Pa ge 1 Pa ge 35 American Journal of Multidisciplinary Research and Innovation (AJMRI) Academic Achievement of Primary Learners and the Parental Involvement Capabilities During Covid 19 Pandemic Jonalie Ygot1*, Helen Revalde1 Volume 3 Issue 3, Year 2024 ISSN: 2158-8155 (Online), 2832-4854 (Print) DOI: https://doi.org/10.54536/ajmri.v3i3.2659 https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajmri Article Information ABSTRACT Received: April 20, 2024 Accepted: May 23, 2024 Published: May 27, 2024 This study determined the academic achievement of grades one, two, and three pupils and the parental involvement capabilities during the COVID 19 pandemic of Libertad Elementary School, Daanbantayan, Cebu during school year 2020-2021 as the basis for the proposed development plan. This research employed a descriptive correlational design. There were 115 parent respondents, selected via general sampling, who answered the adopted survey questionnaire. The data were treated using frequency count, percentage, weighted mean, and chi-square test of independence. Findings revealed that most parent- respondents were mothers, aged 36-40, married, high school graduates, unemployed, had 1 to 3 children in the family and enrolled in school, and had an income of less than 9,649.47. The level of academic achievement of the pupils was mostly very satisfactory. The extent of parental involvement in the children’s academic achievement was moderately involved. There were significant impacts of civil status, occupation, family size, and income on student achievement. There was no significant relationship between the profile variables and student achievement. Hence, complex support strategies are needed to be tailored to meet the diverse learners’ needs. Keywords Early Childhood Education, Academic Achievement and Parental Involvement, Descriptive Correlational Method, Daanbantayan, Cebu, Philippines INTRODUCTION Education is a foundational component for the future of a nation, and the level of education that students receive in the present day significantly impacts the progress they make in the future. Since parental engagement is a vital factor in determining a child’s academic achievement, the positive relationship that exists between the home and the school is of the utmost importance. The realization that the support and involvement of parents has a substantial impact on the early cognitive development of a child is a significant factor that amplifies the significance of schooling. It is emphasized in the Child and Youth Welfare Code of the Philippines that the child plays a significant role as a precious asset to the nation. This code also emphasizes the importance of parental or guardian assistance for the child’s success and well-being. Jeynes (2018) highlights the importance of family background on parental engagement, demonstrating that most parents can play a more active role in their children’s education if encouraged. With encouragement, this is possible. This involvement encompasses a wide range of activities, consisting of providing support for educational processes and actively engaging with schools to improve student accomplishment. Because of the COVID-19 pandemic, global education has been confronted with obstacles that have never been seen before (Sahlberg, 2012). As a result, the Philippine education system has been forced to use “blended learning” modes to maintain educational continuity in the face of risks to public health. The Department of Education (DepEd) has mandated all schools to embrace blended learning. They can choose an online class where teachers can communicate the learners and parents via the learning management system like Google Meet and Zoom or use modules that contain the desired competencies, activities, and details on how parents’ guide their children studying at home. This modular approach is intended for learners who have difficulty in accessing the Internet. Embracing the basic education learning continuity plan gives opportunities to continue educating learners in borderless classrooms. The transition has been challenging for both parents and educators who are not familiar with the new educational technologies and approaches that have been implemented. These unique problems highlight the need of doing research into the influence that parental involvement has on the academic accomplishments of students in grades one, two, and three during the COVID-19 pandemic by highlighting the necessity of conducting such research. In the context of blended learning and changes brought about by the pandemic, it is of the utmost importance to have a solid understanding of the relationships that exist between parental involvement and student accomplishment. This study intended to uncover characteristics that affect academic performance and to provide solutions to promote parental participation, with the goal of improving students’ educational success both during and after the pandemic crisis. It is possible that the findings of this research could provide useful insights into the development of viable ways to educate primary learners during the pandemic period. LITERATURE REVIEW This study is anchored by the following theories: The Hoover-Dempsey and Sandler Model, Bronfenbrenner 1 Cebu Technological University, Cebu City, Philippines * Corresponding author’s e-mail: june.ygot1@gmail.com Pa ge 36 https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajmri Am. J. Multidis. Res. Innov. 3(3) 35-44, 2024 Theory (1979), and Epstein’s Theory (2018). This research is also legally anchored on DepEd Order No. 012, S. 2020, DepEd Order No. 31, S. 2020, and CHED MEMO No. 05 Series of 2020. The Hoover-Dempsey and Sandler Model, conceived in 1990, of Parental Involvement offers a crucial paradigm for comprehending the interplay between parental involvement and academic attainment, specifically in the context of the COVID-19 epidemic. This model explores the motivational and psychological factors that influence parents’ involvement in their children’s education (Whitaker, 2019). It highlights the significance of parents’ perception of their role and their confidence in their ability to positively impact their child’s learning. Amidst the pandemic, education systems globally shifted towards remote and blended learning methods, making the ideas of this paradigm more pertinent. Parental involvement in the teaching of Grades 1 to 3 learners has evolved from being supportive to