COSPRAS - Progress

Versione italiana

COSPRAS

SCHOOL - FAMILY COOPERATION

         

Schools

Progress
         

Steps: - - -

First step :
AIM
RESEARCHERS INVOLVED
PERSONS PARTICIPATING FROM SCHOOLS INVOLVED
ACTIONS
TIME
RESULTS
To focus the most important issues concerning school - family communication The whole Cospras team (Cosulich, Grego, Matievich, Medizza)
  • 38 Parents
  • 23 Teachers
  • 22 Students (Secondary School)

Leading discussion groups on school- family communication

8 discussion groups in total:

4 with the participation of parents

2 with the participation of teachers

2 with the participation of students

Areas of discussion:

  1. School-Family Communication: means of communication, evaluation of the information flow
  2. School-Family Cooperation: common activities, parents' proposals and involvement
  3. Parents' Role in schools
  4. Teacher-Parent Relationships: positive and negative attitudes, expectations
May 2002
  • Means of communication found:

on an individual basis:

  • individual meetings
  • school reports
  • personal notebooks
  • letters
  • phone calls

on a class and school basis:

  • newsletters
  • bulletins
  • circular letters
  • notices
  • posters
  • informative reports
Same as above Same as above School staff Collecting some documents on school-family written communication May 2002

Documents collected were:

  • school plans
  • newsletters
  • bulletins

Second step:
AIM
RESEARCHERS INVOLVED
PERSONS PARTICIPATINGFROM SCHOOLS INVOLVED
ACTIONS
TIME
RESULTS

1. SCHOOL - FAMILY WRITTEN COMMUNICATION to assess in a number of documents:

- where a satisfactory level of quality has been reached

- where quality still has to be improved

The whole Cospras team (Cosulich, Grego, Matievich, Medizza) and Lara Modanese
  • One contact person in every school unit in charge for collecting and delivering documents to the Cospras person (Medizza)

1. Collecting documents on school-family written communication(86 documents in total)

2. Grouping documents in 5 categories:

a) School Plans and projects (5 in total)

b) bulletins -newsletters (10 in total)

c) circular letters to families (40 in total)

d) documents from the notice board (15 in total)

e) "informative" papers and posters(16 in total)

3. Analysing and evaluating the above mentioned documents according criteria of quality in written communication

November 2002 -March 2003

1. A number of considerations about where and how documents examined by the expert have reached a good level of quality, and where and how they can be improved

2. A number of suggestions aiming at an effective school-family written communication

2. SCHOOL - FAMILY SPOKEN COMMUNICATION- to analyse in depth opinions of teachers and parents just about teacher-parent individual meetings (NB individual meetings have been chosen by the Cospras team as being the most frequently mentioned by participants in group discussions) The whole Cospras team (Cosulich, Grego, Matievich, Medizza)and Paolo Sorzio

12 Parents (3 from Pre-primary School, 3 from Primary School, 3 from Middle School, 3 from High School)

12 Teachers (3 from Pre-primary School, 3 from Primary School, 3 from Middle School, 3 from High School)

1. Conducting interviews on parent-teacher individual meetings:

  • preparation, contents, way of running individual meetings
  • aims, expectations, feelings, description of problems
  • suggestions for an "ideal" parent-teacher individual meeting (24 interviews and 311 pages transcribed from the interviews)

2. Analysing interviews and categorising main issues found

November 2002 -March 2003

Three categories found:

1. Setting (place, time, relationships)

2. Teachers' and parents' viewpoint

3. Other (whatever is not included in the first two categories mentioned above)

Third step:
AIM
RESEARCHERS INVOLVED
PERSONS PARTICIPATINGFROM SCHOOLS INVOLVED
ACTIONS
TIME
RESULTS

1. SCHOOL - FAMILY WRITTEN COMMUNICATION

  • to present the results of the research to the pilot -schools involved
  • to elaborate a number of training materials for the improving of school-family written communication
The whole Cospras team and Lara Modanese

None

1. Reviewing considerations and suggestions made by the expert

2. Working out tools ready to be used by teachers and non-teaching staff

March - September 2003

Production of in-service training materials to be validated

2. SCHOOL - FAMILY SPOKEN COMMUNICATION

  • to present the results of the research to the pilot -schools involved
  • to elaborate a number of training materials for the improving of the teacher-parent individual meeting
The whole Cospras team

None

Working out tools to be used by teachers

March - September 2003

Production of in-service training tools to be validated

Fourth step:
AIM
RESEARCHERS INVOLVED
PERSONS PARTICIPATINGFROM SCHOOLS INVOLVED
ACTIONS
TIME
RESULTS

1. SCHOOL - FAMILY WRITTEN COMMUNICATION

To have training materials ready for use

The whole Cospras team and Lara Modanese

None

Reviewing training materials by considering the reactions of pilot schools at the presentation of the research

December 2003 - June 2004

Production of a cd - rom with suggestions on how to improve school - family written communication

2. SCHOOL - FAMILY SPOKEN COMMUNICATION

To have training materials ready for use

The whole Cospras team and Federico Somma
  • 82 teachers
  • 9 parents

Validating training materials by having them read and discussed by a number of teachers and parents

December 2003 - April 2004

Producing the basic structure of a cd - rom with in-service training materials for schools

Working on the interactive and printable versions of the workshops April - May 2004 Production of a cd-rom on the parent-teacher individual meeting

3. BOTH WRITTEN AND SPOKEN COMMUNICATION

Presentation and distribution of the training materials, possible follow-up in schools

The whole Cospras team Head teachers and teachers from all the schools in Friuli - Venezia Giulia Presentation meeting held in: Tolmezzo, Udine. Gorizia, Pordenone, Trieste September 2004

Presentation of the materials, final debate with questions and comments of participants.

Planning a possible follow-up with further contacts with schools.

 

Top

Web page edited on the 24th of January, 2005 by Livia Cosulich

English text by Nora Matievich