Investigating changes in expressed child-rearing practices through parent education

Item Type text; Thesis-Reproduction (electronic)

Authors Thorsrud, Audrey Olson, 1930-

Publisher The University of Arizona.

Rights Copyright © is held by the author. Digital access to this materialis made possible by the University Libraries, University of Arizona.Further transmission, reproduction or presentation (such aspublic display or performance) of protected items is prohibitedexcept with permission of the author.

Download date 22/08/2018 10:05:23

Link to Item http://hdl.handle.net/10150/554682

INVESTIGATING CHANGES IN EXPRESSED CHILD-REARING PRACTICES

THROUGH PARENT EDUCATION

byAudrey Olson Thorsrud

A Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of theSCHOOL OF HOME ECONOMICS

In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements For the Degree ofMASTER OF SCIENCE

In the Graduate CollegeTHE UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA

STATEMENT BY AUTHOR

This thesis has been submitted in partial fulfillment of re­quirements for an advanced degree at The University of Arizona and is deposited at the University Library to be made available to borrowers under rules of the library.

Brief quotations from this thesis are allowable without special permission, provided that accurate acknowledgment of source is made. Requests for permission for extended quotation from or reproduction of this manuscript in whole or in part may be granted by the head of the major department or the Dean of the Graduate College when in his judg­ment the proposed use of the material is in the interests of scholar­ship. In all other instances, however, permission must be obtained from the author.

SIGNED:7

APPROVAL BY THESIS DIRECTORThis thesis has been approved on the date shown below:

1 JEAN RULEY KEARNS Professor of Home Economics

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

. Sincere appreciation is expressed to Dr. Jean R. Kearns, major professor, for her guidance during the graduate program and thesis preparation. This guidance included assistance when needed, hut more important, a great deal of freedom to make choices and decisions. Dr. Sarah M. Dinham and Dr. Nylda A. Lopez most graciously took time to read the manuscript and offered many help- . ful suggestions. To them is extended much appreciation.

Beryl Merrill and Susan Sims, through the Tucson Chapter of the American National Red Cross, were helpful and cooperative in assisting with plans for this study. Many thanks are extended to them and the parents who participated in this study.

Without the writer's family and friends this thesis and the graduate program could not have been accomplished. Her parents and friends have offered ongoing, constant encouragement. Her husband and children have been supportive, encouraging and most patient. The writer wishes to thank them all.

iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PageLIST OF TABLES O 0 00 0 00 0 ©0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 viABSTRACT o o o d o o o o o o o o . o o o o o o o o o o o o o o V H

Io INTRODUCTION © o o © o © o © ©o © © o© © © o© © © © © o© IPurpose O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O . O 3

II© REVIEW OF LITERATURE © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © 5Parent Educations Definition and Philosophy © © © © © © 5Historical Review and Overview © © © © © © © © © © © © © 6Justification for Parent Education Today © © © © © © © © 13

Social Changes © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © 1^Growing Research Concerning. Children8s Early Years © 16Groups in Special Need of Parent Education © © © © © 18

Components of Parent Education © © © © © © © © © © © © © 21Research and Evaluation © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © 26Summary of the Review of Literature © © © © © © © © © © . 2?

Ill © PROCEDURE o 0 © O © 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 o 30\ Research Design © © © o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o © 30

Sampling © © © © © © © © © © © o o o o o o o o o o o 30 Method © 0.0 0 d o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 33Course Content © © © o o o o o o o o o o o o o o © © 37

Instrumentation © © © © o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o oChild Rearing Questionnaire © © © © © © © © © © © © 40Illinois Course Evaluation Questionnaire © © © © © © 41

Data Analysis © © © g © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © 43IV© RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © 44

Results 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 44Hypothesis 1A © o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o © 44Hypothesis IB ©o © o o © © o © © © o © © o o o © © 44Hypothesis 1C © © © © © © o - o o o o o o o o o o - o o 43Hypothesis 2A © © © o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o 4 3Hypothesis 2B © © © © © © © © © © © o o © © © o © © 46Course Evaluation o © © © © © © © © © © © © o © © ©. 46

Discussion of Results © © © © © © © © © © 0 o © © © o © 4?Limitations © © © © o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o 3^

iv

LIST OF TABLES

Table Page1. Characteristics of the Sample ............ 322. Number of Children in Families..................... 333. Attendance at Sessions . ................... J6

4. Number of Fathers and Mothers Respondingto Questionnaires . . . . . . ............ . . . . . . . . 37

vi

ABSTRACT

Parents’ reported democratic attitudes toward child-rearing practices'were assessed before and after participation in a five-week parent education course. Parents also evaluated the course in regard to interest, attention, course content and teaching methods,

Ten families, represented by five fathers and ten mothers, responded to a Child-Rearing Questionnaire before and after exposure to a parent education course. After parent education the parents responded to a revised Illinois Course Evaluation Questionnaire.

There were no differences in parents' reported democratic attitudes, as assessed by the Child-Rearing Questionnaire, before and after parent education? however, parents, when evaluating the course, expressed more democratic attitudes as the result of parent education. They reported, too, that the course had met some of their needs as parents.

Mothers showed more democratic gains after parent education than fathers; however, when comparing each mother with respective father, there were no differences in democratic gains after parent education.

Parents who had higher education levels reported more democratic attitudes than parents who had lower education levels. There were no differences in democratic attitudes in regard to past child-rearing training.

vii

TABLE OF CONTENTS— Continuedv

PageCONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS............................ „ 53

Conclusions . . . . . . . ........ 53Implications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5^

Suggestions for Further Research ................. 55APPENDIX A 1 LETTER OF AUTHORIZATION ............. 57APPENDIX Bs PERSONAL DATA SHEET........... ............. ' 59APPENDIX Cl AN OVERVIEW: A FIVE-SESSION COURSE IN PARENT ■

EDUCATION . ............. 62APPENDIX D: CHILD REARING QUESTIONNAIRE . . . . 69

APPENDIX E: COURSE EVALUATION QUESTIONNAIRE . . . . . . . . 73APPENDIX F: PRE AND POSTTEST REPORTED DEMOCRATIC RESPONSES

. TO CHILD-REARING QUESTIONNAIRE „ . ........ 77LIST OF REFERENCES . . . . ................... 78

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

Parent education could be identified as the oldest of all educational disciplines since parenting skills have been taught by one generation to another. If educating for parenthood by one generation for another was ever adequate, it does not appear so today. Mace (1969) and Landau (1973) referred to the difficulties of parenthood today. Others like Hanford (1969) related this phenomenon to the following '

factors: (l) the rapid pace of change in society altering family lifeprofoundly, and (2) the growing research indicating the importance of the child’s early years and the vital role of parents.

Mace further stressed the pressures on parents as they try to cope with change and growing responsibilities. As responsible parent­hood is reviewed by specialists in various fields, parent education is receiving renewed attention. Pickarts (1970, p. 133) wrote, "Parent education is one way of assisting families to deal with conditions re­sulting from accelerating social change. Present knowledge should be put to work to build more effective methods of meeting the educative needs of parents."

In a formal sense, parent education in the United States had its beginnings late in the 19th -century (Dybwad 195*0 • Senn (195?) reports cyclical patterns of child-rearing advice and practices which are not isolated from societal change and scientific discovery. "It should not

be discouraging that changes in advice to parents have occurred„ They reflect the improvement of current scientific knowledge and also mirror changes in values regarding desirable man" (Brim 1959> P* 26).

Bronfenbrenner-(1961) reported a generally more democratic approach to child rearing in the last twenty-five years. According to Watson (1957) there is some converging evidence that firm, strict adult domination will produce conforming, obedient children but probably handicap them in initiative and foster a sense of inadequacy, while more permissive treatment will result in more independence and aggressiveness. As a tentative conclusion, Kates and Diab (1955) reported that strong authoritarian beliefs may be inappropriate in a democratic society since such beliefs are associated with attitudes similar to those held by parents of children who display authoritarian and possessive behavior.

Since the beginning of this century there has been a move away from harsh authoritarian type of punishment and control of children to more and more permissiveness in child rearing (Duvall 1969). Both Duvall and Peterson et'al. (1959) hold to the advantage of democratic qualities in child rearing. These writers have asked for sound direction and encouragement to help young people to assume responsibility, learn inner control and learn how to use freedom.

Dreikurs and Soltz (1964) wrote that in moving from autocratic to democratic practices- people enjoy freedom when their neighbors' have it too."'According to them, to have freedom one must have order and-respon­sibility. Gondrey (1972) appears to believe that if man is an active organism with control over his actions and interactions, he must have freedom and choice, contingent on responsible feedback and completion.

Thus, one might hypothesize that parent education today might have as one of its goals the rearing of children in a democratic way.

Another aspect of parent education, emphasized "by Endres and Evans (1968), is research direction. Research in parent education is multifaceted with emphasis on these questions: (l) how is evaluationaccomplished, (2) who teaches parent education, (3) what is the course content and (4) who needs parent education?

Brim (195?) and Picharts (1970) have urged sound research designs and instruments with a move away from a pseudo-scientific ap­proach. Mace (1969) has called for more specialists in the field of parent education. In regard, to the questions of course content and who needs parent education, Brim (1958) has - encouraged varied, programs to meet the needs of the people involved. He said individuals "behave in their parent roles as part of a social system. Hawkins (l9?l) discussed parent education course content in terms of teaching how to rear.rather than merely teaching about children, Adams (1973) stressed that all parents need help in rearing children; however, Stein and Smith (1973) joined Hawkins in placing special significance on prevention rather than cure. They have encouraged early child-rearing training before parenthood.

PurposeThis study was a project to explore the movements in parent

education toward; (l) encouraging democratic rearing of children and (2) establishing research direction for evaluation of course content, teaching methods and parent participation.

The following hypotheses were tested;There are differences in reported democratic child-rearing .practices "before and after parent education in the followingregard; ,A. Parents report more democratic responses after parent

education.B. Mothers report more democratic responses than fathers

after parent education.0, Individual mothers report more democratic responses

than respective fathers after parent education.There are pretest differences in reported democratic child-rearing practices in the following regard:A. Parents who have attained a higher education level

report more democratic responses than parents who have attained a lower level of education.