becoming an almost essential component. Parents, following the recommendations proposed by Hoover- Dempsey and Sandler, have taken an active role in helping their children get learning resources, participating in educational activities, and managing the technological difficulties associated with online education. This increased degree of engagement is crucial for preserving and improving academic performance during a time of substantial upheaval to conventional educational systems. Bronfenbrenner’s Ecological Systems Theory, formulated in 1979, provides a comprehensive framework for understanding the academic accomplishments of students in Grades 1 to 3 during the COVID-19 epidemic. It highlights the complex interaction between several environmental systems and child development. This theory outlines various strata of environmental effects, ranging from the proximate microsystem of family and school to the more expansive macrosystem of cultural norms and values (Paat, 2013). Amidst the epidemic, the importance of the microsystem, specifically the influence of parental engagement, has been greatly amplified. Parents have assumed the role of both primary caretakers and educators, exerting a direct influence on their children’s learning experiences within the household. This shift highlights the theory’s claim that the quality of relationships within a child’s immediate surroundings has a substantial impact on their development. Epstein’s Theory of School, Family, and Community Partnerships, formulated in 2018, underscores the multifaceted role of parental involvement in the educational process, presenting a framework that becomes particularly pertinent in understanding the academic achievement of Grades 1 to 3 learners during the COVID-19 pandemic. This theory categorizes parental involvement into six types, ranging from parenting and communicating to volunteering and learning at home, each of which has taken on new dimensions in the context of pandemic- induced remote learning. As schools shifted to online and blended learning formats, the reliance on home environments for educational delivery increased, spotlighting the critical role parents play in facilitating their children’s learning. This period has amplified the necessity for parents to engage not just as supporters but as active participants in the educational process, directly influencing their children’s academic outcomes. During the COVID-19 pandemic, Philippine educational policies, such as DepEd Order No. 012, S. 2020, DepEd Order No. 31, S. 2020, and CHED Memorandum No. 05 Series of 2020, emphasized the importance of parental involvement and adaptable learning strategies in ensuring continuous education for Grades 1–3 students. These directions stressed the importance of parental involvement in a co-educational role, the use of remote and modular learning techniques, and the deployment of creative strategies to address the pandemic’s educational difficulties. The emphasis on alternate learning systems and the transition to a home-based educational setting need parents’ active participation as facilitators and motivators, maintaining academic continuity and achievement despite the crisis. Di Pietro et al. (2020) expounded that the transition to distant and blended learning models has placed exceptional pressure on households as the main location for education, greatly impacting the academic achievements of young kids. Dutta and Smita (2020) supported that the families have faced a range of obstacles, such as restricted technological access, inadequate educational resources at home, and unfamiliarity with digital learning platforms. These issues have hindered the ability to maintain consistent academic advancement. Parental participation has been identified as a vital factor in determining academic success throughout this period. The level of parental support in facilitating their children’s learning activities at home, including providing access to online classes and offering direct instructional assistance, has significantly influenced the maintenance and improvement of student engagement and achievement (Rudo & Dimock, 2017). Diaz (2023) corroborates that there was a significant effect on the academic performance of the learner in the PreCalculus course towards the engagement of the parents, whether at home or school in the new normal. Nonetheless, the impact of parental participation is greatly shaped by various aspects, such as parents’ level of education, socio- economic status, and the extent of time and money they can allocate to their children’s education (Selolo, 2018). Garcia and Ancheta (2022) claim that parents had low levels of involvement in the modeling, cognitive, and behavioral dimensions; their level of role construction was high. The pandemic has emphasized the significance of educators and schools in adopting adaptable learning solutions that accommodate the varied requirements of students and their families. The integration of diverse educational technology and conventional approaches like printed learning materials has played a crucial role in guaranteeing equal access to education for all pupils, regardless of their family circumstances (Badilla- Pa ge 37 https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajmri Am. J. Multidis. Res. Innov. 3(3) 35-44, 2024 Quintana et al., 2020). The current period of educational disruption has emphasized the necessity for educators, parents, and the broader community to work together to create an environment that promotes the comprehensive growth of young students, guaranteeing that every child receives equal educational opportunities (Bozkurt et al., 2020). Parental engagement has been demonstrated to be a fundamental element of student achievement during these challenging circumstances. The shift to home- based learning has emphasized the crucial role of parents in assisting their children’s education, including ensuring access to digital learning platforms, and actively participating in the educational process alongside their children (Bhamani, 2020). Nevertheless, this transition has also brought attention to the unequal capacity of parents to facilitate learning at home, influenced by variables such as socioeconomic position, employment obligations, and digital proficiency, which subsequently impact children’s academic advancement (Ball et al., 2019). Educators have been assigned the responsibility of creating and providing teaching that not