Impact of Parental Involvement with Homework on Pupils’ Mathematics Performance in Public Basic Schools in Ghana

Impact of Parental Involvement with Homework on Pupils’ Mathematics Performance in Public Basic Schools in Ghana

Francis Avevor

Advanced School of System and Data Studies (ASSDAS), Accra Institute of Technology, Accra, Ghana

DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2024.806128

Received: 26 July 2022; Revised: 31 August 2022; Accepted: 07 September 2022; Published: 11 July 2024

ABSTRACT

This descriptive survey, underpinned by self-determination theory, sought to determine the relationship between parental involvement with homework and their children’s academic performance in mathematics. It also examined the differences in the impact of involvement of single parents, double parents and non-parent caregivers on children’s performance in mathematics. Data was collected using semi-structured questionnaire from a sample of 440 pupils of five clusters of public basic schools in Accra, Ghana. Data analysis was done using descriptive statistics (frequencies, percentages, mean and standard deviation), Pearson’s product moment correlation and ANOVA. The results revealed that children’s performance in mathematics has a significantly positive relationship with parental goals, values and expectations (PGE), parental support (PSU) and children’s mathematics self-efficacy (MSE); and a significantly negative relationship with parental control (PCO) and homework task persistence (HTP). This study also showed that parental goals, values and expectations (PGE) has a significantly moderate relationship with both parental support (PSU) and children’s mathematics self-efficacy (MSE); while children’s homework task persistence (HTP) has a significantly moderate relationship with both parental support (PSU), and children’s mathematics self-efficacy (MSE). Furthermore, this study revealed that children of double parents outperformed those of single parents and non-parent caregivers in mathematics; and the significant difference in the mean scores of the children in mathematics is traceable to the high absolute mean score differences between the children of double parents and single parents; and between the children of double parents and non-parent caregivers.

Keywords— Parental involvement, mathematics performance, self-efficacy, parental prudence, homework.

INTRODUCTION

Parents’ involvement in children’s educational activities is important [1], [2], [3] because it can facilitate children’s acquisition of enhanced behavior and their attainment of higher academic performance [4]-[9]. Monitoring children’s educational activities, motivating them, managing their behaviour, and supporting them (through homework assistance and providing their educational needs) are examples of parental involvement. Many studies have demonstrated that parental involvement has a positive impact on children’s academic performance [7], [8], [10]-[13]. However, some other studies produced mixed results [14], [15], [16].

RESEARCH PROBLEM, GAPS AND OBJECTIVES

Pupils’ terminal examination scores in Ghanaian pre-tertiary schools (comprising basic schools and senior secondary schools), as well as their results for the Basic Education Certificate Examination (BECE) and the Senior Secondary School Certificate Examination (SSSCE), frequently reveal low academic achievement in several subjects, including mathematics [17], [18]. A continuous pattern of poor performance in mathematics among pupils is a result of

heterogenous factors involving pupils, teachers, and schools [19], [20]. Specifically, many educational stakeholders blame this phenomenon on teachers’ poor lesson delivery, pupils’ negative attitudes toward some subjects, poor parental controls, lack of parental motivation and assistance with homework, and parents’ lack of interest in their children’s educational activities [21]-[24]. Pupils’ performance in other courses that need mathematical knowledge and abilities might be impaired by a lack of mastery and poor performance in mathematics [25].

Reference [26] assert that there is a significantly negative relationship between parental assistance with homework and children’s academic achievement. They ascribe this phenomenon to children’s inability to, on their own, develop self-regulatory strategies. In contrast, schools, teachers and parents believe that parental homework involvement is essential for pupils’ academic performance; and they expect some level of parental involvement in pupils’ homework completion [27], [28] [29]. However, many parents appear very busy with their daily activities (including work and leisure) and do not have time to effectively and efficiently monitor their children’s educational activities. As such, their children are left to do their homework without parental assistance. Many children, therefore, struggle to do their homework; and often do it abysmally either because they do not understand the concepts on which the assignments are based or because they have not allocated themselves with ample time to do the homework.

Since the early 1990s, Ghanaian basic schools (comprising primary and junior high schools) and senior high schools have adopted Continuous Assessment (CA) of 30% for classwork (comprising in-class assignments and homework) and 70% for end-of-term examinations. It is, therefore, imperative that pupils do their homework assiduously with maximum parental assistance. A pupil’s poor cumulative performance in homework, therefore, implies that his/her total scores and grades will be adversely affected. Poor grades, and for that matter, poor academic performance of pupils may impair their educational aspirations and future professional success [27], [30]; and turn some of them into truants, school-dropouts, and social deviants (such as gamblers, alcoholics, drug addicts, prostitutes, armed-robbers, burglars, et cetera). This study, therefore, seeks to assess the impact of parental assistance with homework on pupils’ performance in mathematics in Ghanaian public basic schools.

Many studies have been conducted relating to parental involvement with homework and their effects on children’s academic performance. However, these studies largely concentrated on examining the perceptions of teachers and parents, thus, leaving out the perceptions of children. Very few studies have analyzed parental involvement with pupils’ homework that focused on a specific subject [31], [32]. To the best of the researcher’s knowledge, available literature does not do any comparative analysis of parental involvement with homework concerning the following categories of parents: single parents, double parents and non-parent caregivers. This study, therefore, made a comparative assessment of the involvement of the three categories of parents (single parents, double parents and non-parent caregivers), and investigated the impact of parental involvement with homework on children’s performance in mathematics.

The objectives of this study are outlined as follows:

1. To assess the relationship between parental involvement with homework and children’s performance in mathematics.
2. To determine the inter-relationships among parental involvement variables and student-related variables.
3. To determine the differences in the involvement of single parents, double parents and non-parent caregivers on children’s performance in mathematics.