B. Parents with formal child-development training report more democratic responses than parents with informal child development training.

CHAPTER IT

REVIEW OF LITERATURE

There is an abundance of written information on the subject of parent education. The following review of literature will not only relate to this particular study but will attempt to provide a compre­hensive overview of parent education in the United States. Included will be philosophical and historical aspects and current concerns of justification, function, research and evaluation.

Parent Educations Definition and PhilosophyLeading writers in the field have attempted to define parent

education and to discuss the basic philosophies underlying education for parenthood. The following are several definitions:

Parent education is a movement within such fields as home economics, mental hygiene, social service, pediatrics and medicine rather than an independent movement (Bridgeman 1932, p. 893).

, Parent education is one way of assisting families to deal with conditions resulting, from accelerating social change (Pickarts 1970, p. 133)=

Parent education can be defined as an activity using educational techniques in order to effect change in parent role performance (Zaiman 1972, p. 18).

Bridgeman’s 1932 inter-disciplinary approach to parent education was supported by Brown (1958). After attending a conference on parent education sponsored by the University of Minnesota Institute of Child

6Development and the Children's Bureau, she wrote that parent education had lost its identity as a special field because every professional person who works with children and families teaches parents.

Buckland (l9?2, p. 151) has written that the focus of parent education is shifting from "adjustment" of children and "role perfor­mance” of parents toward competence of both parent and child to learn skills for functioning in 9, changing society. She feels that families are attuned to stress but unfamiliar with available resources.Schaefer (1972) joins Buckland in viewing parent education today as a comprehensive system which teaches, supports and strengthens parents and children in the home with effective use of socialization agencies: schools, mass media, public institutions and medical professions. The orientation is humanistic and nurturing.

According to Buckland (1972, p. l6l), "Parent, education needs to become part of the mainstream of educational endeavor." She suggested it might more effectively be called family education where a variety of "valuing-learning-skill-building" group experiences are available for family members of all ages.

Historical Review and Overview Parent education can be put in perspective by relating it to

historical/cultural/social factors and scientific research in the field of child development. Actual child-rearing practices have been altered by these same factors; and ultimately, varied emphases have been placed on parent education. Formal parent education in the United States had

7its early "beginnings in the late 19th century; however, it is really a phenomenon of the 20th century (Pringle 1959-1960).

In reviewing the historical files of the Child Study Association of America in the 1890‘s, Dybwad (195^0 found detailed records of how parents struggled by reading together and discussing Rousseau's Emile so they might gain from his knowledge a better understanding in coping with their problems as parents.

A philosophical view of parent education also reveals goals and objectives. Stott and Berson (l951» P» 191) have written, "A major objective of those primarily interested in parent education has always been the modifying of parents' attitudes and beliefs about children in ways that seemed likely to result in better child-rearing practices and more constructive parent-child relations."

Mannino et al. (1968) talked about immediate and ultimate goals. They said changing of attitudes regarding child relationships and child- rearing practices are frequently the immediate goals while the ultimate goal is to produce a positive change in the child's behavior and attitudes.

The Child Study Association of America, established in the 1880's was joined by the American Association of University Women and the Parent Teachers Association, organized in the 1890's, in promoting a more scientific understanding of children in the late years of the 19th century (Pringle 1959“I960). Dybwad further suggested that interest in the work of Freud and Darwin and the influence of E, Stanley Hall had definite repercussions as far as our understanding of children and the ways parents related to them.

8American parent education has followed concurrently the changes-

and concerns taking place in America. Much of the concern for children has grown from emergency needs brought on by war and economic depres­sions,. Both Frank (1962) and Pringle (1959-1960) related the growth of nursery schools, child guidance clinics and child research centers directly to the country's social needs.

Pringle discussed parent education as it was stressed at con­secutive White House Conferences on Children, pointing out that parent • education took on added interest after each successive White House Conference. The first conference met in 1909. From 1909 to 1920

there was no significant parent education thrust until after World War II when, as Frank (1962, p. 20?) related,, an optimistic planning period of "reconstruction" was undertaken in almost every area of social life, especially in education. Much of this optimism was shattered by situations that often follow war - "considerable disorder and lawlessness - violent crazes and aberrent modes of living."

The 1930 White House Conference of Children was filled with reports, literature and disagreement concerning parent education, mark­ing another impetus in the field'. This impetus continued to grow, as ■ did the scientific interest in child development research in the 1930’s and 1940's. Frank pointed out the work of Arnold Gessell at Yale,Helen T. Wooley at the Merrill-Palmer Institute, the establishment of the Pels Institute by Lester Sontag and the Berkeley studies started by Jean McFarlane, as part of the growing interest in child development research.

9Thrown into, another war, the United States' national interests

in organized parent education lessened in the 19^0*s. Another upswingoccurred in 1950 when the White House Conference again stressed- thevneeds in this area. Ridenour (1955) and Brim (1957) reported that not only were parent education needs again re-emphasized, "but parent education itself was being reassessed.

Stein and Smith (1973) identified the 1960's as a decade of compensatory education, enrichment programs, head-starts and follow- throughs which resulted in identifying the child's first environment - his home - as the most important element for adequate development. From the i9606s came re-thinking of parents' vital role not only in child rearing, but in child education also. The 1970 White House Conference re-focused on parent education with a heavy emphasis on training youth for parenthood through programs like "Exploring Childhood," a joint endeavor by the Offices of Education and Child Development (Marland 1973)• This emphasis of the 1970's is further demonstrated by Parents Magazine (May 1973) and Children Today (March-April 1973a) where they dedicated total issues to the subject of parent education.

Parent education has also developed concurrently with child development research. Frank (1962) discussed this influential research coming not only from the field of child development, but also from in­sights and understandings gained from research in clinical psychology, psychiatry and psycho-analysis, social psychology, sociology and anthropology.

There is also a relationship between child-rearing practices, and parent education as altered by cultural factors and scientific

10research. Changes in child rearing have followed rather consistently cultural changes and the scientific approach of a particular era. For example, Frank (1962) closely related the rigorous care approach of the 1920's to John B. Watson's behavioristic assertion that a child could be molded by using correct techniques.

This relationship is further documented by several other writers. Brim (1959) referred to studies going back to the 1820's when the Calvinistic view toward child rearing was based on the current belief that a child was born depraved and that it was the parents duty to force absolute obedience. Then there was the "hardening school" of Locke and Rousseau whose aim, according to Brim, was to bring out naturalness and manliness. The last part of the 19th century reveals a European "gentle approach" of viewing the child as a fragile creature. "Sweet permissiveness" dominated the scene from 1890-1910, with a change to "rigid discipline" from 1910 to 1930. Vincent (1972) stretched this particular period.of restrictiveness from 1915 to 1935

with the extreme occurring in the mid-twenties.Brim further suggested that the impersonal child-care practices

between 1910-1930 were a result of the scientific methods then flourish­ing in such fields as disease control and physical growth. Senn (1957), in his review of the historical background of child-rearing practices, .showed that when the rigidity of the 1930's resulted in some problems, a "self-regulation” approach became identified with the 19^0's, Vincent described the period from 194-5-1965 as "the "childrens' era" with a fusion of "wants" and "needs" and the emergency of "fun morality,"

11Bronfenbrenner (1961) wrote that there has been a trend toward

a more bureaucratic way of life in the last twenty-five years, with a less structured pattern of family life and child rearing. There is an overall theme of a continuing democratic approach with significance on setting limits and accepting responsibility for one’s own actions, according to Dreikurs and Soltz (1964).

Maccoby (1961), in discussing the communication of child-rearing advice to parents, pointed out that the trend in restrictiveness follows research emphasis on physical development and socialization of the infant while emphasis on personality development tends to result in permissive practices.

It would seem apparent that changes in child-rearing practices have occurred as the result of cultural and scientific trends. Brim (1959) has written that these changes reflect improved knowledge and consequently can change the values regarding man.

An overview of parent education should include some of its results and effectiveness. There is a need for research oriented to assessing the immediate and long-range effects of parent education.Stott and Berson (l95l) related a study they conducted at the Merrill- Palmer Institute concerned with; (l) measurement of common attitudes and beliefs of young perspective parents about small children and (2) evaluation of changes in the above attitudes and beliefs after a series of weekly educational meetings. The results showed more positive

12attitudes after parent, education, with a, move away from authoritarian toward permissive responses.

Stott and Berson pointed out that authorities differ as to what constitutes sound child-rearing practices and desired outcomes in children's behavior. There seems to be, however, some converging evidence that democratic, more permissive family relationships lead to more cooperative, independent, responsible children while parental dominance and authoritarianism lead to autocratic, conforming, obedient, less independent and more problem-oriented children (Shoben 1-9̂ 9 > Kates and Diab 1955) Watson 1957r Meyer and Wacker 19?0).

Shoben (1949), while developing a questionnaire to access parental attitudes, found that parents of "problem children" were more apt than parents of "non-problem children” to agree with statements approving strict discipline and demand for obedience. Watson (1957) studied 328 children in regard to relationships between permissive/ strict homes and nine dimensions of personality. Qualities of inde­pendence and initiative, cooperation, friendliness and creativity all were clearly related to permissive homes. There were no statistically significant differences on self-control, inner security and happiness in the two home environments. He found factors making for emotional disorganization equally often in both types of homes. Children -from permissive homes' maintained better quality of intellectual activity, while high-activity-level children more often came from stricter homes.

Watson tempered his findings by saying that none of the person­ality differences applied to all cases and that some children from both

types were found on every level on every characteristic. There was no clear personality advantage associated with strict discipline in a good home, while advantages did appear to emerge in permissive up-bringing. Watson cautioned that this study does not distinguish the extent to which advantages associated with permissiveness axe due to permissive­ness alone and the extent to which permissive parents may convey hered­itary or cultural assets with which the permissive attitudes happen to be correlated.