only captivates students but also connects different learning contexts. This has encompassed the implementation of blended learning models, which involve the integration of digital resources alongside conventional learning materials, as well as aiding parents to enable them to effectively facilitate their children’s learning (Kumar et al., 2018). The primary objective has been to uphold educational fairness, guaranteeing that every student, irrespective of their domestic circumstances, can pursue their educational progress without any disruptions. The epidemic has highlighted the significance of providing mental and emotional assistance to young students, as they cope with the uncertainties and disturbances to their daily schedule. Due to the pandemic’s effect on children’s well-being and the importance of positive teacher- student and peer relationships in creating a supportive learning environment, schools and educators have had to integrate social and emotional learning components into their curriculum (Vaillancourt et al., 2019). The research conducted by Rudo and Dimock (2017) emphasizes the crucial role of parents in enabling remote learning. It suggests that students whose parents actively participated in their educational activities shown higher levels of resilience and made more academic advancements during school closures. Budhrani et al. (2020) claim that maintaining academic success throughout the pandemic relies on two key factors: strong communication between schools and families, and the availability of resources for parents to assist their children’s learning at home. In addition, the pandemic has brought attention to the inequalities in educational opportunities and results. McAleavy (2020) found that students from socio- economically disadvantaged backgrounds encountered greater difficulties in remote learning. This highlights the necessity for specific interventions to assist these students and their families. Moreover, the pandemic’s psychological effects on young students have led to investigations into the significance of social-emotional assistance. Raffaele (2021) and Banati et al. (2020) emphasize the necessity of educational interventions that cater to both academic and learners’ psycho-emotional well-being. Thus, the unique challenges of the pandemic have significantly impacted educational systems, transforming how students learn and how parental involvement is facilitated. Given these dynamics, it is essential to determine the profile and academic achievement of the learners, the parental involvement, and its relationship to identify concerned areas for targeted support and intervention to mitigate the pandemic’s effects on education. METHODOLOGY This research employed a descriptive correlational design, a methodology aimed at understanding the relationships between variables without any manipulation (Alipio, 2021). This approach facilitated a comprehensive understanding of the learners’ academic achievement, parental involvement, and relationships. There were 115 parent respondents selected through the general sampling technique. Etikan and Bala (2017) explained that the general sampling approach pertains to the strategies employed in research to select a particular group of individuals, products, or cases from a wider population to partake in a study. The survey questionnaire is composed of the parent respondents’ profile, pupils’ academic achievement as represented with their grade, and the level of parental involvement that contains 10 indicators adopted from Menheere and Hooge (2010). The data gathered were organised, tallied, summarised, tabulated, and treated statistically with a statistician’s assistance. Frequency count and percentage were used to determine the parents’ prolife and pupils’ grades. Weighted mean was employed to ascertain the level of parental involvement, and a chi-square test of independence was used for the test of a significant relationship between the parents’ profile and academic achievement, and parents’ profile and their extent of involvement in their children’s academic achievement. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Table 1 presents the results of the age of the parent respondents. This provided valuable insights into the Table 1: Age of the Parent-Respondents Age (in years) Total f % 26-30 6 5.22 31-35 23 20.00 36-40 45 22.50 41-45 11 39.13 46-50 10 8.70 More than 50 23 20 Total 115 100.00 Pa ge 38 https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajmri Am. J. Multidis. Res. Innov. 3(3) 35-44, 2024 demographic composition of the parents participating in the study. Understanding the age distribution of parents is crucial for assessing the representativeness of the sample. Table 1 reveals that most parents (39.13%) are between the ages of 36 and 40, showing that people in their late thirties support a sizable portion of the student population to early forties, who are most likely at a stable stage in their careers and families. This is followed by the 31-35 and over-50 age groups, which account for 20% of the sample, demonstrating a wide range of parental ages active in their children’s schooling. The age group of 26-30 years is the least represented, accounting for only 5.22%. The age range of the parents shows that there are a variety of experiences and resources accessible to help children with their schooling. Older parents may provide more stability and resources, along with evidence demonstrating that mature parental age improves children’s educational outcomes (Hällsten & Pfeffer, 2017). The findings emphasize the need for educational programs that address the requirements of families at various life phases, ensuring that all parents, regardless of age, may actively engage in and support their children’s learning. Table 2 presents the marital status distribution among respondents. It aids in assessing family structure and potential influences on parenting dynamics and decision- making processes and provides information about the sample’s demographic composition. ensuring fair educational chances regardless of family structure. Table 3 provides an overview of the highest educational attainment of parent respondents. It highlights gaps and trends in the parent respondents’ education levels, which can be a tool to determine its influences. Table 2: Civil Status (n = 115) Category F % Married 106 92.17 Single 9 7.83 Widowed 0 0 Separated 0 0 Total 115 100.00 Table 2 showcases that 