The research questions for this study are outlined as follows:

1. What is the relationship between parental involvement with homework and pupils’ performance in mathematics (using the perceptions of pupils)?
2. Are there any inter-relationships among parental involvement variables and student-related variables?
3. Is there any difference in the involvement of single parents, double parents and non-parent caregivers with homework on children’s performance in mathematics?

LITERATURE REVIEW

A. Conceptual Framework

Parental involvement has many dimensions [33]. This includes parental values, beliefs, expectations and attitudes regarding their children’s educational aspirations and attainments [34], parental support with homework, parental control and demandingness, communication with teachers, and attending school functions and parent-teacher association meetings [35], [36]. Research has found that parental values and expectations can predict children’s values and academic achievements [37], [38], [39].

Existing literature on parental involvement with pupils’ homework has examined various parental styles and/or parental dimensions. Reference [40] has differentiated between authoritative, authoritarian and permissive parenting styles; while [41] differentiated between parenting dimensions of emotional support, and behavioural and psychological control. Furthermore, some studies have emphasized the importance of parents communicating their values, aspirations and goals to their children [42].

Popular theoretical frameworks for analyzing parental involvement with homework include [43]’s self-determination theory and [44]’s decay theory. The self-determination theory postulates that feelings of relatedness, competence, and autonomy are crucial for children’s motivation and skills development [43]. This implies that parental support and control are forms of parental involvement that satisfy the need for a child’s relatedness, competence, and autonomy. Parental support refers to children’s valuation of their parents’ homework assistance; whereas parental control connotes pressure and/or control which parents exert on children to complete assignments steadfastly and in a timely fashion.

The decay theory postulates that learning leaves a mark on the brain, which should be actively used else it might fade away over time. This implies that in parenting and academic accomplishment, if parents and teachers do not stress the positive qualities that they want their children/pupils to acquire on a regular basis, the learners may forget about them and eventually adopt the negative habits. Also, if pupils do not revise things they have learnt or been taught on a regular basis, they are likely to forget them.

Furthermore, [45] formulated a model with five levels for analyzing the impact of parental involvement on their children’s educational activities, as shown in Fig. 1. The levels are outlined as follows:

1. Parents’ perception of invitations for involvement from others (namely: Child, School, Teachers)
2. Parents’ involvement behaviour (such as encouragement, modeling, reinforcement and instruction)
3. Children’s perceptions of parent’s involvement (through modeling, encouragement, instruction and reinforcement)
4. Children’s attributes for academic achievement (such as their academic and social self-efficacies, their use of self-regulatory strategy, and their learning impetus)
5. Student achievement.

Fig. 1 Model of Parental Involvement Process [45], p.74

B. Empirical Literature

Research has revealed that children’s senses of competence and autonomy as well as their learning efforts increase when parents give them autonomy thus allowing them to do the homework themselves and providing them with assistance, if needed [46]. Specifically, [47] found a positive relationship between perceived parental homework support and children’s academic achievement. Research also showed that parental control reduces children’s persistence in learning as well as their senses of competence and autonomy [48]. Also, [30] and [47] found that there is a negative relationship between perceived parental homework control and children’s academic achievement. Thus, parental support can boost children’s homework performance while parental control can impede it.

Existing literature suggests that parents’ involvement in their children’s academic achievement can differ at school-grade levels. In a meta-analysis regarding parental involvement programs for urban students, [39] found that parental involvement predicts children’s academic achievement better at elementary school level than at secondary school level. He ascribed three main reasons for this phenomenon; namely: parents’ higher motivation for involvement with their children’s educational activities (including homework) at their tender ages; higher influence of parents’ educational values on their children at their tender ages; and children’s self-belief of their academic competences as they get higher in their education and become more autonomous (and, thus, get less parental involvement) in their academic activities.

Prior literature on parental involvement with educational attainment of elementary and secondary school students shows that parental expectations and aspirations as well as parental support and encouragement are positively related to children’s academic achievement [49]-[53].

Children’s performance in mathematics is influenced by their cognitive abilities, self-perceived beliefs, self-concept, and the impact of teachers, parents and their peers [54], [55]. Some studies have used children’s self-perceived beliefs about their abilities and competencies in mathematics, their mathematics self-concept and their attitudes towards mathematics to assess children’s academic achievement [54], [56]. Research has found a positive relationship between children’s mathematics self-concept and their achievement in mathematics [57], [58]; and children’s cognitive ability enhances their achievement in mathematics [55]. In contrast, [32] found that parental control tends to inhibit children’s mathematics self-concept.

In their recent study of the effect of parents’ involvement on Chinese students’ performance in mathematics, [9] analyzed data from 2866 students and their parents on the following three parental involvement dimensions: personal involvement, behavioral involvement and cognitive involvement.  They made three findings: (1). Children from families with only one child outperformed those from families with two or more children in all the three parental involvement dimensions, as well as in “mental health, mathematics self-efficacy, and mathematics performance” (p.6); (2). The three parental involvement dimensions have different effects on students’ performance in mathematics; (3). Students’ mental health and mathematics self-efficacy partially mediate the influences of parental behavioral involvement and cognitive involvement on students’ performance in mathematics; whilst students’ mental health and mathematics self-efficacy fully mediate parental personal involvement on the students’ performance in mathematics.

In their analysis of how Korean middle school students’ academic self-efficacy and test anxiety relate to their parents’ involvement towards their learning strategy and performance in mathematics, [59] found that the most significant influence on students’ learning strategy and academic achievement was their academic self-efficacy. Similarly, in a longitudinal study to examine the relationship between parents’ involvement in homework and pupils’ performance in mathematics across third and sixth grades in 28 Estonia schools, [60] found a positive relationship between parental support and pupils’ homework task persistence; and that pupils’ low mathematics self-concept predicted an increased parental control.