Parents' democratic attitudes have also been related to their education level and knowledge of child development. Silva (l9?l) and Kerns (196?) related a higher degree of child-development training and knowledge to more democratic parental attitudes. Shoben's study, re­ferred to above, also showed that the education level of parents is positively related to their democratic responses.

Justification for Parent Education TodayLiterature in the last forty years abounds with expressions of

the importance of parent education. Kennedy (1931, p. 136 wrote that, "since the home is responsible for the training of the child during his early formative years, it is most important, that the future fathers and mothers of the race be educated for parenthood."

By the 1970’s, the same theme was reiterated when. DeRosis (l9?0) wrote that parenting is probably the single most important job in the world. Roger W, Mclntire, speaking before the Eastern Psychological Association in 1973, considered parenthood important enough to require licenses for parents. After all, he said, licenses are required for

14pilots, scuba divers, teachers, drivers, plumbers, doctors and even dogs. "Licensing for Parenthood" (May 12$ 1973, p. 305) reporting Mclntire's speech stated, "This proposal is not new but the fact that it was presented at a scientific meeting indicates that the prospect may be taken more seriously now than in the past."

Mace referred to the difficulties of parenthood today. "The close intimate relationships between parents and their children today in the nuclear family is the deviant pattern of human parenthood in the world today" (Mace 1969, p. 280). This situation places tremendous responsibility on parents, Mace believes. Landau (1973, P- l6) appears to agree with Mace. As editor of Parents Magazine, she wrote, "It may never have been harder to be a parent than it is today.”

It might be asked at this point why the responsibilities of parenthood are considered greater today than ever before. From the literature comes two salient factors t

1. social changes are altering family life profoundly, and2. growing research is indicating the importance of the

child's early years and the vital role of parents.

Social ChangesAs cited earlier, Mace attributed the change from extended to

nuclear families as one cause of increased parenting difficulties. This places tremendous responsibility on parents, particularly the mother. This of course, Mace said, is great for "good mothers” and terrible for "bad mothers."

15Hanford (19.69) wrote that it is not only changes themselves but

the rapid rate of change that is affecting family life so deeply. Changing work patterns and sex roles, particularly the emergency of the working mother, and increasing single-parent families are cited by Hanford. Zaiman (1972) revealed modifications which have occurred in patterns of child rearing in the United States since World War II.' Children used to be reared solely by their parents, but now institutions and peer groups have increasing influence.

Heinz Lehmann, a McGill University psychiatrist, emphasized peer influence when he said that the peer group for children becomes the place where a value system is learned. Today9s Child (September 1973c reported an interview with Lehmann. He was asked why today's parents can't just rely on their own instincts as generations of parents have done.. Lehmann answered?

It was another society; it didn't have today’s instability of all value systems; there was more coherence in the family, more discipline, more self-discipline, more religion. About all, there was no communication explosion, where everybody is forced to make decisions - major decisions of his own about war, rebellion, justice or anything that happens anywhere in the world, the minute it happens (Today’s Child, September •1973c, p. 4).

Today’s Child (February 1973a, p. 5) reported the following statement by Arnold Arnolds ’’It is clearly more difficult to be a parent or adolescent today than it was fifty years ago. Then the rules were clearly spelled out by one generation for the next. Even when the rules were wrong-headed, they provided a yardstick of behavior that was less confusing than today's standards."

Growing Research Concerning Children*s Early YearsAlong with rapid societal changes has come research concerning

the young child and the importance of the early years.A first consideration concerns competency and intelligence.

White (l97l), in the Harvard Pre-school Project, identified the age from ten months to one and a half years as being critical for a child's intellectual development. In studying three year olds, White related their competency directly to the quality of the mother-child inter­action as well as the quality of the stimulation provided. Mothers of competent children were generally permissive and indulgent, provided teaching "on the fly" at child's instigation and talked a great deal to their children.

Kagan (1972) reviewed five studies when attempting to discover if infants think. These studies involved a discrepancy test, effects of parents departure and stranger’s arrival, heart rate and eye fixation related to discrepant events and visual/auditory stimuli assessment. Kagan concluded that before an infant is a year old, he has become a thinking creature. Up to six months differences in infants seem inde­pendent of environment, but by one year of age differences in rearing experiences seriously affect cognitive functioning.

Physical development is a second area where research indicates early needs. Conception to three years of age is a crucial forty-five- month period, according to Wyden (l97l)« Nutrition during these months is an important factor which determines whether or not a child will be able to live up to his genetic potential. "A series of landmark studies,

17conducted in this country, Great Britain, Latin America and Africa, have pointed to the nutritional status of not only the child but also the pregnant mother as the key to that development” (Wyden 1971, p. 95)•

In addition to intellectual and physical growth, emotional growth is also an integral part of a child’s development. Here again, the early years come into play as being critical for adequate emotional growth. Studies reviewed by Cadden (l97l) revealed that the love and affection a child receives from his mother or a mother-figure, most critically from his birth through age three, will influence his life­time emotional development.

Thus, evidence shows that rapid social changes, coupled with knowledge of the importance of a child’s early years in three major areas of development, have put added pressures on parents today.

A sampling of facts reported since 1970 illustrates some of the problems facing children in the United States today. The following statistics were reported during the 1970 White House Conference on Children (Kruger 1973, p. 5)*

Infant mortality rates in the United States are higher than those in twelve other developed nations.

Between 100,000 and 200,000 babies born in the United States each year are mentally retarded, some as a result of factors which could be avoided.

In the United States, 15,000 children under the age of fifteen die from accidents each year, and nineteen million are injured severely enough to require medical care or be restricted in their usual activities. Most accidents in­volving children occur in the home.

1 Half of the children in this country under the age offifteen, and 90 percent of those under five, have never been to a dentist.

18Child abuse has become a problem of critical concern, with

more than one third of the cases surveyed affecting children three years old or younger.

Reported in Children Today (May-June 1973b, p.32)sIn 1972 the infant mortality rate was 18.5 per 1,000

live births.In 1972 the divorce rate was 4 (4 divorces per 1,000

population), a rate close to the all-time postwar high of 4.3 observed in 1946. The present rising trend in the divorce rate, which began in 1963, has led to an average yearly increase of 11 percent during the past five years - and an increase of over 80 percent in the past ten years.

S. Ward. (1972, pp. 38-40) reported2

In the United States it is estimated that of persons under seventeen years old there are:

Five million who suffer from malnutrition (which interferes with their physical and mental growth).Eight million who drop out of school each year.One million who are involved in court processes due to delinquency.Five million who have moderate to severe mental health problems, and 700,000 who receive some care from mental health facilities.

Kruger considered other factors than deficiencies in parenting skills (poverty, particularly) as playing a role in producing the above facts. "Nevertheless, each represents a problem area which could be alleviated by increased parental competencies, developed through im­proved parenthood education," wrote Kruger (1973, P» 5 ) •

Groups in Special Need of Parent Education

Historically, it would appear that there has been a universal need for parent education. However, recent societal changes have called attention to several specific groups which deserve special attention.

19The lower socio-economic clases have a particular need for

help in parenting skills. V. Ward (1972) reviewed recent research and showed how early childhood experiences set different styles of inter­action with the world between different social classes. These differ­ences are broad - including cognitive, social, language and motivation - and the lower classes suffer the greatest disadvantages. Schaefer(1972) further documented this disadvantage and cited accumulating evidence which suggests parents have a great influence upon children's total behavior, particularly intellectual and academic achievement.

Youth arid young parents comprise another group with primary needs for parent education. Be Lissovoy (1973) found serious knowledge deficiencies of child development in forty-eight young couples. These young people, from fourteen to nineteen years of age, reported that babies could be toilet trained as early as twenty-four weeks, obedience trained in twenty-six weeks and taught the difference between right and wrong as early as fifty-two weeks. This study encouraged Be Lissovoy to stress the importance of parent education for young parents.

Educating young people for parenthood is not a new idea. Almost forty-five years ago Kennedy (l93l) > writing in the Journal of Home Economics, recommended child development'training for eleventh and twelfth graders where theory could be put to use in laboratory situations. Educating youth for parenthood became a paramount issue after the 1970 White House Conference on Children (Kruger 1973)• Hawkins (l97l) sug­gested that through schools all future parents could be reached.

. BeRosis (l970) strongly encouraged parent education for future parents. She reported that from grades one to twelve, schools provide

. 2 01600 hours of mathematics, not including homework time, and many schools provide not one hour to the understanding of.what makes for satisfying human relationships,

Rosoff (1973) reported the following in regard to a new program for young peoples

The Office of Child Development has awarded a grant to Education Development Center, Cambridge, Massachusetts, to prepare a comprehensive one-year curriculum on child develop­ment for boys and girls in grades 7-12. This course, called "Exploring Childhood,” combines classroom instruction and practical experience working with young children under teacher supervision at day care centers, nursery schools or kindergartens. With the cooperation of the Office of Education and OGD, "Exploring Childhood" will be tested in 200 public schools during the 1973-74- school year (Children Today 1973a, inside cover).

Fathers comprise a third group where there is a need for parent education. Nash (1965, p. 292) wrote, "It appears that in the opinion of some sociologists, American society in particular, and probably Western industrial society in general, can be ipitomized as "mother- centered" in its philosophy of child care," Widespread paternal absence during World War II stimulated research concerning the effects of father absence which in turn resulted in an examining of fathers' roles in parenting (Hetherington and Deur 1971)• Tasch (1952) interviewed 85

fathers who had a total of 160 children. She reported that these fathers did not consider themselves secondary to mothers but saw themselves as active participants in child rearing. They highly valued companionship with their children.

Studies through the 1960*s and early in the 19706s involving both "father-absent" and "father-present" homes have shown that fathers

21play a vital role in their children's social, cognitive and personality development (Hetherington and Deur 1971). Biller and Weiss (1970) re­ported that fathers have more influence than mothers in both masculine and feminine sex role identity.