92.17% (106 respondents) were married, showing most students came from stable dual- parent families. Single respondents made up 7.83% (9 people), indicating that single-parent families may affect parental participation differently. No participants were bereaved or separated, suggesting cultural norms or community features may have prevented representation for all family arrangements. The predominance of married respondents in the sample may reflect cultural or regional norms regarding marriage and family structure. Scheuerell (2019) found that single-parent children may struggle academically and socially due to fewer parental resources. However, the sample’s lack of widowed or separated parents may indicate a research gap or a school community trait. These findings imply that while married family support networks may assist most children, single- parent children’s unique obstacles must be understood and addressed (Cancian & Meyer, 2019). This understanding is necessary to provide tailored interventions and support mechanisms that meet the different needs of all students, Table 3: Highest Educational Attainment (n = 115) Category f % College Graduate 9 7.82 College Level 4 3.48 High School Graduate 42 36.52 High School Level 31 29.96 Elementary Graduate 29 25.22 Total 115 100.00 Table 3 reveals that only 7.82% (9 people) of the parent sample have college degrees, according to the report. Another 3.48% (4 respondents) have college experience without a degree. High school grads make up 36.52% (42 respondents), showing that many parents have completed secondary school. The highest academic accomplishment is elementary schooling for 25.22% (29 respondents) and incomplete high school for 29.96% (31 respondents). The school community’s diverse parental education levels suggest that most parents have the skills to support their children’s primary education, but the low proportion of college-educated parents may reflect regional socio- economic and educational challenges. Higher parental education frequently leads to better resources and greater school involvement, which is critical for child academic performance (Li & Qiu, 2018). Given the educational background diversity, interventions that increase parental involvement in education are needed regardless of academic achievement. Schools may offer parents support and tools to help them better support their children’s education, boosting student results. Parental education affects kids’ success, and bridging educational support gaps is important. Table 4 details the occupational distribution of parent respondents. It provides valuable insights into the prevalent occupations, highlighting the workforce composition and potential socioeconomic implications of the parents towards the learners’ academic achievement. Table 4: Occupation (n = 115) Category f % Housemaid 21 18.26 Laborer 20 17.39 Vendor 16 13.91 Saleslady 11 9.57 Teacher 4 3.48 Driver 2 1.74 Jobless 41 35.65 Total 115 100.00 Pa ge 39 https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajmri Am. J. Multidis. Res. Innov. 3(3) 35-44, 2024 Table 4 shows that housemaids are the most common occupational group among parents, accounting for 18.26% (21 persons) of the sample, indicating a strong involvement in domestic work. Laborers who perform manual or physical labor follow closely with 17.39% (20 respondents). Vendors, or those self-employed in the informal sector, account for 13.91% (16 respondents), whereas salesladies, who work in retail sales, account for 9.57% (11 respondents). Teachers in the education sector make up 3.48% (4 respondents), whereas drivers make up only 1.74% (2 respondents). Notably, the jobless category is the largest, with 35.65% (41 respondents) reporting a high unemployment rate among their parents. The occupational distribution reveals pupils’ families’ socioeconomic backgrounds. The high unemployment rate and majority of respondents working in low-wage or informal sectors (Housemaid, Laborer, Vendor) suggest economic weaknesses that could affect their capacity to support their children’s education. Parents’ work and income affect children’s academic performance (Li & Qiu, 2018). Economic challenges may reduce families’ time, resources, and energy for educational support, impacting children’s learning environments and possibilities (Magnuson & Duncan, 2019). Although minor, the presence of teachers in the responder pool suggests a direct link to the education system and stronger educational support for their children. The data implies the need for specific interventions and support systems to address families’ different socio-economic issues and increase parental involvement regardless of job position. Schools and policymakers may consider community-based support networks, financial assistance programs, and flexible involvement opportunities for poor and jobless families to ensure academic success for all children. Table 5 outlines the distribution of the number of children in the families of parent respondents. It is vital since it sheds light on family size dynamics, allowing us to better understand potential factors impacting parental involvement and educational outcomes in the face of pandemic problems. show situations where allocating resources and providing individualized attention for educational requirements may be quite difficult. This distribution highlights the possible impact of family size on educational outcomes. Coleman (2018) indicates that larger families may find it more difficult to provide all their children with equal support, while smaller families may be able to afford to invest more in their children’s education. These findings highlight the need for family-size-appropriate educational policies and initiatives, particularly to assist larger families in making sure all children receive sufficient educational attention. Larger families may benefit from special programs offered by communities and schools, such as tutoring or after-school activities. Table 6 presents the parents’ total monthly income. This is essential because it indicates socioeconomic level, which may influence access to resources and parental availability. Understanding income gaps informs measures to help disadvantaged families, especially given the pandemic’s economic constraints. Table 5: Number of Children in the Family (n = 115) Category f % 1-3 90 78.26 4-6 16 13.91 7-10 8 6.96 More than 10 1 0.87 Total 115 100.00 Table 5 underscores that 78.26% of families have one to three children. This suggests that smaller family sizes are more common, which probably enables higher per-child educational resources. 