If we look at parents’ participation in early intervention versus their engagement, is there a difference?

Both terms fit under the umbrella category of parent “involvement” – something which we, as SLPs, know is essential for supporting young children’s communication development.

A recent study summarized existing research by identifying “participation” as the quantity of parents’ involvement in early intervention and “engagement” as the quality of that involvement. ¹ Furthermore, the quality of engagement varies depending on how actively parents are involved in the process of facilitating their child’s abilities.¹

Parent involvement in early intervention

(adapted from Decker et al., 2025)

We know that active engagement is best for building parents’ capacity, competence and confidence in supporting their child’s communication. Research consistently shows how higher quality parent engagement elicited through effective coaching correlates to significantly better outcomes for the child.² In short, active engagement is best practice for coaching adult learners.³

However, research also consistently shows that there is a gap between what early interventionists value about parents’ engagement, and the real-world implementation of those techniques during intervention sessions.^4,5 Sometimes, SLPs may readily include opportunities for parents’ “passive” engagement, but miss out on chances for their active engagement.^1,4

So, why does this gap persist?

While there are many factors at play, one important barrier is the expectations of the parents themselves.

Have you ever experienced the following situation?

• You are providing service to a family of a young child;
• You fully intend to actively engage the parent and use coaching to help them learn to facilitate their child’s communication
• But the parent is reluctant to engage with your coaching

If so, what did you do? Did you stick with the coaching? Or did you revert to a more clinician-directed approach?

Understanding what parents want and expect from early intervention can help improve our ability to provide them with higher quality coaching experiences. So, let’s take a closer look at that recent study to explore this idea.

Parents’ Reflections on Involvement in Early Intervention

(Decker et al., 2025)

Decker et al. (2025) conducted and analyzed qualitative interviews of 28 families in a particular administrative region of Montana, U.S.. Each family comprised one parent and at least one young child who was currently receiving early intervention services (including speech-language services), or who had received these services within the past year.

The purpose of the study was to understand parents’ preferences for and perspectives on involvement in their child’s early intervention, as well as the factors that influenced their involvement.¹

What Parents Found Helpful

Some of the parents’ reflections demonstrated positive, relative strengths of the early intervention services they received.¹  For example:

• 86% of parents (n=24) identified their experiences of discussing information about their child’s progress with the clinician.¹
• 82% of parents (n=23) identified their experiences of collaborative goal-setting and problem-solving with the clinician.¹
• 79% of parents (n=22) felt that the clinician had encouraged and supported their overall involvement during the intervention.¹
• 68% of parents (n=19) felt that the clinician provided “guidance” to support their learning (Decker et al., 2025, p.317).
• 43% of parents (n=12) reported that the clinician gave them a choice about how involved they preferred to be.

In these examples, parents’ overall involvement aligns with best practice.¹

What Parents Found Challenging

Conversely, many of the parents’ reflections demonstrate “areas for improvement” in their early intervention experiences (Decker et al., 2025, p.323).

For example:

• 75% of parents (n=21) discussed how the clinician primarily worked directly with the child.¹
• 75% of parents (n=21) described wanting the clinician to engage them more substantially and explicitly.¹
• 36% of parents (n=10) found it challenging to carry over the clinician’s recommendations independently between sessions.¹
• 36% of parents (n=10) found their involvement to be overwhelming for a variety of different reasons, including a busy home schedule and travel time to appointments.¹

Interestingly, the parents in this study generally expressed satisfaction with their early intervention services, even though most of their involvement comprised only participation and more passive engagement.¹ Despite its small sample size, the findings of this study reinforce the persistent discrepancy between what parents appear to prefer and what we know to be ideal for their learning. Overall, few parents in this study had the chance to practise and self-reflect¹, two skills we know to be essential for long-term behaviour changes.

In the study’s conclusion, the authors highlight the inconsistency of parents’ engagement and suggest that more “commitment to actively engaging parents would better utilize the valuable time and energy parents have and the limited availability of providers” (Decker et al., 2025, p.323).

Clinical Implications

Parents may be completely unaware of what they are missing when they choose more passive levels of involvement.¹ Possibly, they do not yet know how much richer their early intervention experience could be.

At The Hanen Centre we use the expression “start as you mean to go” when discussing parent coaching. From the very first contact with the family, we establish the expectations for the parents’ engagement, including what their role will be during the sessions.

This precedent affects the entire intervention. If, for example, parents are used to a pattern of attending sessions but not being actively engaged, it can be more challenging to switch to parent coaching and get active engagement started.

However, even when we “start as we mean to go,” we can still encounter difficulties in our coaching along the way.

What do we do when the parent:

• Seems reluctant to be coached?

or

• Says, “I want you to do the therapy. You know how to do it.”

When SLPs run into these situations, it may seem like reverting to a clinician-directed approach is the right choice. But this research by Decker et al. (2025) is a good reminder that, in the long-term, forgoing active engagement can be a significant disservice to families. Rather, resolving the parent’s reluctance is the most beneficial solution for the child’s and family’s outcomes.

Let’s think about an example scenario:

The SLP encourages the parent to practise a new strategy they have just learned.

The parent expresses reluctance and says, “I don’t know about this… I’m more used to the therapist doing it.”

Here is the process the SLP might follow to resolve this difficulty:

1. The SLP's initial reaction

First, the SLP might think, Okay, I guess this parent does not want to practice.

But it’s not yet clear what the parent is really feeling and thinking without exploring further (even if it feels uncomfortable). Coaching is all about the collaborative relationship and conversations between the parent and SLP.

2. The SLP seeks more information

The SLP needs to know: What is the reason for the breakdown in the parent’s expectations?

Drawing on the communication techniques from our Hanen trainings is a helpful way to probe for more information and get to the heart of what parents express. Open-ended questions and non-judgmental, reflective comments guide the conversation towards the reason for why the parent is expressing reluctance.

The SLP could respond: “It sounds like this is very different than what you’ve done before.” Then, wait for the parent to elaborate.

3. The parent responds

As the conversation evolves, the parent can share more about their concerns. The parent might say something like, “My child just works much better with therapists than with me.”

4. The SLP keeps the conversation going

In this case, the SLP now has a better understanding of why the parent is feeling reluctant. A reflective comment could help to confirm what the parent is expressing. The SLP could say, “It sounds like you’ve noticed that therapists have more success using strategies than you do.” Then, wait for the parent to elaborate.

As the conversation continues, the SLP could gently guide the parent and get their agreement to try the strategy with lots of help. For example, “This is very new for you so I’m not surprised that you feel like you might not be able to do it. How about I show you, step-by-step, how this strategy works. And when you feel ready, you try it, and we see what happens?” The SLP can remind the parent they’re not expecting perfection.

In summary, parents are more likely to feel validated and empowered when we seek to understand their perspectives and when we support them to become actively engaged during sessions - leading to better outcomes for their child.