Recent societal changes - women's movement, working mothers, high divorce rate and experimentation with sex roles - have all spurredan increasing interest in fathers' fitness as a nurturer of youngchildren (Today's Child, April 1973b. Lendon Smith, author of Encyclopedia of Baby and Child Care, contributes a humanistic view as he is quoteds

Raising children isn't woman's work, it's human beings' work. The father who cuddles, changes and feeds the baby - some of the work a woman once did all the time in raising a child - is doing something human for another human being, which is what life really is all about (Today's Child.February 1973a, p. 5)•

Components of Parent EducationThe components of teaching parent education include $ ( l) who

teaches, (2) what is taught and (3) how is it taught. Parent education teachers must meet both professional and personal criteria if they are to function effectively. Professionally, parent educators need a sound knowledge of child development, an awareness of cultural factors affect­ing patterns of family living and a broad understanding of new tech­niques in group dynamics, communications and information theories (Dybwad 195^> Frank 1962, Schaefer 1972). Personally, successful teachers of parents must display sensitivity, understanding and

22thoughtfulness toward people (Pringle 1959~196o). Zaiman (19?2) stressed the importance of modeling since behavior of others is contagious.

What is taught in parent education poses some questions concern­ing the education process itself in regard to parents and the actual content of parent education teachings. Assuming that human behavior is subject to conscious, voluntary control,. Brim (1958) asserted that education appeals to conscious and rational elements, supplies infor­mation, suggests new values to pursue and provides new skills to make decisions. However, parent behavior cannot be fully accounted for by this assumption since there are more factors involved than when one looks at education in general. According to Brim, the individual be­haves in his parent role as part of a social system with the involvement of unconscious factors, cultural values, inter-personal and social controls, group structural determinants and ecological/physical factors. To Brim, this means that it is difficult to say what is the right 'program. Programs, according to him, must vary with the people in­volved and the situations.

Later, Brim (1959) defended parent education against critics who ask how advice to parents can change over periods of time to represent almost opposite positions and yet be based on scientific findings. He pointed out that although there is often a lag between research in child development and subsequent influence on matters relating to children, especially via parent education, new conceptions of desirable children and adults can develop. It is when advice and aims don't change that one should be suspect of "whimsey" and "dogmatism.85 Lang .and Kagan

23(1973) suggested using scientific findings to understand - not to find a mechanical rule for child rearing.

In summing-up the changes in advice to parents which have taken place during the last century, Brim wrotes

Studies of advice to parents have shown that changes have occurred which seem to parallel changes in child rearing objectives of parents and improvements in knowledge of child development. Parent education and some parents now hold the wiser view that each age utilizes the best information it can and that advancing knowledge brings change. As a conse­quence , also, the educator and parent respectively give and receive advice with the mutual understanding that it is al­ways of probable, not ultimate, validity (Brim 1959» P* 2?).

McCandless (1969, p. 291) supported Brim's statements that programs must change to be effective, claiming that society changes and thus alters morality, child-rearing practices and education. "If our society is sick now it is due to the fact that our morals, values' and social organizations do not change at the same rate our technologydoes. We must rear our children here and now for changes."

Writing more specifically than Brim and McCandless, Brown (1958, p. 232) suggested that parent education courses base goals on:

1. goals a family has for itself and children,2. a knowledge of children, and3. the overall goal "to try to help the parent be a better

parent of the kind he already happens to be."Hawkins (l9?l) suggested that the content of a course in child

rearing probably should cover three general areas characterized by the following three questions asked by parents:

1. What are children like?2. What behavior (traits, attitudes, knowledge, skills,

habits) should I develop in my children?3. How can I develop these behaviors?Hawkins suggested that too many parent education classes teach

about children but not how to rear children.Closely related to content is methodology in teaching parent

education. Dybwad (195^) lists two concepts of.importance to method­ology:

1. Attitudes and feelings are as important as intellectual content,

2. Knowledge of group dynamics is necessary.Much of what the literature has to say concerning methods in parent education suggests a group approach. Mace (1969) strongly urged group teaching and learning plus cooperative nurseries where parents can see children interacting.

Successful group approaches are reported frequently. Several examples involve problem-oriented children. Joelson (1972) reported continuing and progressive success in a parental group program since 1969 at the North Shore Child Guidance Center in Chicago, a mental health facility for children. The program has resulted in fewer parents withdrawing children from the clinic program.

■ The Devereaux Day School in Scottsdale, Arizona treats children with learning disabilities and emotional problems. According to McWhirter (l9?2), the school has included a parent program under its comprehensive approach to treatment of the children, The results have

25shown that three-fourths of the parents are involved actively in the program and indicate that the experience has been both beneficial and informative. Teachers report positive behavioral changes in the chil­dren whose parents are regularly involved. Before the program, teachers were burdened by questions and fears of anxiety-ridden parents. After the program started, more realistic problems were then brought to the teachers.

Another group approach is described by Christensen (1972).Group modality in counseling is when a model session is done in front of large groups of parents and teachers. Out of any given group, it is estimated that about 80 to 90 percent of the parents make direct use of information that the family in focus receives.

Effective and measurable results are reported from some current parent education programs which have shown the emerging role of parents as educators. This has had a particular impact on the low-income children in our society. Listed are several active programs:

1. Mothers Training Project in Champaign-Urbana, Illinois • (Badger 19?l)

2. Mother-Child Home Program in New York State (Levenstein, Kochman, Roth 1973)•

3. Parent Co-op Nursery School in Everett, Washington (McNeil 1972) '

4. Parent Education in Florida (Gordon 1970a).The basic principles involved in these programs are: teaching

parents how to teach cognitive, language and competence skills to their

26children! providing opportunities for parents to work and interact with other children; offering parents an opportunity to meet together if desired; providing home visits and tutoring methods. Results have not only shown increased competencies in the children but more out­going, self-confident adults.

Badger reported that the Ghampaign-Urbana project demonstrates the importance of structure in planning and well-defined goals. It also demonstrates the importance of time in changing attitudes.

Research and Evaluation A major movement in parent education today is research and

evaluation. There is a dearth of studies which assess parent educa­tion. Endres and Evans (1968) discussed, the difficulty in conducting experimental research which will evaluate the effectiveness of parent education in achieving its aims. They further stated that evaluation in the field has not only come late, but it is criticized as unsound since evaluation attempts rely heavily on participant assessment rather than on observations and reports of unbiased and uninvolved observers. Direct and extensive observations of parent-child interactions in real- life situations would probably yield the most valid data.

Another difficulty in conducting research in this field is selecting criteria on which to evaluate. Both DeRosis (19?0) and Hanford (1969) have suggested studying more well-adjusted families to discover the concomitants to adequate child rearing. Brim (195?) criticized parent education's failure to develop and use sound research design and instruments. Much of what is done, according to Brim, is

27pseudo-scientific and subjective where evaluation is based on whether or not parents liked the program and would they return, or where those responsible for the program provide personal opinion. Brim urged sound research designs with possible replication and adequate control over variables.

In reviewing the literature on evaluation of parent education programs, Ridenour (1955) found more opinions than evaluations. Even in those cases where there was some degree of objectivity, the "valueH had been taken out of "evaluate" in an effort to control the multi­plicity of factors with which the evaluator must deal. She has identi­fied two major criteria in everyday use: (l) popularity (demand - if itis not popular, it is not effective) and (2) opinion of authorities (if it is needed, it is valuable). There's a frustration, Ridenour felt, at our "inability" to "prove" the value of parent education. She herself claimed to be going "out on a limb” when she said the demand and opinion give us a reasonably good guide to effectiveness,

Summary of the Review of LiteratureIt would appear that parent education has been a concern of pro­

fessionals in all disciplines since the 1890's, with more and more at­tention being given to it since the 1930's. Growing responsibilities of parenthood, due to rapid social change and expanding research in the area of development and learning during the early years, have resulted in increased interest in the vital importance of parent education in recent years.

28A major concern of parent education is its effectiveness in

improving parenting skills, reaching people who need it and teaching it successfully. More recently, attention has been given to establish­ing comprehensive systems where all family members can turn to for family education.

Several studies were cited correlating democratic/child- oriented parents with better-adjusted children but there appears to be little research in regard to how parent education has had an effect in changing attitudes of parents and then ultimately parents' and children's behavior.

Specific groups, namely lower socio-economic classes, youth and fathers, are identified as in particular need of parent education; however, all parents can and do need to improve parenting skills. There is a current impetus to reach youth and young parents in order to pre­vent child-rearing problems rather than depending on remedial efforts.

There is a multitude of teaching methods available to profes­sionals involved in parent education. The advisability of a given method varies pith the people involved in programs and their particular needs. What seems to be important is that parent education utilises the advancing knowledge of each age and reflects changes as they occur in society.

Evaluation and research thus become vital if parent education is to be effective. The preceding review concluded by pointing out two varying concepts of evaluation and research - one calling for sound research designs and a move away from the pseudo-scientific approach,

and another, recognizing the multiplicity of variables involved, sug gesting that demand and opinion serve as guides to effectiveness.

CHAPTER III

PROCEDURE

In reviewing the literature on parent education in America, it was found that the following .are several concerns in parent education’s long,• multifaceted history and perspectives (l) changing•parental child-rearing practices, (2) determining course content and teaching methods and (3) evaluating course content and teaching methods.

This study was primarily designed to assess reported democratic child-rearing practices before and after parent education, A secondary aspect included developing, teaching and evaluating a course,in parent education. The Tucson, Arizona Chapter of the American National Red Cross (aNRC) was the coordinating agency. Reported child-rearing practices were tabulated before and after the course. Data were also collected from the participating .parents to evaluate the course content and teaching methods.

Research Design

SamplingChoice of Setting. According to sources from the Tucson

Chapter of the American Rational Red Cross, somewhere between 450-500 expectant parents annually complete the organization’s Mother and Baby Care Course. Mrs. Beryl Merrill, R.N., Director of Nursing Services, further reported that the Course is designed to give information about

■

31prenatal care, childbirth and infant care. The Course is twelve hours in length. Other goals of the AMRO Course are: (l) to help parents

*become more secure and.independent in making decisions that concern themselves or their new baby and (2) to help reduce concerns and anxieties new parents often experience.