13.91% of families have four or more children, which suggests a moderate family size where educational resources might be distributed more evenly. The low of 0.87% with more than ten children and the 6.96% of families with seven to ten children Table 6: Combined Monthly Income (n = 115) In Pesos (Php) f % Less than 9,649.47 83 72.17 9,649.47-19,928.94 20 17.39 19,928.94-38,597.88 12 10.43 Total 115 100.00 It can be gleaned in table 6 that 83 families (72.17%) got less than Php 9,649.47 income. This high proportion shows that most households earn below the poverty threshold, making it difficult to meet basic needs like funding children’s education. Twenty households (17.39%) got Php 9,649.47 to 19,928.94 and make up the second category, Families in this income bracket may struggle to afford educational materials and help beyond basic needs. Meanwhile, twelve families (10.43%) have the greatest income. Although better off than the other two groups, families in this bracket may still struggle to finance decent education and related fees, especially if they have many children in school. The data suggests that respondent households are mostly low-income, reflecting community socioeconomic issues. The significant number of families earning less than Php 9,649.47 highlights the possible challenges of affording educational materials, internet connectivity for online learning, and other academic resources during the pandemic. Due to limited educational resources and opportunities, poor family poverty has repeatedly been linked to inferior academic attainment (Johnson, 2019). These findings show that low-income households need focused interventions and support to overcome financial barriers to education. Financial aid, scholarships, free or subsidized learning materials, and online learning support can reduce the influence of economic limitations on educational outcomes. Educational officials and school administrators should develop and execute programs that meet the needs of low-income families to guarantee that Pa ge 40 https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajmri Am. J. Multidis. Res. Innov. 3(3) 35-44, 2024 all students have equal academic opportunity. Table 7 showcases the pupils’ academic achievement. This data is crucial to gauge parental involvement’s impact during COVID-19. It identifies effective home- learning strategies, highlights areas of parental influence, and exposes academic disparities across socioeconomic backgrounds, informing equitable education policies and practices. and excellence in their studies. The average grade of 83.74, along with a standard deviation of 6.52, indicates a generally satisfactory academic outcome, with most students achieving satisfactorily or better. Despite varying levels of achievement, the findings show that kids are resilient, with a large number managing to excel or attain satisfactory levels of academic performance throughout a difficult period in education. This resilience highlights the importance of nurturing learning settings and strong parental engagement, indicating that students may overcome significant obstacles to their education with sufficient resources and support. Colvin et al. (2022) emphasizes the aggravation of educational inequities, finding that pupils from poor backgrounds had disproportionate learning deficits. On one hand, the existence of pupils falling short of expectations indicates a necessity for specific interventions to tackle the distinct obstacles encountered during the pandemic. Reimers (2022) also claimed that Psychological and socioeconomic aspects contribute to the variation in pandemic consequences, advocating for personalized educational strategies to meet diverse student needs. Kuhfeld et al (2020) report conflicting results in the academic community about the pandemic’s impact on student learning, highlighting significant learning setbacks in broader research. This variation demonstrates that the effects of unique interruptions can vary greatly depending on the circumstances, highlighting the significance of tailored responses and the necessity for educational institutions to adjust to the individual requirements of their students. Table 8 provides the level of parental involvement data to understand its impact on academic outcomes, and tailor support strategies. Table 7: Academic Achievement of the Pupils (n = 115) Grades Description f % Below 75 Did Not Meet Expectations 13 11.30 75 - 79 Fairly Satisfactory 21 18.26 80 - 84 Satisfactory 22 19.13 85 - 89 Very Satisfactory 31 26.96 90 - 100 Outstanding 28 24.35 Total 115 100.00 Mean : 83.74 StDev : 6.52 Table 7 shows that a small percentage, 11.30% (13 students), fell into the “Did Not Meet Expectations” group, suggesting severe difficulty in meeting basic educational requirements. Meanwhile, 18.26% (21 pupils) received “Fairly Satisfactory” grades, barely meeting the minimum requirements, and emphasizing areas for future improvement. The “Satisfactory” range was represented by 19.13% (22 students), indicating a strong meeting of expected academic criteria. Most pupils attained higher performance levels, with 26.96% (31 students) getting “Very Satisfactory” and another 24.35% (28 students) scoring “Outstanding”, demonstrating a solid knowledge Table 8: Respondents’ Level of Parental Involvement (n = 115) Indicators Mean Interpretation 1. Explaining the methods of learning using the DepEd modules 3.25 Highly involved 2. Talking about the effects of COVID-19 pandemic on child 3.24 Moderately involved 3. Guiding the child in performing the module activities during parents’ free time 3.24 Moderately involved 4. Helping the child encountered difficulties in reading the assigned module 3.18 Moderately involved 5. Teaching the child how to understand independently from the given module lesson 3.17 Moderately involved 6. Providing books and other references for the child regarding the weekly module topics 3.12 Moderately involved 7. Trying to reinforce what the child's teacher has instructed about the contents in the module 3.09 Moderately involved 8. Assisting the child in answering the worksheets/ activity sheet properly. 3.24 Moderately involved 9. Showing a positive attitude when checking the child's wrong answers in the worksheet/ activity sheet. 