home involvement was not moderated by inattention in contrast with the other three parental motivators where moderation was found. One explanation is that self-efficacy is a robust predictor of parental home involvement regardless of child symptomatology.

This study has important implications for practice. For parents of children with high levels of inattention in particular, parents’ perceived role construction, along with their perceived knowledge and skills and time and energy, are strongly tied to their levels of involvement. This suggests that parents of youth with high levels of inattention, who exhibit low levels of perceived knowledge and skills, role construction, or time and energy, may be a particularly important group to intervene with. Given the academic difficulties faced by youth with inattentive symptoms, parents provide an important avenue to support a positive academic trajectory. For this group, interventions aimed at enhancing parental motivators could be important to support parent involvement, as motivators are more strongly linked with involvement behaviors. Although such interventions would need to be tested, the items on the measure used to assess parental motivators may shed light on the types of knowledge and skills that could be targeted. For example, several items targeted parents’ perceived skills at helping their child on their school work (“I know enough about the subjects of my child’s homework to help him or her”, “I know how to supervise my child’s homework”). Schools could provide parents with explicit instructions on how to help their child with their homework and information on how to structure homework activities. Items on the role construction measure ask parents about how much they believe it is their responsibility to help their child or to be involved at school. Encouraging parents and highlighting the importance of their role could be one direction for intervention. Interventions aimed at parent’s perceptions of time and energy to be involved could be more challenging, as prior research has demonstrated that parents of children with ADHD perceive lower levels of time and energy to be involved than parents of children without ADHD (Rogers et al. 2009b). Providing parents with strategies that they perceive as time efficient and feasible may be particularly important for parents of children with inattentive symptoms. Altogether the findings demonstrate the potential of examining motivators for involvement when developing and enhancing interventions for youth with ADHD. Focusing only on involvement behaviors without attention to why parents become involved may result in interventions that are not optimally effective.

Limitations

Although this study examined multiple parental motivators for involvement, there are numerous additional reasons why parents become involved. Specifically, in the current study the models explained only 26 to 41% of the variance in parent’s involvement, meaning there are a number of other factors that account for involvement. The current study focused on the personal and contextual motivators in the Hoover-Dempsey and Sandler model; however, there are a number of other school and broader contextual variables that are important to consider. For example, invitations for involvement from the school, teacher, and student have all demonstrated importance in parents deciding to become involved in their child’s education (Green et al. 2007; Hoover-Dempsey et al. 2005). In addition, socioeconomic status was related to parental involvement in the current study, which is consistent with prior research (Englund et al. 2004; Hill et al. 2004; Kohl et al. 2000) and represents one contextual variable that is associated with parent involvement. In addition, in the current study SES was associated with parent’s role construction and their perceived knowledge and skills. The development of interventions that help build parent’s perceived knowledge and skills, particularly in lower SES contexts, is a potential direction for future research.

The current study focused on one form of involvement, parent involvement at home; future research should examine how ADHD symptoms influence the relationships between parental motivators and other forms of involvement behaviors, such as parent-teacher communication. It is also possible that the direction of the relationships, although informed by theory, may be opposite of that proposed. For example, the HDS model proposes that parental motivators, such as perceived knowledge, predict parent involvement behaviors; however, it is also possible that parent involvement behaviors may also influence parents’ perceived knowledge and skill. Given this potential for reciprocal relations between the variables, these effects should be further evaluated with longitudinal research designs that will allow for more exploration of directionality, such as cross-lagged panel analyses.

The sample used in the current study also poses some limitations to interpretation. The sample was a convenience sample and was relatively small. Although a post-hoc power analysis indicated adequate levels of power, future research using an a priori power analysis can ensure adequate power to identify smaller effects that may not have been identified in the current study. Another key limitation is that the alpha for the self-efficacy measure was low. Although this scale has been used widely in past research, continued review of its psychometric properties may be warranted. Despite these limitations, this study provides a first look at the potential relationships between ADHD symptoms and theoretically informed components of parent involvement.

Conclusion

This study provides insight into the complex nature of parent involvement for youth who exhibit symptoms of ADHD. Inattention may be an important behavior to consider when determining strategies and interventions to support parent involvement in kindergarten. For children with high levels of inattention, how parents perceive their role as an educator and the time, energy, knowledge, and skills they have for this role are an important predictor of parent involvement. Given that kindergarten marks the beginning of a long-term relationship between home and school, understanding which families may be at risk for low levels of involvement is particularly important for facilitating the success of students with symptoms of ADHD.