In her association with expectant parents, Mrs. Merrill found an expressed need for additional child development classes to include further information about a child's physical, social, emotional and intellectual growth. Mrs. Merrill also pointed to growing numbers of fathers participating in the baby care classes. With this information, the AKRC served as a source for potential enrollees in a child develop- X meht class.

Subjects. A total of fifteen parents participated in this project. This number included five couples (mothers and fathers) and five mothers. The short form of the McQuire-White Index of Social Status (1955), which utilizes occupation, source of income and educa­tion, was used to determine socio-economic status. The actual scores ranged from 25 to 48. McQuire-White's - range for middle class is 25 to 51. A more detailed description of" the subjects can be found in Table 1.

In all the families represented, both mother and father lived at home with no in-laws or outsiders living permanently at home. The parents together had twelve children. Table 2 gives the number of children in each family.

32

TABLE 1CHARACTERISTICS OF THE SAMPLE

A/re Number of Fathers3, Number of MothersUnder 25 2 6Between 25 and 30 4 4Over 30 2 0

EmploymentEmployed 8 1Unemployed 0 9

Level of EducationHigh school graduate 3 2One to three years of college 3 5College graduate 1 2Graduate school 1 1

Child Development TrainingFormal*3 1 6Informal0 7 4

a. Included are three fathers whose wives participated in the study. These three fathers responded to the Personal Data Sheet and the Child-Rearing Questionnaire pretest only.

b. Defined in present study as having had child development courses in high school or college.

c. Defined in present study as having been exposed to mass media and influenced by family/friends.

TABL2 2NUMBER OF CHILDREN IN FAMILIES

Number of Children3, Familie;

1 52 23 1

Expecting child 2

a. Children's ages ranged from 8 weeks to years.

MethodLate in 1973» the plans for this study/course were discussed

with the ANEC director of nursing services. After appropriate approval from ANRC administration, an organizational meeting for parents was planned on January 23, 1974 at 7:00 p.m.

Nine days prior to the organizational meeting, a letter was mailed to approximately one hundred parents who had previously partici­pated in ANRC baby care classes during the months of September through December, 1973* The letter briefly described the course including its content, the time involved, the meeting place and the date of the organizational meeting. (See Appendix A for a copy of the letter.)

Only four persons attended the organizational meeting: onemother, the ANRC director of nursing, the ANRC volunteer chairman and

34

the investigator in this study. The possible contributing reasons for the lack of attendance were discussed. They were: (l) the impersonalaspect of the letter, (2) the current gasoline shortage, (3) the lack of adequate public transportation, (4) difficulty in finding the meeting place and (5) the meeting place was quite a distance from some parts of Tucson.

Despite the discouragement of this first meeting, the AliRG personnel felt that another effort should be made to.begin classes.The ANRC volunteer chairman, herself a mother interested in the course and a. registered nurse who had taught baby care classes, suggested making personal contact with some of the parents to whom letters had been sent. She and the director of nursing selected about thirty names. They and the investigator in this study made personal phone calls to these parents informing them of another meeting - a week later on Wednesday, January 30, 1974.

Eight mothers and two fathers attended this second organiza­tional meeting. After a discussion concerning the planned five-week course, the parents present showed interest in attending5 thus, plans were made to begin classes with the first session starting two weeks later.

Commencing on Wednesday, February 13, 1974 at 7=30 p.m., five two-hour, weekly sessions were scheduled. These evening classes met in a classroom at the Red Cross headquarters.' The room was well lighted and equipped with comfortable chairs and a rectangular table, large enough to seat around it at least 15-20 people. There was adequate

35

space for displaying visual aids. Also available were a blackboard and audio-visual equipment.

Other physical aspects easily accessible were rest rooms and water fountains. Light refreshments, coffee, tea, fruit juice and snack-crackers, were available at each session. Cribs and bassinettes were provided if parents brought their babies.

At the first session a Personal Data Sheet and the Child Bear­ing Questionnaire were administered to the parents in attendance. The Personal Data Sheet elicited the following information: fathers' andmothers' occupations, sources of income, ethnicity and country of birth, a-ges, levels of education and sources of child-rearing infor­mation, Also obtained.were: number and ages of children, whether ornot both parents were living at home and whether or not there were in-laws or outsiders living permanently at home, (See Appendix B for copy of the Personal Data Sheet.) The Child Rearing Questionnaire used is described later under the heading Instrumentation.

At the second session both the Child-Rearing Questionnaire and Personal Data Sheet were administered again to parents who did not attend the first session. Six of the mothers who attended the first session without their husbands asked to take home the questionnaire for their husbands to answer. These questionnaires were returned at the second session.

At the fifth and final session, data were again obtained from re-administering the Child-Rearing Questionnaire. The parents were also asked to respond to a Course Evaluation Questionnaire which is described under the heading Instrumentation.

36

Personal data were obtained from eighteen parents, eight couples and two mothers. Pre and post data from the Child-Rearing Questionnaire were obtained from ten mothers and five fathers. Sixteen parents re­sponded to the written evaluation of the course.

Table 3 shows the attendance at each session. Table 4 shows the number of individual responses to the three data gathering instru­ments. The inconsistent N's are the result of erratic attendance at sessions.

The investigator in this study coordinated personally with the ANRC director of nursing services in planning all aspects of this program. Classes were developed and taught by the investigator. The ANRC director of nursing services, to assist in planning, attended the organizational meetings and the first two class sessions.

TABLE 3 ATTENDANCE AT SESSIONS

Sessions Fathers Mothers1 1 ?2 5 103 4 94 3 55 5 12

37

TABLE 4:tu:ibeb o p f a t h e r s Aire m others r e s p c i t i h g to q u e s t io h h a ir e s

Questionnaires Personal Data Sheet Course Evaluation Questionnaire Child-Rearing Questionnaire: Pre

Post

others8a

58a

5

Methers 10 n b 10 10

a. Included are three fathers whose wives participated in the study.

b. One mother attended only two sessions, thus was not included in parents group (15) who participated fully.

Course ContentRobert P. Hawkins, consultant for the School Adjustment Program

and director of the School Adjustment Research Project for the Kalamazoo (Michigan) Valley Intermediate School District, proposed a course in child rearing which teaches not only about children but how to rear them (Hawkins 19?l). He suggested parent education courses should in­clude the following: (l) what children are like, (2) what behaviorshould be developed in a child and (3) how is this behavior developed.It was from Hawkins' broad base that the course taught in this study was designed.

38The course included broad; general themes: ( l ) what children

are like physically, emotionally and intellectually with an emphasis on the first two years of life, (2) guidance principles, (3) intel­lectual and language development, (4) social development and (5) physical and emotional development.

These broad subjects on what children are like and how they develop were reinforced by focusing on ways to foster adequate development and acceptable behavior. In addition to "talking about" ways to accomplish the "how" aspects of child rearing were "demonstra-

itions and displays" on: (l) creative activities in the home, (2) useof children's books, (3) selection of toys and (4) homemade toys. Parents were given the opportunity to observe children in several pre-school situations in Tucson. (Only one parent observed in a nursery school.) Books and magazines on child rearing were reviewed and suggested for future reading. Sach parent was given a copy of four publications on child rearing issued from the Cooperative Ex­tension Service. .

Visual aids included the use of the blackboard, mounted clip­pings of relevance to the course and the viewing of two films.

Each session also included a discussion of five individual topics: (l) parent education, (2) television and its effects onchildren, (3) changing sex roles and sex identity, (4) day care and pre-school needs and (5) child abuse.

The investigator chose these topics because of their current interest and relevance to children today. Parent education seemed of

utmost importance because of the nature of the study itself. Television consumes nearly one fourth of our existence (Rue 1974). "A principal finding is clears television is a major activity for children; most watch every day for at least two hours” (Hebert, Neale, Davidson 1973>

P. 9). .Questioning of previously stereotyped sex roles and sex role

identity sparked by the recent women’s movement, has created an in­creasing interest in male/female roles. The advent of great numbers of working mothers has also increased interest in the changing roles of mothers and fathers. Orth (1973) reports that nearly one third of all mothers with pre-school children work. One half of all mothers with children from eight to fourteen are working. For these same reasons, day care and pre-school have become of prime concern to parents. Another factor which has made child care of vital interest is research showing the great importance of the early learning years (Dees, n.d,). Hymes (1962, p. 9) wrote, "Good school programs during these years have a, unique charge to help parents understand their children, how they grow and how they learn and why they behave as they do."

Child abuse has received enough attention of late to warrant the establishment of a National Center on Child Abuse and Neglect within the Children’s Bureau, Office of Child Development (Children Today 1974. p. 27). Stoener (1972) reports that physical abuse of

children in the United.States is roughly estimated at 25,000 cases a year by some and the total for all forms of mistreatment at 250,000.

(See Appendix 0 for a brief session-by-session outline of the course content.)

Instrumentation Two instruments were used in this studyi A Child-Rearing

Questionnaire and a revised Illinois Course Evaluation Questionnaire.

Child-Rearing: QuestionnaireA Child-Rearing Questionnaire was used to investigate the

reported child-rearing practices of the parents enrolled in this parent education course. Edna Earl Christmas (1965) developed the questionnaire when she studied lower and middle-class mothers to determine Which of the two groups were the most democratic, indulgent and authoritarian in their child-rearing practices. The instrument consists of twenty situational questions concerning the behavior of a child which elicits from the pa,rent either an authoritarian, a democratic or an indulgent response. Christmas reported that the instrument was validated with the help of eleven child development instructors at Florida State University. The pretest of the question­naire to ascertain a measure of reliability involved thirty adolescent males and females from lower income families. A measure of reliability, for the males was found to be .80 as compared with a value of .71 for the female subjects. As the result of the actual study, an index of reliability was computed using the following formulas

412 X' N of Agreements

Total N of Items MentionedThe- measure of reliability was based on the following

pairs of items s , 1 and 19, 12 and 16, 13 and 18,. This instrument was constructed so that the second item, would act as a check on the first item of each pair listed.The computation of the index of reliability revealed as percentage of agreement of ,80 and .73 for the middleand lower income groups respectively. The percentageof agreement for the total group was .77 (Christmas 1965, pp. 24-25).