Combining findings from nine meta-analyses, [1] found a positive relationship between parents’ involvement and students’ academic performance, regardless of how parental involvement is defined or how students’ performance is measured. He also found that the relationship is strongest if parents’ expectations for their children’s academic performance is used to define parental involvement. Furthermore, he found the weakest impact when homework assistance is used to define parental involvement. Similarly, [2] concluded from their meta-analysis that there is a negative relationship between parents’ involvement with homework and children’s performance in mathematics. Also, in their study of private university students in Malaysia, [61] found a negative relationship between parents’ involvement and students’ academic performance in mathematics.

METHODOLOGY

This study is underpinned by [43]’s self-determination theory and the parental involvement process model of [45]. The researcher, therefore, conceptualized parental homework involvement using the following five variables: (a). parental goals, values and expectations; (b). parental support, (c). parental control, (d). children’s mathematics self-efficacy, and (e). children’s homework task persistence. Fig. 2 showed the conceptual framework proposed for this study to establish whether parental involvement with homework has any impact on children’s performance in mathematics.

Fig. 2 Conceptual framework for parental involvement and children’s mathematics achievement

This study is a descriptive survey. The researcher used a mixed research design so as to have a comprehensive data analysis [62]. Specifically, a semi-structured questionnaire was used to collect quantitative data on students’ mathematics performance, as well as their biographical data and 5-scale likert-style data on the five perception constructs in Table 2. Also, before the data analysis stage, the researcher held a 53-minute focus group discussion with 3 headteachers and 8 teachers (from the selected clusters of schools), as well as 10 parents/caregivers. These two sets of data were triangulated for two reasons: i. to enhance the credibility and validity of the findings of this study; and ii.  explain the results in more detail.

The instruments for measuring the following four (4) variables were adapted from literature as shown in Table 1:

1. perceptions of parental support,
2. perceptions of parental control,
3. children’s mathematics self-efficacy, and
4. children’s homework task persistence.

However, an 11-item instrument for gathering both biographical data (comprising age, gender, class, number of siblings, and parental type) and for measuring the perception of parental goals, values and aspirations was developed by the researcher; and this was validated by two university professors with expertise in questionnaire design.

Table 1. Instruments for Measuring Parental Support, Parental Control, Mathematics Self-Efficacy and Task Persistence

Five data collectors were trained on ethical issues and quality data collection approaches. All the 6,487,133 pupils in public basic schools in Ghana during the 2020/2021 academic year [65] constituted the general population for this study. The target population comprised all eligible and potential public basic school pupils with the ability to read and understand texts in English language. According to [66], the national average for children aged 7-14 years who have foundational reading skills “based on contents for Grades 2 and 3” (p. 12) is 21%. Thus, the target population for this study was 1,362,298. This study’s accessible population comprised members of the target population who were willing and available to participate in this study.

The researcher used stratified random sampling technique to break the general population into regions and then randomly selected Greater Accra Region to focus on for this study. This selection was made considering financial constraints as well as the large size and the geographically dispersed nature of the target population. Also, the public basic schools in Greater Accra Region were stratified into metropolis/ municipalities/districts; and stratified further into locality types (namely: urban and rural areas); and random sampling technique was used to select one metropolis and one municipality in Accra for this study. Furthermore, the researcher used convenience sampling technique to select 4 urban clusters of schools and 1 rural cluster of schools (from the chosen metropolis and municipality in Accra). These 5 clusters of schools had a combined students’ population of 9,172. In compliance with [67]’s sample size determination table, a minimum sample size of 385 was targeted for this study. The researcher sought clearance from the headteachers of these schools; and with the help of one teacher from each of the 5 clusters of schools, a sample size of four hundred and forty (440) primary and junior high school pupils was randomly selected for this study. Furthermore, with the help of the headteachers, the parents/caregivers of the pupils selected for this study were contacted to seek their permissions for their children’s participation.

A total of 440 questionnaires were administered to the primary and junior high school pupils who were between the ages of 8 and 19 years; and could read and understand texts in English language [66]. 420 of the administered questionnaires were usable; thus, the response rate was 97.3%. The 420 completed questionnaires used for this study, therefore, exceeded the minimum number (of 385) required for this study.

Data analysis was done using descriptive statistics (frequencies, percentages, mean and standard deviation), Pearson’s product moment correlation and ANOVA on IBM SPSS Statistics version 28.0.1.1. Specifically, the statistical tools used for analyzing data in respect of each of the research questions are outlined as follows:

RQ1. What is the relationship between parental involvement with homework and pupils’ performance in mathematics (using the perceptions of pupils)?

Pearson’s correlation coefficients were used to clearly determine the relationships/correlations among the variables.

RQ2. Are there any inter-relationships among parental involvement variables and student-related variables?

Pearson’s correlation coefficients were used to clearly determine the relationships/correlations among the variables.

RQ3. Is there any difference in the involvement of single parents, double parents and non-parent caregivers with homework on children’s performance mathematics?

Frequency, Mean, Standard deviation, and ANOVA were used to determine the significance of differences in the mean scores of the children of these 3 parent types in mathematics; and trace such differences, if any.

RESULTS

Table 2 presented the demographic data of the respondents. It showed that the 420 pupils are between the ages of 8 and 19 years; and 108 (25.7%) of them are in Primary 1-3, .while 145 (34.5%) of them are in Primary 4-6, and the remaining 167 (39.8%) of them are in Junior high school 1-3. Also, 172 (40.95%) of the pupils have double parents while 149 (35.48%) of them have single parents and the remaining 99 (23.57%) have non-parent caregivers looking after them.

