Parent Partnership in Early Years: Why It Truly Matters

A parent can answer every message, attend every event and still feel like a visitor. Another may seldom come to an event, yet know exactly what their child is exploring, talk about it at home and share thoughtful observations with the key person. One is easy for a setting to count. The other is easier to miss.

Working across different educational contexts has taught me not to confuse visibility with commitment. In early years settings, we often measure family engagement through what we can see: who attends, replies, volunteers or joins a meeting. These things matter, but they do not tell us whether a family feels recognised, respected or able to influence what happens around their child.

I have come to see family inclusion not only as a partnership between adults, but as part of the child's daily experience of the setting. Children do not leave their family identity at the door. The relationship between home and the setting becomes part of the environment in which they learn whether they, and the people who matter to them, truly have a place.

A welcome is not yet a partnership

Goodall and Montgomery's work invites us to look beyond what parents do in relation to the setting and consider how closely they are connected to their children's learning. In practice, that distinction matters. A setting can have a welcoming entrance, a busy calendar and a well-used communication app, while still deciding the subject, timing, language and acceptable form of almost every exchange.

Inclusion asks something more demanding:

Does the family's knowledge have a legitimate place here?

Families know things that no observation sheet can fully capture: How a child communicates when tired, what brings comfort, which words carry meaning at home, what has recently changed and what the family is hoping for.

Reciprocity does not ask practitioners to set aside their expertise. It asks us not to assume that ours is the only expertise in the room. Professional judgement is stronger when it is informed by people who know the child in different places and in different ways. This is consistent with research in which families from culturally and ethnically diverse backgrounds emphasised communication, trust and feeling comfortable within the partnership. In one South African early childhood centre, parents described participation as something more than being present: they wanted their contributions to influence the life of the centre.

What the child picks up

Young children may not understand every conversation between the adults who care for them, but they notice the quality of those encounters. They notice whether their parents' names are known and pronounced properly. They see whether a home language is welcomed or treated as a problem. They experience whether information from home changes what an adult does next.

This does not create a neat cause-and-effect line. A child's participation is shaped by temperament, development, relationships, previous experiences and the wider context. Even so, the relationship between home and the setting belongs inside that context, not outside it. Intervention studies in the early years have found benefits for aspects of children's language and social and emotional development when practitioners and families work together in structured, reciprocal ways.

For me, the child receives a simple relational message: the people who know me belong here, and what they know about me matters. That message cannot guarantee participation, but it can help to make participation feel less risky.

When the same families always take part

There is a leadership question here. When the same families repeatedly participate, and others remain less visible, it is tempting to attribute that difference to motivation. In my experience, that is rarely the most useful place to begin.

Working hours, transport, language, disability, digital access, previous experiences of education and culturally shaped expectations can all affect how a family responds to the opportunities offered. A family can care deeply and still not fit the timetable, language or format that the setting has chosen. Low visibility is not reliable evidence of low interest. Presence, meanwhile, is not proof of genuine inclusion.

As a leader, I am interested in the pattern before the label. If our preferred forms of participation work particularly well for families who speak the dominant language, have flexible working arrangements and already understand the system. Then the pattern is telling us something about the design of our provision.

The questions then change:

Which forms of participation do we make most accessible?

Who is continually expected to adapt to us?

Whose knowledge reaches planning and decision-making, rather than simply being collected?

Designing inclusion from the inside out

The answer is not necessarily another family event. Sometimes it is a translated conversation, a flexible appointment, continuity with a key person, a voice note rather than a form, or a question about what the child is learning beyond the setting. Most importantly, families need to see that what they have shared has made a difference. A brief exchange that changes how a child is supported can be more meaningful than attendance at a large celebration.

This is where family engagement becomes a matter of organisational quality. It can be traced through induction, staff deployment, translation, meeting times, key-person practice, curriculum planning, additional-needs processes and the way leaders respond to family feedback. One exceptional practitioner can make families feel welcome, but if inclusion depends entirely on that person's warmth or initiative, it is fragile. Leaders must make reciprocal practice ordinary.

The form will not look identical in every community. I have worked in places where the expectations of the educator, the family and the institution differed considerably. The method must adapt, but the principle can remain steady: every family needs a genuine route to be known, to contribute and, where appropriate, to shape practice.

Perhaps this is why children participate differently when families feel included. It is not because every partnership becomes perfect, or because every child responds in the same way. It is because the child sees, repeatedly and in practical ways, that the setting recognises the world they come from rather than asking them to set it aside.

A setting that listens, adapts and shows families that their knowledge has mattered has built more than a family-engagement programme. It has strengthened the child's place within the setting too.

Join the Conversation

How does your setting build genuine parent partnership in early years, beyond the events on the calendar? Perhaps it is a small change to how you greet families at drop-off, or a new way of sharing observations that invites a reply rather than just recording one. We would love to hear how you are putting this into practice - share your experience in the comments below.

Further Reading

For readers interested in exploring these ideas further, the following publications offer valuable perspectives on family engagement, reciprocal partnerships and the ways relationships between home and early years settings can support children's participation and development.

  • Goodall, J. & Montgomery, C. (2014). Parental involvement to parental engagement: A continuum. Educational Review.
  • Sheridan, S. M. et al. (2010; 2011). Research from the Getting Ready intervention exploring the relationship between parent engagement and children's social-emotional development, early language and literacy. Early Education and Development and Journal of School Psychology.
  • Gaspar, C. R., Jahromi, L. B. & Rooney, M. E. (2025). Culturally and ethnically diverse parents' views of home-school partnership responsibilities. Journal of Early Childhood Research.
  • Connelly, A. S., Shaik, N. & Chigona, A. (2024). We grow together: Parent participation in an early childhood care and education centre. South African Journal of Childhood Education.

How Parenta Supports Parent Partnership in Early Years

Building genuine parent partnership in early years settings takes more than good intentions - it takes the right tools and the right training. At Parenta, we help nurseries turn reciprocal practice into an everyday routine, rather than leaving it to rest on one practitioner's initiative.

Our nursery management software makes it easier to keep families genuinely informed and involved, from two-way messaging to sharing observations that invite a response rather than simply recording one. And because sustainable parent partnership in early years depends on confident, well-supported staff, our childcare training courses cover inclusive practice, communication and leading family engagement across a whole team.

These principles sit alongside the expectations set out in the Early Years Foundation Stage statutory framework, which asks providers to work in partnership with parents and/or carers. When your team is equipped to build that parent partnership in early years consistently, children feel it too.

Ready to help your whole team build stronger, more consistent family partnerships? Get in touch with our friendly team today to find out how our childcare training and nursery management software could support your setting.

children

Discover more: About Anabela Paulo

Other Articles:
Early Years Safeguarding: A Proven Path to Trust
Workforce Challenges and invisible inclusion
The Key To Inclusive Education In Early Years
Inclusion in Early Years – What is it?
From Inclusion to Participation: Supporting Neurodivergent Children in Everyday Practice

author avatar
Parenta

Expression of interest

Complete the form below if you are interested in joining our family. 

You have Successfully Subscribed!

Share This