(See Appendix D for copy of Child-Rearing Questionnaire.)

Illinois Course Evaluation QuestionnaireA revision of the Illinois Course Evaluation Questionnaire

(ESQ) was administered to parents to assess the course, content and methods used in teaching this course in parent education. Aleamoni and Spencer (l97l), in discussing the original development of the CEQ, said it was designed to measure the effectiveness of instruction by soliciting student opinions, The original CEQ contains negative and positive statements totaling fifty items in the following subsets;(l) general course, (2) method of instruction, (3) course content,(4) interest and attention, (5) instructor and (6) other (homework,tests).

Reliability was calculated by the Guilford split-half method used on negative versus positive items yielding correlations of .849. Correction for length was made by Spearman-Brown resulting in r = .92. Second split-half resulted in r = ,865, r - .93. ICuder-Richardson Formula 21 (K-R 2l) was computed for sixteen different courses with the following results? K-R 21 = .931, SD of .02, By the nature of

42

K-E 21, Aleamoni and Spencer state the reliability was underestimated. All available validating evidence (unpublished studies), according to Aleamoni and Spencer, indicates that the CEQ does indeed identify courses that are considered to be very good or very bad.

The investigator in the present study chose to use Form 72, ashortened form of the original CEQ, which contains twenty-five items.Three items were eliminated because they were not relevant to thisparticular course. The resulting twenty-two questions included thefollowing breakdown of items:

general course content = 4 itemsmethod of instruction = 3 itemscourse content = 4 itemsinterest and attention = 4 itemsinstructor = 7 items

The CEQ, Form 72 also elicits personal comments on course eval­uation. Added to these were three questions which related directly to specific subjects in this particular parent education class. Parents were asked to rank, in order of interest, the subjects of current interest which were discussed, to indicate the general area of child development which was most helpful to them and to suggest which general area needed more elaboration.

When administering the CEQ the parents were asked to respond to each question by checking one of the following; strongly agree (SA), agree (A), disagree (D) or strongly disagree (SD). In scoring, the positive and negative items were scored as in the following example;

I would take another course that was taughtthis way. SA A D SD

(Positive scoring) 4 3 2 1

Not much was gained by taking this course. SA A D SD(Negative scoring) 1 2 3 4

The mean scores were computed fo.r each subset and for the total course. Thus, as scored, a scale of 1 to 4 was used with the highest possible score being 4.

(See Appendix E for a copy of the revised Course Evaluation Questionnaire used in the present study.)

Data AnalysisIn order to test the hypotheses, non-parametric tests were used

because of the small sample size and the ordinal level of data collected (See Siegel 1956). Hypotheses 1A and 1C were tested by using the Wilcoxon-Matched-Pair-Signed-Banks test for related groups. Hypotheses IB, 2A and 2B were tested by using the Mann--Whitney U test for inde­pendent groups.

CHAPTER IV

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

After the five weekly parent education sessions ended, the data were tabulated, computed and analyzed. The results are reported below as is the evaluation of the course.

Results

Hypothesis 1A .Hypothesis 1A stated, "There are differences in reported

democratic child-rearing practices before and after parent education in the following regard: parents report more democratic responsesafter parent education."

To test' this hypothesis the Wilcoxon-Matched-Pairs-Signed-Ranks test for related groups was used. No differences between parents' democratic scores before and after parent education were found.

Research Hypothesis 1A was not supported.

Hypothesis IBHypothesis IB stated, "There are differences in reported

democratic child-rearing practices before and after parent education in the following regard: mothers report more democratic responses thanfathers after parent education."

44

'+5'To test this hypothesis, the differences in democratic scores

of mothers and fathers from pre to posttest were ranked and the Mann Whitney U test was used. Mothers gained more than fathers from pre to posttest. In order to reject the null hypothesis for this size sample,U must be less than or equal to 8. II for this study was 7 ( p'51025) •

Research Hypothesis 13 was supported.

Hypothesis 10Hypothesis 10 stated, "There are differences in reported demo­

cratic child-rearing practices before and after parent education in the following regard: individual mothers report more democratic responsesthan respective fathers after parent education. '*

To test this hypothesis the Wilcoxon-Matched-Pairs-Signed-Ranks test for related groups was used. There were no differences in the democratic score gains between mothers and fathers respectively.

Research hypothesis 10 was not supported.

Hypothesis 2AHypothesis 2A stated, "There are pretest differences in reported

democratic child-rearing practices in the following regard: parents whohave attained a higher education level report more democratic responsesthan parents who have attained a lower level of education."

To test this hypothesis the Mann-Whitney U test was used. In order to reject the null hypothesis for this size sample, U must be less than or equal to 9* U for this study was 6 ( p snOl).

Research Hypothesis 2A was supported.

'46Hypothesis 2B

Hypothesis 2B stated, "There are pretest differences in reported democratic child-rearing practices in the following regards parents with formal child development training report more democratic responses than parents with informal child development training." Formal child development training was defined in this study as child development courses in high school or college while informal training included exposure to mass media and influence from family/friends.

To test this hypothesis the Mann-Whitney U test was used. No differences in pretest democratic scores between parents with formal or informal child development training were found.

Research Hypothesis 2B was not supported.(See Appendix F for pre and post scores as reported by parents.)

Course EvaluationSixteen parents responded to the Course Evaluation Questionnaire

(CEQ), with the following results;1, With a scale of 1 - 4, the highest value being 4, the

CEQ results, reported in mean scores, were:General Course Attitude = 3•35 •Method of Instruction = 3-^9

- Course Content - 3•58Interest and Attention = 3.47Instruction - 3.74

The overall mean score for the course was 3.52.2. In order of value, the following subject of current interest

were ranked accordingly:

4?1st - Parent Education 2nd - Sex Roles 3rd - Television4th - Day Care and Pre-school Needs 5th - Child Abuse

3. In order of helpfulness to the parents, the following general areas of child development were ranked accord­ingly $1st - Setting the Stage for Children 2nd - Guidance3rd - Social Development and Creativity 4th - Intellectual and Language Development 5th - Physical and Emotional Development

4, The parents were asked to write personal comments re­garding teacher effectiveness and. general course value.All but one of the parents responded. From these general comments, several salient points are:

The course was not long enough. Too much material was covered in the short time. (Seven parents of fifteen replies.)A course of this nature needs to allow for more involvement and discussion on the part of the participants. Five parents suggested that more class participation would have added to the value of the sessions. (Five parents.)There was a need for more outside reading suggestions. (Two parents.)Questionnaires are irrelevant and redundant. (One parent.)

Discussion of .Results The review of literature for the present study included many

studies- which correlated democratic child rearing with well-adjusted children. If indeed a goal in our society is to rear well-adjusted

48children, then parent education should have as one of its goals that of promoting democratic child-rearing practices. It would appear from the data of this' study that no gains in democratic scores were made; however, it must be pointed out that from the beginning, the parents involved were basically democratic. This can best be demonstrated by comparing the democratic scores of the middle-class mothers in the Christmas (1965) and Silva (l9?l) studies with those from the present study:

Christmas......... . , 16.8Silva . ......... 15.9-present study . . . . . . 15.9 (pre-post mean)

There appears to have been a "ceiling effect" in the Child-Rearing Questionnaire used for this study in that a majority of the subjects scored very high in regard to democratic scores. When a measure with a ceiling effect.is used as a pretest in a pre-posttest study, no gains are possible and, therefore, no pre-post differences will be observed. This statistical artifact could hide the real effects of the treatment.

Although there,appeared to be no democratic score gains before and after parent education, the following comments from several parents indicate that parent education in this study did have some positive effects on parents' attitudes toward and understanding of children1

By taking- this course a lot of my opinions on child rearing have been changed. This course helped me to look at children and try to relate their actions to subjects we covered in class.

(The) course gave me encouragement and confidence (more than before), (l; feel more secure as a future parent, Everyparent should take a class like this or at least read, read, read.

It definitely made me see the. child as a child and his viewpoints just a little clearer. I can’t say it was all interesting and valuable.

When I first came to this class, I expected to be bored stiff and was quite pleasantly surprised. I had gotten to the point with my son where being a parent was beginning to be more of a hassle than a joy. It has taught me.to treat my child as an individual and not as someone to take my frustrations out on when things are not right with me.This course taught me to treat my child as another person with the same types of feelings as an adult.

Without exception, the parents expressed viewpoints indicating positive response to the course as having met some of their needs as parents or future parents.

The review of literature revealed an.apparent lack of research revealing how mothers and fathers react to parent education; thus, the investigator in this study wished to explore this question. Data from the present study did not show that individual mothers made more gains in democratic scores than respective fathers; however, mothers as a group made more gains than fathers as a group. This at first appeared to be inconsistent but a look at the raw data showed that two of the mothers who reported democratic score gains from pre to posttesting did not have husbands responding in posttests. It should also be noted that in both pre and posttesting fathers more than mothers departed from test instructions. These discrepancies included leaving questions unanswered, adding a fourth response and indicating two responses on a question.Three fathers verbally indicated to the investigator negative feelings toward the evaluative tests«

Despite the limitations of the data, there is a suggestion that mothers may be more responsive to parent education than fathers. This

50is not only suggested by the actual democratic score gains on the part of mothers but also by the larger number of mothers enrolled in the class. At the onset of this particular parent education course, only two fathers were enrolled. Mothers attending the first class all re­quested that they be given questionnaires for their husbands' responses. Three more fathers, with mothers’ encouragement, enrolled and attended regularly. In two situations'where fathers were unable to attend, the , mothers repeatedly commented that they wished their husbands could become involved in a class of this nature.

Data from the present study reinforced previous findings of Shoben (1949) and - S chae f er' and Bell (1958) that parents having attained higher education levels report more democratic attitudes toward child rearing. There does seem to be' converging evidence that the higher the education level of parents the more democratic are child-rearing practices. Christmas (1965) suggests this correlation even when con­trolling for social class.