Table 2: Frequencies and Percentages of Respondents’ Demographic Data

Table 3 shows that average variance extracted (AVE) values higher than the 0.50 threshold [68] was attained, indicating convergent and discriminant validity. Also, Cronbach alpha reliability values higher than the 0.70 threshold [69] was attained indicating internal consistency of the data items. Furthermore, composite reliability (CR) values of at least 0.80 [70] was attained signifying convergent validity. Thus, the instrument passed the validity and variability tests.

n=420, Mathematics scores range from 0 – 100; all other variables use likert-scale 1-5.      

Among the five variables in Table 3, parental goals, values and expectations has the largest mean score of 3.37, while Mathematics self-efficacy has the smallest mean score of 2.67) Also, Mathematics self-efficacy has the largest standard deviation of 2.04, while parental goals, values and expectations has smallest standard deviation of 0.79.

RQ1. What is the relationship between parental involvement with homework and pupils’ performance in mathematics (using the perceptions of pupils)?

Table 4 revealed that there is a significantly positive correlation between children’s performance in mathematics and their perception of their parents’ goals, values and expectations (r=0.571, p<0.00001 and effect size r²=0.326). The effect size interpretation table of [71] showed that this relationship is moderate (See Table 5). Thus, an increase in children’s perception of their parents’ goals, values and expectations will moderately increase their performance in mathematics. Similarly, there is a significantly moderate positive correlation between children’s performance in mathematics and their perceptions of their parents’ support (r=0.527, p<0.00001 and effect size r²=0.278).

Table 4: Mean, Standard Deviation, Pearson’s Correlation Coefficients and Corresponding P Values

*p < .05

Table 5: Effect Size Interpretation Table.

Ferguson (2009)

This study also revealed that there is a significantly weak negative relationship between children’s performance in mathematics and their homework task persistence (r=-0.337, p<0.00001 and effect size r²=0.114). Furthermore, there is a significantly positive relationship between children’s performance in mathematics and their mathematics self-efficacy (r=0.158, p<0.00116 and effect size r²=0.025) but the effect is negligible; thus, one cannot make a strong claim about this relationship. In contrast, there is a significantly weak negative correlation between children’s performance in mathematics and their perception of their parents’ control (r=-0.415, p<0.00004 with the effect size r² = 0.172). Thus, an increase in children’s perception of their parents’ control will weakly decrease their performance in mathematics.

RQ2. Are there any inter-relationships among parental involvement variables and student-related variables?

Table 4 also revealed the strength of relationships between pairs of the five variables examined in this study. Children’s perception of their parents’ goals, values and expectations has a significantly moderate positive relationship with their perception of parental support (r=0.511, p<0.00001, r²=0.261); and it has a significantly weak positive relationships with both their parents’ control (r=0.365, p<0.00001, r²=0.133) and their mathematics self-efficacy (r=0.491, p<0.00001, r²=0.241) since the p value is less than 0.05 level of significance. However, children’s perceptions of their parents’ goals, values and expectations has no significant relationship with their homework task persistence (r=0.043, p<0.3794, r²=0.002). Thus, an increase in the children’s perception of their parents’ goals, values and expectations will increase their perception of their parents’ support; but it will not necessarily increase their perception of their parents’ control; neither will it increase their mathematics self-efficacy.

Children’s perception of their parents’ support has a significantly weak positive relationship with their homework task persistence (r=0.416, p<0.00001, r²=0.173), their mathematics self-efficacy (r=0.272, p<0.00001, r²=0.074), and their perception of their parents’ control (r=0.384, p<0.00001, r²=0.147).

Also, children’s perception of their parents’ control has a negligible negative relationship with their mathematics self-efficacy (r=-0.19, p<0.000089, r²=0.036); but it has no significant relationship with their homework task persistence (r=-0.051, p<0.29706, r²=0.003) since the p value is greater than 0.05 level of significance. Thus, an increase (or decrease) in the children’s perception regarding their parents’ control will not change their mathematics self-efficacy; neither will it change their homework task persistence.

Furthermore, there is a significantly moderate positive relationship between children’s mathematics self-efficacy and their homework task persistence (r=0.526, p<0.00001, r² = 0.277). Thus, an increase in the children’s self-efficacy will moderately increase their homework task persistence.

RQ3. Is there any difference in the involvement of single parents, double parents and non-parent caregivers with homework on children’s performance in mathematics?

Table 6 revealed that children of double parents had the highest mean achievement score of 70.09 and the lowest standard deviation of 10.984 in mathematics; whilst children of single parents had the lowest mean achievement score of 61.33 and the highest standard deviation of 15.718 in mathematics.  Thus, children of double parents are doing well in mathematics, but children of single parents are performing poorly in mathematics. Children of non-parent caregivers, on the other hand, had a mean score of 65.02 and a standard deviation of 13.061 in their mathematics achievement.

Table 6: Mathematics Performance Level by Parental Type

Table 7 showed that there is a significant difference in the mean scores of children of at least one pair of parent types in mathematics since the p value is less than the alpha (α) value [p=0.0000, α = 0.05 and F(2, 417) = 1720.63]. In order to identify the source of the difference in the children’s mean scores, the Tukey-Kramer post ad hoc HSD test was performed, as presented in Table 8. It revealed that there is a significant   difference in the mean mathematics achievement scores between children of double parents and those of single parents; and between children of single parents and those of non-parent caregivers, since q(3, 417) = 3.314 (as read from Studentized q table) is less than the HSD values of 6.7402 and 3.9010 in the 1^st and 2^nd rows of Table 8, respectively, at α = 0.05 level of significance.

Table 7: One Way Anova for Measuring Group Differences Across Parental Type

Note: N = 420      α = 0.05 level of significance

Table 8 also showed that the absolute mean difference in the achievement scores between children of double parents and those of single parents is 8.76; while the absolute mean difference in the scores in mathematics between children of double parents and those of non-parent caregivers is 5.07. Thus, the significant difference in the mean scores of the children in mathematics is traceable to the high absolute mean score differences between the children of double parents and single parents; and between the children of double parents and non-parent caregivers.

 Table 8: Tukey-Kramer HSD One Way Anova for Measuring Mathematics Across Parental Types

*α=0.05 level of significance     q(3, 417) = 3.314 from Studentized q table

 DISCUSSION

The discussion of the findings is done in this section on the basis of the research questions.

RO1. What is the relationship between parental involvement with homework and pupils’ Mathematics performance (using the perceptions of pupils)?

This study examined the impact of the following five variables on pupils’ academic performance in mathematics: Parental goals, values and expectations (PGE), Parental support (PSU), Parental control (PCO), Mathematics self-efficacy (MSE), and Homework task persistence (HTP)

This study found a significantly moderate correlation between children’s performance in mathematics and their perception of their parents’ goals, values and expectations. This means that an increase in the children’s perception of their parents’ goals, values and expectations will moderately increase their academic performance in mathematics. This implies that if parents want their children to perform well in mathematics, they should constantly and openly communicate their goals, values and expectations to their children regarding the children’s education and future career prospects. This result is consistent with those of [3], [38], and [49]-[53].

Similarly, this study found that there is a significantly moderate positive correlation between children’s performance in mathematics and their perceptions of their parents’ support.  This implies that the more support (such as homework support and provision of school and other ancillary materials) that parents provide to their children, the more their children’s performance in mathematics will increase. Thus, parental support is an important stimulus for children’s academic performance in mathematics; so, parents need to provide support for their children’s education to increase their achievement in mathematics. This result is consistent with those of [48]-[53], [72], and [73].

Furthermore, this study found a significantly weak negative correlation between children’s performance in mathematics and their perception of their parents’ control.  This implies that an increase in children’s perception of their parents’ control regarding their educational activities will decrease their performance in mathematics slightly. This result complements those of [30], [32], [47] and [60]. In contrast, [74] in their study found a positive relationship between parental control and children’s performance in mathematics; while [75] found no relationship between these two variables.

Comparing the effect sizes of the three parental involvement variables discussed above, that of parental goals, values and expectations is the largest; and thus had the largest impact on children’s performance in mathematics. This result corroborated that of [1] which found parental expectations as the strongest parental involvement factor influencing children’s academic performance. Thus, the importance of parental goals, values and expectations as stimulus for children’s performance in mathematics cannot be overstated.

Also, this study revealed that there is a significantly positive but negligible relationship between children’s performance in mathematics and their mathematics self-efficacy; so, one cannot make a strong claim about this relationship. Thus, children’s belief in their mathematical ability and capability (mathematics self-efficacy) had a negligible effect on their performance in mathematics.  This result is consistent with those of [57], [58], [59], and [76].

In addition, this study showed that there is a significantly weak negative relationship between children’s performance in mathematics and their homework task persistence. Thus, the higher the children’s homework task persistence, the lower their level of performance in mathematics. Children exert much effort in doing mathematics homework if they do not understand the concept(s) on which the assignments are based, if they consider the questions to be difficult, and if the questions are very many.   

RO2. Are there any inter-relationships among parental involvement variables and children’s performance variables?

This study found the following relationships among the five independent variables examined:

1. Children’s perception of their parents’ goals, values and expectations has a significantly moderate positive relationship with their perception of parental support; but it has significantly weak positive relationships with both their parents’ control and their mathematics self-efficacy. These findings call for parents to communicate their goals, values and expectations fluidly to their children and also create a friendly, supportive environment for the children to develop and achieve their educational and future career goals. Also, children’s perception of their parents’ support has a significantly weak positive relationship with their homework task persistence. This finding is consistent with that of [60].
2. Children’s perception of their parents’ support has significantly weak positive relationships with parental control, their homework task persistence, and their mathematics self-efficacy.
3. Children’s perception of their parents’ control has negligible negative relationships with both their mathematics self-efficacy and their homework task persistence. Thus, an increase in the children’s perception regarding their parents’ control will reduce their mathematics self-efficacy and their homework task persistence slightly. This finding is consistent with that of [60] who concluded that increased parental control leads to low task persistence as well as low math self-concept.
4. Children’s mathematics self-efficacy has a significantly moderate positive relationship with their homework task persistence. This means that an increase in children’s self-efficacy in mathematics will moderately increase their homework task persistence. Thus, children will not struggle or exert much effort in executing their mathematics assignments if their self-efficacy is good.

RO3. Is there any difference in the involvement of single parents, double parents and non-parent caregivers with homework on children’s Mathematics performance?

This study revealed that children of double parents had the highest mean score in mathematics while children of single parents had the lowest mean score. Thus, children of double parents were doing well in mathematics, but children of single parents were performing poorly in mathematics. It also showed that there is a significant difference in the mean scores of children of at least one pair of parent types in mathematics. In addition, it revealed that there is a significant difference in the mean achievement scores in mathematics between children of double parents and those of single parents; and between children of double parents and those of non-parent caregivers. Thus, the significant difference in the mean scores of the children in mathematics is traceable to the high absolute mean score differences between the children of double parents and single parents; and between the children of double parents and non-parent caregivers. This study, therefore, adds an analysis of parenting types (viz: double parents, single parents and non-parent caregivers) to the existing literature on the impact of parents’ involvement with homework on children’s academic performance in mathematics.

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

This study sought to determine three things: the impact of parents’ involvement with homework on children’s academic performance in mathematics, the inter-relationships among the five independent variables used for this study, and the differences in the impact of involvement of single parents, double parents and non-parent caregivers on children’s performance in mathematics. It revealed that children’s performance in mathematics has a significantly positive relationship with parental goals, values and expectations (PGE), parental support (PSU) and children’s mathematics self-efficacy (MSE); and a significantly negative relationship with parental control (PCO) and homework task persistence (HTP). Also, parental goals, values and expectations (PGE) has the strongest impact on children’s performance in mathematics, followed by parental support (PSU) and parental control (PCO). This result, therefore, calls for parental prudence and self-circumspection in order to create a congenial environment at home for children to have some form of autonomy regarding their studies and homework task performance; and this will, in turn, foster the children’s academic performance in mathematics.

This study also showed that parental goals, values and expectations (PGE) has a significantly moderate relationship with both parental support (PSU) and children’s mathematics self-efficacy (MSE).  Furthermore, this study revealed that the significant difference in the mean scores of the children in mathematics is traceable to the high absolute mean score differences between the children of double parents and single parents; and between children of double parents and non-parent caregivers.

This study used five clusters of public basic schools in Accra, Ghana; and the results may not be truly representative of the population. Therefore, future research may consider using a sample that covers a wider geographical area. Also, future researchers may consider focusing on some other salient parental involvement variables as well as other student-related variables as predictors of children’s academic performance in mathematics and other STEM courses (namely: science, technology, and engineering). Furthermore, parents should endeavour to provide a congenial environment at home for their children to engage in school-related activities (including homework and studying) to enhance their academic performance in mathematics.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

I am grateful to Evans Kudzo Morve for editing the manuscript for this study.

REFERENCES

1. Wilder, S. (2014). Effects of parental involvement on academic achievement: A meta synthesis. Educational Review, 66(3), 377-397. doi: 10.1080/00131911.2013.780009
2. Patall, E. A., Cooper, H., & Robinson, J. C. (2008). Parent involvement in homework: A research synthesis. Review of Educational Research, 78(4), 1039-1101. doi:10.3102/0034654308325185
3. Jeynes, W. (2012). A meta-analysis of the efficacy of different types of parental involvement programs for urban students. Urban Education, 47(4), 706-742
4. Henderson, A. T., & Mapp, K. L. (2002). A new wave of evidence: The impact of school, family, and community connections on student achievement. Austin, TX: National Educational Development Laboratory
5. Walker, J. M., Hoover-Dempsey, K. V., Whetsel, D. R., & Green, C. L. (2004). Parental involvement in homework: A review of current research and its implications for teachers, after school program staff, and parent leaders. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Family Research Project.
6. Bryan, J. B. (2005). Fostering educational resilience and achievement in urban schools through school-family-community partnerships. Professional School of Counseling, 8, 219-227.
7. Cairney, T. H. (2000). Beyond the classroom walls: The rediscovery of the family and community as partners in education. Educational Review, 52, 163-174
8. Melhuish, E. C., Sylva, K., Sammons, P., Siraj-Blatchford, I., Taggart, B., Phan, M., & Malin, A. (2008). Preschool influences on mathematics achievement. Science, 321, 1161-1162.
9. Huang, F., Huang, Z.., Li, Z.., & Zhang, M. (2021). Relationship between Parental Involvement and Mathematics Achievement of Chinese Early Adolescents: Multiple Mediating Roles of Mental Health and Mathematics Self-Efficacy. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health, 18, 9565. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18189565
10. Desforges, C., & Abouchaar, A. (2003). The impact of parental involvement, parental support and family education on pupil achievement and adjustment: A review of literature. London, England: DfES Publications.
11. Shaver, A. V. & Walls, R. T. (1998). Effect of Title I parent involvement on student reading and mathematics achievement, Journal of Research and Development in Education, 31(2), pp. 90-97.
12. Gutman, L. M., & Midgley, C. (2000). The role of protective factors in supporting the academic achievement of poor African American students during the middle school transition. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 20, 223–248
13. Epstein, J. L., & Sanders, M. G. (2002). Family, school, and community partnerships. In Bornstein, M. H. (ed.), Handbook of Parenting. Vol. 5: Practical Issues in Parenting, Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ, pp. 407–437.
14. Hill, N. E., & Tyson, D. F. (2019).  Parental Involvement in Middle School: A Meta-Analytic Assessment of the Strategies That Promote Achievement. Developmental Psychology 45(3) 740–763. Retrieved from: https://www.apa.org/pubs/journals/releases/dev453740.pdf
15. Silinskas, G., & Kikas, E. (2019a). Math homework: Parental help and children’s academic outcomes. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 59, Article 101784. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2019.101784
16. Carmichael, C., & MacDonald, A. (2016). Parental influences on primary school children’s mathematics achievement: insights from the Longitudinal Study of Australian Children. Education 3-13, 44(2), 197-211. doi:10.1080/03004279.2014.939684
17. Butakor, P. K. (2016). Hierarchical linear modeling of the relationship between attitudinal and instructional variables and mathematics achievement. International Journal of Research in Education Methodology, 7(5): 1328-1336.
18. Ministry of Education (2016). Ghana 2016 national education assessment, Report of findings. Accra.
19. Tshabalala, T, & Ncube, A.C. (2016). Causes of poor performance of ordinary level pupils in mathematics in rural secondary schools in Nkayi district: learner’ s attributions. Med Biol Sci (2016). 1:1–10.
20. Kupari, P, & Nissinen, K. (2013). Background factors behind mathematics achievement in Finnish education context: explanatory models based on TIMSS 1999 and TIMSS 2011 data. (2013). Proceedings: IEA conference 2013. Retrieved from: http://iea-aie2013.few.vu.nl/index.shtm
21. Chand, S., Chaudhary, K., Prasad, A., & Chand, V. (2021). Perceived Causes of Students’ Poor Performance in Mathematics: A Case Study at Ba and Tavua Secondary School. Frontiers in Applied Mathematics and Statistics, 7. Retrieved from: https://doi.org/10.3389/fams.2021.614408
22. Oduro, E. O. (2015), Assessment in Mathematics Classrooms in Ghana: A Study of Teachers’ Practices http://Sro.Sussex.Ac.Uk/       Thesis
23. Anlimachie, M.A. (2019).  Understanding the Causes of Students’ weak Performance in Geography at the WASSCE and the Implications for School Practices; A Case of Two Senior High Schools in a Rural District of Ghana. International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science (IJRISS) III(III). 295-311.
24. Wu, B., & Xin, Y. (2019), Investigation and Study on the Causes of College Students’ Poor Academic Performances and Intervention Mechanism Taking College Students in Xi’an as an Example. Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Culture, Education and Economic Development of Modern Society (ICCESE 2019) https://doi.org/10.2991/iccese-19.2019.364.
25. Bakar, N. A., Ayub, A. F. M., Ahmad, N. A., & Abdullah, S. I. S. S. (2021). Mathematics Achievement: The Relationship between Student Engagement, Parental Involvement, and Peer Influence. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 11(5), 496–513.
26. Lee, J., & Bowen, N. (2006). Parental involvement, cultural capital, and the achievement gap among elementary school children. American Educational Research Journal, 43(2), 193-218. https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312043002193
27. Dettmers, S., Yotyodying, S., & Jonkmann, K. (2019). Antecedents and Outcomes of Parental Homework Involvement: How Do Family-School Partnerships Affect Parental Homework Involvement and Student Outcomes? Frontiers in Psychology 2019.01048.   DOI:10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01048. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.2991/iccese-19.2019.364
28. Maltese, A.V., Tai, R. H., & Fan, X. (2012). When is homework worth the time? Evaluating the association between homework and achievement in high school science and math. High School Journal, 96(1), 52-72.
29. Brock, C.H., Lapp, D., Flood, J., Fisher, D., & Han, K.T. (2007). Does homework matter? An investigation of teacher perceptions about homework practices for children from nondominant backgrounds. Urban Education, 42(4), 349-372. (EJ7677573). doi:10.1177/0042085907304277
30. Karbach, J., Gottschling, J., Spengler, M., Hegewald, K., & Spinath, F. M. (2013). Parental involvement and general cognitive ability as predictors of domain-specific academic achievement in early adolescence. Learning and Instruction, 23, 43–51. doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2012.09.004
31. Trautwein, U., Schnyder, I., Niggli, A., Neumann, M., & Ludtke, O. (2009). Chameleon effects in homework research: The homework-achievement association depends on the measures used and the level of analysis chosen. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 34(1), 77- 88. (EJ819473). doi:10.1016/j.cedpsych.2008.09.001. Retrieved from https://doc.rero.ch/record/235691/files/35_Chameleon_effects_in_homework_research.pdf
32. Dumont, H., Trautwein, U., Lüdtke, O., Neumann, M., Niggli, A., & Schnyder, I. (2012). Does parental homework involvement mediate the relationship between family background and educational outcomes? Contemporary Educational Psychology, 37, 55–69. doi:10.1016/j.cedpsych.2011.09.004
33. Boonk, L., Gijselaersa, H. J., Ritzenb, H., & Brand-Gruwela, S. (2018). A review of the relationship between parental involvement indicators and academic achievement. Educational Research Review, 24, 10-30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2018.02.001
34. Hoover-Dempsey, K.V., & Sandler, H.M. (1997). Why do parents become involved in their children’s education? Review of Educational Research, 67(1), 3-42
35. Englund, M. M., Luckner, A. E., Whaley, G. J., & Egeland, B. (2004). Children’s achievement in early elementary school: Longitudinal effects of parental involvement, expectations, and quality of assistance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96(4), 723-730. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.96.4.723
36. Sheldon, S. B., & Epstein, J. L. (2007). Parent survey of family and community involvement in the elementary and middle grades. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University, Center on School, Family, and Community Partnerships.
37. Porumbu, D., & Necşoi, D.V. (2013). Relationship between parental involvement/attitude and children’s school achievements. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 76, 706-710. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.04.191.
38. Gniewosz, B., & Noack, P. (2012). What you see is what you get: The role of early adolescents’ perceptions in the intergenerational transmission of academic values. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 37(1), 70-79. doi:10.1016/j.cedpsych.2011.10.002.
39. Jeynes, W.H. (2007). The relationship between parental involvement and urban secondary school student academic achievement: A meta-analysis. Urban Education, 42(1), 82-110. doi:10.1177/0042085906293818
40. Baumrind, D. (1966). Effects of authoritative parental control on child behavior. Child Development, 47, 887 907.doi:10.2307/1126611
41. Skinner, E., Johnson, S., & Snyder, T. (2005). Six dimensions of parenting: A motivational model. Parenting: Science and Practice, 5, 175–235. doi:10.1207/s15327922par0502_3
42. Ford, M. (1992). Motivating Humans: Goals, Emotions, and Personal Agency Beliefs, Sage, Newbury Park, CA.
43. Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55, 68–78. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.68
44. Freud, S. (1933). New Introductory Lectures in Psychoanalysis, Norton, New York.
45. Hoover-Dempsey, K.V., & Sandler, H.M. (2005). Final performance report for OERI: The social context of parental involvement: A path to enhanced achievement. Presented to Project Monitor, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education, March 22, 2005.
46. Moorman, E. A., & Pomerantz, E. M. (2008). The role of mothers’ control in children’s mastery orientation: A time frame analysis. Journal of Family Psychology, 22, 734–741. doi:10.1037/0893-3200.22.5.734
47.  Núñez, J. C., Suárez, N., Rosário, P., Vallejo, G., Valle, A., & Epstein, J. L. (2015). Relationships between perceived parental involvement in homework, student homework behaviors, and academic achievement: Differences among elementary, junior high, and high school students. Metacognition and Learning, 10, 375–406.  doi:10.1007/s11409-015-9135-5
48. Pomerantz, E., Moorman, E. A., & Litwack, S. D. (2007). The How, Whom, and Why of Parents’ Involvement in Children’s Academic Lives: More Is Not Always Better, Review of Educational Research, 77(3) pp. 373-410   DOI:10.3102/003465430305567
49. Chen, W. B., & Gregory, A. (2010). Parental involvement as a protective factor during the transition to high school. The Journal of Educational Research, 103(1), 53-62. doi:10.1080/00220670903231250
50. Antonopoulou, K., Koutrouba, K., & Babalis, T. (2011). Parental involvement in secondary education schools: the views of parents in Greece. Educational Studies, 37(3), 333-344. doi:10.1080/03055698.2010.506332
51. Hung, C. L. (2007). Family, schools and Taiwanese children’s outcomes. Educational Research, 49(2), 115-125. doi: 10.1080/00131880701369644
52. Phillipson, S., & Phillipson, S. N. (2012). Children’s cognitive ability and their academic achievement: the mediation effects of parental expectations. Asia Pacific Education Review, 13(3), 495-508. doi: 10.1007/s12564-011-9198-1
53. Gubbins, V., & Otero, G. (2016). Effect of the parental involvement style perceived by elementary school students at home on Language and Mathematics performance in Chilean schools. Educational Studies, 42(2), 121-136. doi: 10.1080/03055698.2016.1148586
54. Marsh, H. W., Lüdtke, O., Nagengast, B., Trautwein, U., Abduljabbar, A. S., Abdelfattah, F., & Jansen, M. (2015). Dimensional comparison theory: Paradoxical relations between self-beliefs and achievements in multiple domains. Learning and Instruction, 35, 16–32. doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2014.08.005
55. Veas, A., Castejón, J. L., Gilar, R., & Miñano, P. (2015). Academic achievement in early adolescence: The influence of cognitive and non-cognitive variables. The Journal of General Psychology, 142(4), 273-294. doi: 10.1080/00221309.2015.1092940
56. Bong, M., & Skaalvik, E. M. (2003). Academic self-concept and self-efficacy: How different are they really? Educational Psychology Review, 15, 1–40. doi:10.1023/A:1021302408382
57. Marsh, H. W. & Martin, A. J. (2011). Academic self-concept and academic achievement: Relations and causal ordering. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 81(1), 59-77. doi:10.1348/000709910X503501
58. Kikas, E., & Mägi, K. (2017). Does self-efficacy mediate the effect of primary school teachers’ emotional support on learning behavior and academic skills? Journal of Early Adolescence, 37, 696–730. doi:10.1177/0272431615624567
59. Orkin, M., May, S., & Wolf, M. (2017). How parental support during homework contributes to helpless behaviours among struggling readers. Reading Psychology, 27, 506-541. https://doi.org/10.1080/02702711.2017.1299822
60. Silinskas, G. & Kikas, E. (2019b) Parental Involvement in Math Homework: Links to Children’s Performance and Motivation, Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 63(1) 17-37, DOI: 10.1080/00313831.2017.13249
61. Bakar, N. A., Ayub, A. F. M., Ahmad, N. A., &  Abdullah, A. I. S. (2021). Mathematics Achievement: The Relationship between Student Engagement, Parental Involvement, and Peer Influence, International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 11(5): 497-513
62. Creswell, J. W. (2009). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (3^rd). Sage.
63. Marjoribanks, K. (2002). Family and school capital: Towards a context theory of students’ school outcomes. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer.
64. Schwarzer, R., & Jerusalem, M. (1995). Optimistic self-beliefs as a resource factor in coping with stress. Extreme Stress and Communities: Impact and Intervention, 159–177. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-015-8486-9_7
65. Ghana Statistical Service (2021). Ghana 2021 population and housing census, General Report Vol 3D: Literacy and Education. Retrieved from https://statsghana.gov.gh/gssmain/fileUpload/pressrelease/2021%20PHC%20General%20Report%20Vol%203D_Literacy%20and%20Education.pdf
66. Ghana Education Fact Sheets (2020). “Analysis for learning and equity using MICS data. Retrieved from https://data.unicef.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/Ghana_Fact_Sheets_Digital.pdf
67. Krejcie, R. V., &  Morgan, D. W. (1970). Determining sample size for research activities. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 30(4), 607-610.
68. Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of marketing research, 18(1), 39-50.
69. Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2010). Multivariate data analysis: Pearson College Division
70. Ramayah, T., Cheah, J., Chuah, F., Ting, H., & Memon, M. A. (2016). Partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) using SmartPLS 3.0: An updated and practical guide to statistical analysis. Pearson Singapore.
71. Ferguson, C. J. (2009). An effect size primer: A guide to clinicians and researchers. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice 40(5): 532-538
72. Moroni, S., Dumont, H., Trautwein, U., Niggli, A., & Baeriswyl, F. (2015). The need to distinguish between quantity and quality in research on parental involvement: The example of parental help with homework. Journal of Educational Research, 108, 417–431. doi:10.1080/00220671.2014.901283
73. Kramer, K. (2012). Parental behavioural control and academic achievement: striking the balance between control and involvement. Research in Education, 88(1) 85-98.
74. Wang, Q., Pometantz, E., & Chen, H. (2007). The role of parents? Control in early adolescents? Psychological functioning: A longitudinal investigation in the United States and China. Child Development 78(5): 1592-610.
75. Bean, R. A., Barber, B. K., & Crane, D. R. (2006). Parental support, behavioral control, and psychological control among African American youth. Journal of Family Issues, 27, 1335–1355
76. Valentine, J. C., DuBois, D. L., & Cooper, H. (2004). The relation between self-beliefs and academic achievement: A meta-analytic review. Educational Psychologist, 39, 111–133.  doi:10.1207/s15326985ep3902_3