3.11 Moderately involved 10. Assessing the child’s progress in the weekly worksheet/activity sheet scores. 3.23 Moderately involved Aggregate Mean 3.19 Moderately involved Range: 1.00-1.74 Not involved; 1.75-2.49 Less involved; 2.50-3.24 Moderately involved; 3.25-4.00 Highly involved Pa ge 41 https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajmri Am. J. Multidis. Res. Innov. 3(3) 35-44, 2024 Table 8 demonstrates the complex levels of parental involvement among respondents from Libertad Elementary School, emphasizing diverse activities and their accompanying engagement levels during the COVID-19 pandemic. The aggregate weighted mean of parental involvement level is 3.19, indicating a moderate level of dedication to helping children’s education throughout this hard period. Parents show a high level of engagement (3.25) when they describe the learning processes in the DepEd modules, demonstrating a proactive attitude towards comprehending and teaching the curriculum. Additional factors, like addressing the impacts of the pandemic, leading module tasks, and aiding with reading challenges, show moderate engagement, with average ratings falling between 3.24 and 3.17. These activities are essential for children’s acquisition of knowledge and adjustment to new format of learning. These findings have significant consequences, particularly considering the current debate on the effectiveness of parental participation in children’s academic achievements. Educational systems must create conditions that promote and improve parental involvement to help lessen the negative impacts of unforeseen interruptions such as a global health crisis. Furthermore, these observations necessitate the creation of specialized initiatives that provide parents with the abilities and information needed to actively participate in their children’s education. Barger et al. (2019) meta-analysis supports the view that parental involvement is positively correlated with academic achievement. It indicates that actively participating in children’s education can greatly improve learning results. This corresponds to the moderate to high levels of participation noted in the study, showcasing the potential advantages of such involvement during difficult periods. Magwa and Mugari (2017) present a more reserved perspective, casting doubt on the widespread efficacy of parental engagement. According to their research, the influence might significantly differ based on aspects like the child’s age, the family’s socio-economic position, and the precise sorts of parental participation. Tan et al. (2020) delves deeper into the concept, highlighting the subtle impacts of parental involvement on academic achievement, suggesting that its advantages can vary significantly depending on various contexts and personal situations. This highlights the complex nature of parental engagement in education, emphasizing the necessity for detailed, context-specific strategies that recognize the various ways families may enhance their children’s learning. Table 9 presents the test of significant relationship between the parent respondents’ profile and the level of academic achievement of the pupils. It is crucial as it uncovers the impact of demographic and socio-economic variables on educational achievements. Table 9: Test of Significant Relationship Between the Parent Respondents’ Profile and the Level of Academic Achievement of the Pupils (N = 115) Variables Chi-Square Df Critical Value Significance Result Age 19.444 20 31.410 Not significant Ho accepted Civil Status 20.661 4 9.488 Significant Ho rejected Educational Attainment 24.133 16 26.296 Not significant Ho accepted Occupation 41.849 24 36.415 Significant Ho rejected Number of Children in Family 38.258 12 21.026 Significant Ho rejected Combined Monthly Income 45.746 8 15.507 Significant Ho rejected Table 9 reveals that the test results for Age, and educational attainment, with Chi-Square values of 15.511, 19.444, and 24.133, respectively, compared to their critical values of 21.026 for Type of Respondents, 31.410 for age, and for educational attainment 26.296 show no significant relationship with pupils’ academic performance, implying that the null hypothesis for these variables is accepted. This shows that the respondent’s role or age has no substantial impact on academic attainment in this sample. In contrast, Civil Status, with a Chi-Square value of 20.661 surpassing its critical value of 9.488, along with Occupation (Chi-Square value of 41.849 against a critical value of 36.415), Number of Children in Family (Chi- Square value of 38.258 exceeding the critical value of 21.026), and Combined Monthly Income (Chi-Square value of 45.746 surpassing the critical value of 15.507, all demonstrate significant relationships with academic achievement, leading to the rejection of the null hypothesis for these variables. The findings in Table 9, which show the strong influence of civil status, occupation, family size, and income on academic achievement, are consistent with yet differ from previous educational research. Tan et al. (2020) confirms these findings with a meta-analysis that indicated parental participation and family structure have a significant impact on student academic outcomes. It contends that parents’ socioeconomic level and marital status might produce more favorable learning settings, providing a solid foundation for the claim that family dynamics play an important role in educational performance. This is consistent with the relevance seen in civil status and combined monthly income in our analysis, implying that the stability and resources given by specific family arrangements can improve academic achievement. Li et al. (2020) provides a more complex perspective, suggesting that while family structure and socioeconomic factors influence academic achievement, the effects are mediated by parental expectations and the quality of Pa ge 42 https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajmri Am. J. Multidis. Res. Innov. 3(3) 35-44, 2024 parent-child relationships. This shows that the direct impact of socioeconomic position may be less evident than previously anticipated, implying that the quality of participation and support may play a more important role. Furthermore, Öber (2017) research calls into question the direct association between family size and academic achievement, arguing that while larger family sizes may dilute parental resources, the impact varies greatly across different family and socioeconomic circumstances. This confuses the understanding of the strong association found between the number of children in the household and at school and academic achievement, demonstrating that the effect of family size is not always negative or beneficial. Li and Qiu (2018) support the conclusions regarding socioeconomic status by presenting actual evidence showing students from higher income families had superior academic performance due to access to more educational resources and opportunities. This confirms the observed relevance of combined monthly income, emphasizing the view that economic stability is an important component of academic success. The studies demonstrate the complex interplay between family dynamics, socioeconomic status, and academic achievement, supporting the idea that, while certain factors have a significant impact on educational outcomes, their impact is moderated by a variety of contextual and interpersonal variables. Table 10 provides the test of significant relationship between the parent respondents’ profile and the level of their involvement in the children’s academic achievement. This is crucial for understanding the complex dynamics of parental involvement in education, showing that demographic and socio-economic factors do not significantly influence engagement levels. Table 10: Test of Significant Relationship Between the Parent Respondents’ Profile and the Level of Their Involvement in the Children’s Academic Achievement (N = 115) Variables Chi-Square Df Critical Value Significance Result Age 3.488 5 11.070 Not significant Ho accepted Civil Status 1.971 1 3.841 Not significant Ho accepted Educational Attainment 2.165 4 9.488 Not significant Ho accepted Occupation 7.541 5 11.070 Not significant Ho accepted Number of Children in Family 1.764 3 7.815 Not significant Ho accepted Combined Monthly Income 4.065 2 5.991 Not significant Ho accepted Table 10 reveals that across all variables being tested, the results show no significant association between parent respondents’ profile and their level of involvement in their children’s academic performance. Specifically, the Chi-Square values for these variables are significantly lower than the equivalent critical values needed for significance: Age (3.488 with a critical value of 11.070), Civil Status (1.971 with a critical value of 3.841), Educational Attainment (2.165 with a critical value of 9.488), Occupation (7.541 with a critical value of 11.070), Number of Children in Family (1.764 with a critical value of 7.815), and Combined Monthly Income (4.065 with a critical value of 5.99 In all cases, the null hypothesis (H₀) is accepted due to the absence of statistical significance. This uniform lack of significant relationships across a variety of parental profile characteristics suggests that the degree of parental involvement in children’s education at Libertad Elementary School is not directly influenced by these demographic or socio-economic factors. According to Peacock-Chambers et al. (2017), parental engagement is determined more by beliefs and self-efficacy than by demographics, which supports the findings of Table 10. In contrast, Hoff and Laursen (2019) propose that socioeconomic position influences parental participation levels, a claim that is not supported by Table 10, which shows that variables such as income and occupation have no significant effect. Petridou and Karagiorgi (2018) emphasize the complex relationship between parental participation and academic achievement, arguing that a variety of circumstances influences involvement’s impact on accomplishment, These findings collectively imply that parental involvement’s impact on education goes beyond simple socioeconomic and demographic characteristics, emphasizing the necessity of understanding the intricate and multifaceted nature of parental engagement in promoting children’s academic achievement. CONCLUSION Based on the study’s findings, it is concluded that civil status, occupation, family size, and income significantly impacted the pupils’ academic achievement, while parental demographics appear not to significantly sway their involvement, indicating other factors may be at play. This emphasizes the critical need for complex support strategies tailored to meet the pupils’ diverse needs and improve educational service delivery during the pandemic era. REFERENCES Alipio, M. (2021). Predicting academic performance of college freshmen in the Philippines using psychological variables and expectancy-value beliefs to outcomes-based education: a path analysis. IMCC Journal of Science, 1(Special), 77-86. Badilla-Quintana, M. G., Sepulveda-Valenzuela, E., & Salazar Arias, M. (2020). Augmented reality as Pa ge 43 https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajmri Am. J. Multidis. Res. Innov. 3(3) 35-44, 2024 a sustainable technology to improve academic achievement in students with and without special educational needs. Sustainability, 12(19), 8116. Ball, C., Huang, K. T., Rikard, R. V., & Cotten, S. R. (2019). The emotional costs of computers: An expectancy-value theory analysis of predominantly low-socioeconomic status minority students’ STEM attitudes. Information, Communication & Society, 22(1), 105-128. Banati, P., Jones, N., & Youssef, S. (2020). Intersecting vulnerabilities: the impacts of COVID-19 on the psycho-emotional lives of young people in low-and middle-income countries. The European Journal of Development Research, 32(5), 1613-1638. Barger, M. M., Kim, E. M., Kuncel, N. R., & Pomerantz, E. M. (2019). The relation between parents’ involvement in children’s schooling and children’s adjustment: A meta-analysis. Psychological bulletin, 145(9), 855. Bhamani, S., Makhdoom, A. Z., Bharuchi, V., Ali, N., Kaleem, S., & Ahmed, D. (2020). Home learning in times of COVID: Experiences of parents. Journal of education and educational development, 7(1), 9-26. Budhrani, K., Martin, F., Malabanan, O., & Espiritu, J. L. (2021). How did parents balance it all? Work-from- home parents’ engagement in academic and support roles during remote learning. Journal of Online Learning Research, 7(2), 153-184. Cancian, M., & Meyer, D. R. (2018). Reforming policy for single-parent families to reduce child poverty. RSF: The Russell Sage Foundation Journal of the Social Sciences, 4(2), 91-112. Coleman, J. S. (2018). Parents, their children, and schools. Routledge. Colvin, M. K., Reesman, J., & Glen, T. (2022). The impact of COVID-19 related educational disruption on children and adolescents: An interim data summary and commentary on ten considerations for neuropsychological practice. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 36(1), 45-71. Commission on Higher Education. (2020). CMO No. 5, s. 2020: Guidelines on the suspension of operations of degree programs of private higher education institutions. Retrieved from https://bitly.ws/3dEtj Department of Education, Region 8. (2020). DO 012 s2020-031: Guidelines on the suspension of operations of degree programs of private higher education institutions. Retrieved from https://bitly. ws/3dEt3 Department of Education. (2020). DO 031, s. 2020: Interim guidelines for assessment and grading in light of the Basic Education Learning Continuity Plan. Retrieved from https://bitly.ws/BiFb Di Pietro, G., Biagi, F., Costa, P., Karpiński, Z., & Mazza, J. (2020). The likely impact of COVID-19 on education: Reflections based on the existing literature and recent international datasets (Vol. 30275). Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union. Diaz, L. B. (2023). Current Approaches for Engaging Parents in Students’ Academic Performance: Basis for Parental Engagement Policy. American Journal of Multidisciplinary Research and Innovation, 2(4), 32–41. https://doi.org/10.54536/ajmri.v2i4.1817 Dutta, S., & Smita, M. K. (2020). The impact of COVID-19 pandemic on tertiary education in Bangladesh: students’ perspectives. Open Journal of Social Sciences, 8(09), 53. Epstein, J. L. (2018). School, family, and community partnerships: Preparing educators and improving schools. Routledge. Etikan, I., & Bala, K. (2017). Sampling and sampling methods. Biometrics & Biostatistics International Journal, 5(6), 00149. Garcia, A. K. C., & Ancheta, W. M. C. (2022). Parents’ Levels of Involvement and Role Construction in Children’s Reading at Home. American Journal of Multidisciplinary Research and Innovation, 1(6), 82–91. https://doi.org/10.54536/ajmri.v1i6.1029 Hällsten, M., & Pfeffer, F. T. (2017). Grand advantage: Family wealth and grandchildren’s educational achievement in Sweden. American Sociological Review, 82(2), 328-360. Jeynes, W. H. (2018). A practical model for school leaders to encourage parental involvement and parental engagement. School Leadership & Management, 38(2), 147-163. Johnson, K. (2019). Chronic poverty: the implications of bullying, trauma, and the education of the poverty- stricken population. European Journal of Educational Sciences, (Special), 76-101. Kuhfeld, M., Soland, J., Tarasawa, B., Johnson, A., Ruzek, E., & Liu, J. (2020). Projecting the potential impact of COVID-19 school closures on academic achievement. Educational Researcher, 49(8), 549-565. Kumar, A., Krishnamurthi, R., Bhatia, S., Kaushik, K., Ahuja, N. J., Nayyar, A., & Masud, M. (2021). Blended learning tools and practices: A comprehensive analysis. Ieee Access, 9, 85151-85197. Li, X., Yang, H., Wang, H., & Jia, J. (2020). Family socioeconomic status and home-based parental involvement: A mediation analysis of parental attitudes and expectations. Children and Youth Services Review, 116, 105111. Li, Z., & Qiu, Z. (2018). How does family background affect children’s educational achievement? Evidence from Contemporary China. The Journal of Chinese Sociology, 5(1), 1-21. Magnuson, K. A., & Duncan, G. J. (2019). Parents in poverty. Handbook of parenting, 301-328. Magwa, S., & Mugari, S. (2017). Factors affecting parental involvement in the schooling of children. International Journal of Academic Research and Reflection, 5(1), 74-81. McAleavy, T., Joynes, C., Gibbs, E., & Sims, K. (2020). What steps are being taken to reach the most disadvantaged students during the period of COVID-19 school closure. Education Development Trust. https:// edtechhub. org/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/ Pa ge 44 https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajmri Am. J. Multidis. Res. Innov. 3(3) 35-44, 2024 disadvantaged-students. pdf (details). Menheere, A., & Hooge, E. H. (2010). Parental involvement in children’s education: A review study about the effect of parental involvement on children’s school education with a focus on the position of illiterate parents. Journal of the European Teacher Education Network JETEN, 6, 144-157. Öberg, S. (2017). Too many is not enough: Studying how children are affected by their number of siblings and resource dilution in families. The History of the Family, 22(2-3), 157-174. Paat, Y. F. (2013). Working with immigrant children and their families: An application of Bronfenbrenner’s ecological systems theory. Journal of Human Behavior in the Social Environment, 23(8), 954-966. Peacock-Chambers, E., Martin, J. T., Necastro, K. A., Cabral, H. J., & Bair-Merritt, M. (2017). The influence of parental self-efficacy and perceived control on the home learning environment of young children. Academic Pediatrics, 17(2), 176-183. Petridou, A., & Karagiorgi, Y. (2018). Parental involvement and risk for school failure. Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk (JESPAR), 23(4), 359-380. Raffaele, C. T., Khosravi, P., Parker, A., Godovich, S., Rich, B., & Adleman, N. (2021). Social–emotional attention in school-age children: A call for school- based intervention during COVID-19 and distance learning. Children & Schools, 43(2), 107-117. Rudo, Z., & Dimock, V. (2017). How family, school, and community engagement can improve student achievement and influence school reform. Sahlberg, P. (2021). Does the pandemic help us make education more equitable?. Educational Research for Policy and Practice, 20, 11-18. Scheuerell, C. (2019). Supporting success for children from single-parent homes. Selolo, R. E. (2018). Factors influencing parent involvement in the education of their children at primary school level in Bahananwa Circuit in Blouberg Municipality, Limpopo Province (Doctoral dissertation). Tan, C. Y., Lyu, M., & Peng, B. (2020). Academic benefits from parental involvement are stratified by parental socioeconomic status: A meta-analysis. Parenting, 20(4), 241-287. Vaillancourt, T., McDougall, P., Comeau, J., & Finn, C. (2021). COVID-19 school closures and social isolation in children and youth: Prioritizing relationships in education. Facets, 6(1), 1795-1813. Whitaker, M. C. (2019). The Hoover-Dempsey and Sandler model of the parent involvement process. The Wiley handbook of family, school, and community relationships in education, 421-444