In regard to parents' child development training, this study's data did not support the hypothesis that formal child development train­ing would result in more democratic scores than informal child develop­ment training. This finding departs somewhat from previous studies which did show a relationship between democratic child-rearing practices and formal child development training. Both Kerns (1967) and Silva (l97l) reported this relationship, Silva not only related training but also factual knowledge of child development, finding that mothers displaying greater knowledge also reported more democratic attitudes.Huff (1968), not finding any significant differences in attitudes,

(

51"before and after child development courses, suggested that maturation and a general college education had more effect. The data from the present study merely reflects a level of training with no regard to quality and quantity of that training.

The mean score computed from the Course Evaluation Questionnaire would indicate relatively high rating for this course as evaluated "by the parents. Aleamoni and Spencer (l97l) stated that the reliability of scores on the questionnaire are related to the size of the group tested and, therefore, small group,.results should be considered highly tentative. Since there are no norms established for the questionnaire as it was revised for this study, there is no way to compare scores.

The parents* personal comments appear to have been straight­forward in that they included both negative and positive aspect. In the negative vein there appeared to be a general feeling that too much material was covered in too short a time. Also, there seemed to be a desire for more group discussion and participation. There were also suggestions that more visual aids be used and teaching techniques be varied more.

Comments from parents ranged from "down to earth" to a desire for "more facts and fast opinions.” "Instructor didn't have a definite method of child rearing," wrote one parent.. This same parent wrote that the course (and the tests) were redundant, "although my being here shows I enjoyed the course and feel my time was well spent."

V52

LimitationsIn this study, the research design and instrumentation problems

were such that any conclusions or generalizations are limited. A one- group, pretest-posttest design is described by Campbell and Stanley (1968) as inherently weak because of extraneous variables which can jeopardize both internal and external validity,

A second limiting problem is the small sample. Erratic attend­ance at the sessions may have had some effect on data collecting, e.g., difficulty in evaluating total course when not all classes were at­tended by all parents.

Thirdly, the inherent quality of the Child-Rearing Questionnaire offered extreme options in reporting attitudes which may not have . elicited true responses,

A fourth consideration is the aspect of reporting child-rearing attitudes. It is imperative to differentiate between "reported" and "actual" child-rearing attitudes as well as "attitudes" and "actual behavior." Brown (1958) cited studies which indicate what a parent does is more important than the underlying attitude.

CHAPTER V

CONCLUSIONS AMD IMPLICATIONS

Turning back to the original research problem and question, the purpose of this study was to explore parent education - (l) its effects on changing parents' democratic attitudes toward child rearing and (2) its evaluation as assessed by- participating parents.

ConclusionsThe parent education course as presented in the present study

had no great effect on changing parents reported, democratic attitudes in general; however, there is a strong suggestion that mothers are more receptive to both parent education and the changing to more demo-1 cratic attitudes than -fathers.

Data supported that parents with higher education levels report more democratic child-rearing attitudes than those with lower-level education. There was no relationship between formal/informal child development training and reported democratic attitudes.

Parents' assessment of the course revealed personal" comments which indicated a greater understanding toward children and their be­havior. Data showed that parents rated the course - its content, teaching techniques and instructor - high; however, suggestions were made to delimit the amount of material and to vary teaching methods employing more visual aids and group discussion.

53

Implications

This study has some implications to consider in regard to developing and evaluating parent education. It identified the extreme ■ difficulty in adequately' measuring the effects of parent education. Specific goals, if indeed they could even he measured adequately, can become, if not secondary, at least complementary to the overall goal of parent education. This does not imply that specific goals and effects should not be attempted but It suggests that there is value in parents "getting-together" to discuss and learn about children as well as being open to ideas on how to rear children.

Brim (1958) discussed the difficulty in saying what is the "right program” since programs should vary with the people involved. Parents involved in parent education can and should be able to evaluate according to their needs. Teachers of parent education can learn from, these parents, thus incorporating parents' ideas into new programs.This, implies, then, the need for constantly changing programs, not only varying with the people involved but also with cultural and societal needs.

A basic implication is, then, that parent education does require stringent, thoughtful evaluation not only to be effective, but to provide continuing information to those developing programs as to what makes for effectiveness. This evaluation may need to be a balance between sound research designs and measuring instruments, as suggested by Brim (195?) and the more pseudo-scientific approach (Ridenour 1955) in which demand and opinion play some part in determining effectiveness.

55This study, with its parent education course and evaluation,

could serve as a guide for designing and planning future parent edu­cation programs with particular value to an organization like the American National Red Gross. Parents' responses implied the need, for more specific than general information with an emphasis on their current needs.

' Stott and Person (l95l) and Mannino et al. (1968) suggested that while the major objective of parent education has always been modifying parents’ attitudes, the ultimate goal is to produce positive changes in children's behavior and'attitudes. Badger (1971), when discussing the success of the parent education program in Champaign- Urbana, Illinois, stressed the importance of time in changing atti­tudes .

The short term of this study does indeed limit any conclusions concerning attitudinal change; and if, as Endres and Evans (1968) suggest, direct and■extensive observation of parent-child interactions in real life situations could have been accomplished, more adequate assessment of the course's effectiveness could have been made.

Suggestions for Further Research

This study suggests the need for continuing research in evalu­ating parent education. Despite the limitations of research in this field, each study adds to further understanding and promotes an aware­ness of the needs to constantly change and vary programs. Further research is needed to identify what programs are best for specific

g r o u p s , i.e.. adolescents, young p a r e n t s , mothers, fathers, older parents,

etc.

While research has been done which correlates specific parental

attitudes with specific childrens' behavior, there is a continuing need

to study how parent education might further the kinds of attitudes which

foster the development of well-adjusted children. Parent educators

might consider studying more families with well-adjusted children in

order to identify concomitants which could serve to aid in developing

parent education programs.

If specific effects of parent education are to be studied, direct

observation of resulting parent-child interactions should ideally be

employed; however, this is often difficult if not impossible. Thus,

there remains a continuing need to develop more adequate measuring

instruments for reporting attitudes toward child rearing.

M o t h e r s ’ and fathers' reactions need further researching in

regard to interest and participation in parent education. The present

study showed that mothers were not only more interested in parent

education for themselves and their husbands but they gain e d more de m o ­

cratic attitudes after parent education than did fathers. Further s u p ­

port of this finding is needed.

. APPENDIX A

LETTER O F AUTHORIZATION

57

58

^Jucion C^Laptep

OEIBJSna 13118321 ESI 68988'D Jcploru 623-0541 222 S o u th Chernj S i venue Vucion, S r izo n a 85719

January 14, 1974

• Dear Parents,The Tucson Chapter of the American Red Cross, in cooperation with a grad­uate student from the University of Arizona, is planning a course in child development/ An organizational meeting is scheduled for Wednesday,January 23 at 7:00 p.m. at the Red Cross headquarters. The classes, should there be enough parents enrolled, will begin sometime in February, with weekly classes for five weeks.In recent months you have been enrolled in a Red Cross sponsored class in pre and post natal care. There has been increasing interest by parents, like yourselves, to further learn about child development as it applies particularly to the early years of a child1 s life. The. course, as tenta­tively planned, will take a practical approach to every day child rearing as founded on theory and research. Through talks, group discussion, and demonstrations, there will be suggestions as to how parents can meet the needs of their children. Demonstrations will include home creativeactivities and children1s literature.The graduate student planning and teaching the course will be doing so aspartial fulfillment of her Master1 s of Science degree in Home Economics»She is a student majoring in Child Development and Family Relations in the School of Home Economics at the University.

Growing knowledge and awareness of the importance of a child1 s early life, coupled with parents* needs, make courses such as this in demand. It is hoped that you will be able to participate.

Organizational Meeting: Wednesday, January 23, 1974 - 7:00 p.m. •American Red Cross Headquarters 222 South Cherry Avenue Tucson, Arizona

Sincerely,

Jean Kearns, Ph. D. Professor, Child Development

and Family Relations University of Arizona

Susan Sims, R. N.Volunteer Chairman,Mother and Baby Care Program

APPENDIX B

PERSONAL DATA SHEET

We need to know something about you and your family in order to use wisely the information you will be giving.

Please fill in the appropriate information for the following:Your spouse's occupationYour occupation_Your ethnic group.Your spouse's ethnic group. Your country of birth_____Your spouse's country of birth.Number of children___________________ Boys___________ Girls.Ages of boys_______________________ Ages of girls__________

Please check the appropriate response for each of the following

Your spouse's main source of income: monthly or weekly salary ( ) public relief ( ) profits from business ( ) savings and investment ( ) odd jobs, seasonal work ( )

59

Your main source of income:monthly or weekly salary ( ) public relief ( ) profits from business ( ) savings and investment ( ) odd jobs, seasonal work ( )

Your age:under twenty-five ( ) between twenty-five and thirty ( )between thirty and thirty-five ( )between thirty-five and forty ( ) over forty ( )

Are both parents living at home? Yes ( ) No ( ) Are there in-laws living at home? Yes ( ) No ( )Are there outsiders living at home? Yes ( ) No ( )Your years of schooling:

eighth grade graduate ( )one to three years of high school ( )high school graduate ( )one to three years of college ( )college graduate ( )graduate school ( ) degree ( )

61Your spouse's years of schooling?

eighth grade graduate ( )one to three years of high school ( )high school graduate ( )one to three years of college ( )college graduate ( )graduate school ( ) degree ( )

How have you obtained your child rearing education?child development course in high school ( )child development course in college ( )child development and child care course offered by any publicor private organization ( )popular books, such as Dr. Spock, Gesell ( )articles in popular magazines ( )pamphlets ( )columns in newspapers ( )radio and TV programs ( )own mother's and friends' advice ( )other (please list)

APPENDIX C

AN OVERVIEW $ A FIVE-SESSION COURSE IN PARENT EDUCATION

Introduction to CourseIn a broad sense, the course views the total child - his

physical, emotional, social and intellectual development, with an emphasis on the pre-school years. Specifically, the discussions center around ways that parents can set the stage and provide for an environment conducive to a child's total development.

Session 1Interest Subject - "Parent Education"

growing difficulties of being a parent today due to fast changing society and increasing knowledge about the impor­tance of the early years of a child's lifesociety does little to train for parenthood

General Subject - "Setting the Stage for Children"provide environment which meets the needs of children for optimum developmentan infant, though dependent and egocentric, is not just a "blob" but rather a complex individual ready to learn; sen­sitive to sight, sound, taste, all needing stimulation but .balanced with meeting physical needs in loving/nurturing environmentunderstanding children is key to providing for their needsfirst four years of child's life considered important fortotal development with emphasis on the first eighteen months

Session 2Interest Subject - "Television and Its Effect on Children"

62

63

more persuasive and pervasive than any other mediaj it’s instant in sound and scene at no cost or effort as far as children are concernedfindings are inconclusive and many variables exist but there seems to be a link between violence and aggressive acts; cartoons more violent than TV adult dramas and moviesvalue systems are developed through television; stereotyping donetelevision primarily aimed toward adults but children watch as much if not more than adults; children preceive differentlytelevision has many pluses; parents need to take responsible position in supervising viewing and interacting with child (muppets, Big Bird, Batman teach children - where are the real, live people?)

General Subject - "Guidance”guidance is total sphere of adult/child relationships including all adults do for or with childrens setting limits, setting the stage, giving acceptable choices, discipline, punishment.discipline - action directed toward the child with emphasis on helping child toward self-disciplinepunishment - consequences of not accepting limitsacceptable choices are important; allow child to learn to live with his choices and natural consequencesimportant to separate "deed from doer”mutual respect necessary; understanding needed before there can be mutual respectchildren are inexperienced and untrained; they need adult guidance; this includes "freedom but not license"

Session 3 .Interest Subject - "Changing Sex Roles and Sex Role Identity”

changing sex roles in our society need to rear children to value choices of others

64-

in fairness we should no longer slant the way we rear our children, especially in the early yearscontroversy over what is feminine and masculine; is there a natural difference or are differences learnedrole of father discussed in terms of recent research concerning significance of his role in child rearing

General Subject - "Intellectual Development""Language Development"

cognition is activity of coming to know and understandlanguage is all means of communicationboth start to develop the day an infant is born; are learned through interactions with people and enviornmentmuch of what parents teach is taught "on the fly"children learn thropgh experiences with things; senses play important roledevelopment of speech is a must for social relationships and learninggains require environmental support (e.g. walks, cause-effect conversations, encouraging children to ask for things,'talking about doing things, reading books)Demonstration - review of 15-20 books showing how each one can encourage concept and language development and provide enjoyment and child/adult interaction

Session 4Interest Subject - "Day Care and Pre-School Needs Today"

we are a society which encourages women to work but do little to provide adequate child careno three-year-old child in our country should be left alone to care for himselfwide range of child care facilitiesadequate day care is developmental care, not mere custodial care

coordinated efforts needed in communities to provide adequate services and awarenessindividual parents considering day care or pre-school need to consider child's needs and family situation

General Subject - "Social Development""Creative Activities”

a social person behaves in approved manner, plays the role society prescribes for him, has favorable attitudes toward people and social activities

. a child develops from a dependent Infant, completely egocentric, to a social entity through the: exploring twos

social-stretching threes g, . pal-companion fours

group-experience fives"play is children's work"adult creative qualities consist of perception, idea exploring, following through with ideas, self-confidence, sensitivity to aesthetic stimuli around them, curiosity and awarenesschildren have many of these qualities; how are these qualities encouraged and developedfor the child "happiness is in the doing" and "doing success­fully"; process is more important than product; adults help but do not "do"

■ Demonstration - showing selection of toys to buy and to make which provide multiple use and versatility; demonstrating activities at home on the preparation and use of play dough, paint and collage

Session 5Interest Subject - "Child Abuse"

need for public awareness which includes knowledge of the thousands of children involved, the causes and the preventive steps needednew laws are now in effect to help the abused childchild abuse includes broad range of mental, physical, emotional, sexual, psychological abuses

General Subject - "Physical Development”"Emotional Development”

physical development includes growth, health, safety, physical skill training (feeding, dressing and washing oneself, toileting, eating, resting, playing)parents need to provide opportunities for training in physical skillsgrowth rapid in early yearshealth and safety are major concerns of parentspossible problem areas - toileting, resting, feedingconcerning emotional development love, fear and anger are major emotions of infancy through two years of ageemotions are strongly associated with parents and thecare and environment provided for childrenother emotions come into play in the later pre-school years - jealousy, rivalry, aggression -parents have great responsibility in child's emotional

. development; family atmosphere builds attitudes and feelings

Conclusionone area of development cannot be separated from another; all are meshed togetherall children are different; all behavior is caused; understanding children and why they behave as they do is imperative for parentsparents are responsible for providing all the needs of children - learning experiences, food, home, friends, toys, creative activities^, love, nurture, patience, understandingparents' needs are important, toochildren are a challenge; parenthood is a challenge; we are not rearing extensions of ourselves but separate human beings - not intellectual wizzards but loving, giving, receiving, coping individuals; parents need to trust themselves and their abilities to rear children

Films •Terrible Twos and Trusting ThreesFrustrating Fours and Fascinating Fives

Handouts for ParentsThe following bulletins issued by the University of Arizona Cooperative Extension and School of Home Economics $Adams, A, Creativity and Children. Bulletin A-59 (February 19?0)Dees, J. Selecting a Nursery School or Day-Care CenterBulletin Q-238 (n,d.).Lopez, N. You and Your Baby's First Year. Bulletin 0,-26? (n.d.) • Martin, C. Meal Time With Small Children. Bulletin Q-236 (n.d.).

Suggestions for Reading Books 8

Dreikurs, R. and V. Soltz. Children: The Challenge.New York: Hawthorn Books, Inc., 1964.Ginott, H. Between Parent and Child. New York: AvonBooks, 1965.Gordon, I. Baby Learning Through Baby Play. New York:St, Martin's Press, 1970a.Gordon, I., B. Guinagh, and R.-Jester. Child Learning Through Child Play. New York: St. Martin's Press, 1972.Hymes, J . The Child Under Six. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1963.Jorde, P. Living and Learning With Children. Stanford Center for Innovation in Research and Education, 1973.

Magazines:Parents Magazine .Bergenfield, N.J. 07621The PTA Magazine •700 N. Rush St.Chicago, 111. 606ll '

68In addition to the above suggestions, the following references were used to develop the course s

Bossard, J. and E„ Boll. The Sociology of Child Development. (4th ed.). New York: Harper and Row, 1966.Hurlock, E. Child Development. - (5th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill, 1972.Keyserling, M. Windows On Day Care. New York: NationalCouncil of Jewish Women, 1972.Lang, Co and J. Kagan, The Real Differences Between the Sexes. Parents Magazine. 68:37. 62-63 (September 1973).Liebert, J ., J. Neale and E, Davidson. The Early Window: Effects of Television on Children and Youth. New York:Pergamon Press, 1973.Smart M. and R. Smart. Children: Development and Relation­ships . New York: The Macmillan Co., 1967.Stant, M. The Young Child. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: PrenticeHall, Inc., 1972.

APPENDIX D

CHILD-REARING QUESTIONNAIRE

DIRECTIONS: Below are some examples of things that sometimeshappen with children. After each example there are three suggestions for solving the problem. Please place a check ( ) by the wav you would handle the problem not the way you think it should be solved.

1. Your child gets angry because you tell him that he cannot go homewith his grandmother. He lies down on the floor, kicks and holdshis breath until he is turning blue in the face. Would you:A. Change your mind and let him go with his grandmother ( )B. Whip him for such behavior ( )C. Ignore him ( )

2. Your child of three is afraid of the dog next door. Would you:A. Force the child to pat the dog anyway ( )B. Try to explain to the child that the dog will not hurt him ( )C. Keep the child away from the dog ( )

3. Your child breaks a toy on purpose. Would you:A. Let him do without such a toy for a while ( )B. Slap him ( )C. Buy him a new one and tell him not to break it ( )

4. A group of children, your child included, are playing in your backyard. Your child gets angry with another child and pushes him down. Would you:A. Ignore the situation ( )B. Yell at him to stop that ( )C. Have the child come into the house and sit in a room alone ( )

5. Your five-year-old child asks you where babies come from. Would youA. Refuse to answer the child by changing the subject and sending

him out to play ( )

70B. Explain to the child in detail where babies come from ( )C. Answer in a simple, truthful manner the child's one question ( )

6. You find your child marking on the wall with his color crayons.Would you:A. Ask the child not to color on the wall anymore ( )B. Explain to the child why he should not color on the wall and

. get him paper to color on ( )C . 1

?. You are trying to teach your three-year-old child to like a variety of foods. He does not want to taste his vegetables, but wants to eat dessert instead. Would you:A. Force the child to taste the vegetables ( )B. Refuse to give the child dessert unless he tastes his

vegetables ( )C. Give the child the dessert and try to get him to eat

vegetables next time ( )8. You want your six-year-old child to learn to swim and you take him

to a pool or pond. Would you:A. Try to help the child to gradually get used to the water ( )B. Give up the idea if the child says he doesn't want to learn

to swim ( )C. Force the child to get into the water immediately ( )

9. Your four-year-old child gets your older child's toy to play with. Would you:A. Have him put to toy up until he asks permission ( )B. Whip him for getting the toy without asking for it ( )C. Let him play with the toy since he already has it ( )

10. Your child's dog dies. Would you:A. Pretend that the dog is probably just lost ( )B. Bury the dog and say nothing about it to the child ( )C. Explain to the child that the dog is dead ( )

11. Your child is playing and bedtime comes. Would you:A. Pick the child up and take him to his room to bed ( )B. Allow him to continue to play if he says he isn't sleepy ( )

1. Response G was inadvertently omitted from this question­naire. In the original questionnaire Response C reads: Spank him ( )

71C. Give him a few minutes to finish what he is doing before

having him go to bed ( )12. You find that your child has taken a dime out of your purse.

Would you;A. Explain to the child that the money is not his and have him

give it back to you ( )B. