Martine van der Pluijm

138 Chapter 5 TABLE 5.3: Effects of education level on change in parent perceptions ( n =71) F(DF) p η p 2 SFPs 0.65(67) 0.59 .03 Goal-directed SFPs 1.08(67) 0.36 .05 Self-efficacy 0.34(67) 0.79 .02 HLE 3.11(66) 0.03* .12 * p = <0.05, ** p = <0.01, *** p = <0.001 6 5 4 3 2 1 VERY LOW EDUCATED LOW EDUCATED MIDDLE EDUCATED HIGH EDUCATED pre-test post-test Teachers explain and model how parents can: - expand their children’s language by extending their sentences. - use questions about children’s experiences and opinions to stimulate decontextualized language FIGURE 5.4: Effect of parental educational level on change in HLE The open answers in the interviews ( n = 66) indicate positive perceptions of parents of the SFPs in support of child language development. The results at the posttest show an increased number of positive reactions of parents with SFPs compared to the pretest, regardless of their educational levels. The most remarkable is that the lowest educated parents provide more personal details compared to higher-educated parents who seem to reflect more generally. An example of a very low educated parent perception of her relationship with the teacher is: “The t eacher is open and connects to my level. She also has a nice voice.” An example of a higher- educated parent perception is: “Teachers are nice and give good information.” Two examples of perceptions of the lowest educated parents’ of SFPs to support oral language development are: “ They involve parents during activities, I mean together with the children.” And : “ We play memory in the class. They give me tips for activities at home. A few weeks later, they ask if it worked.”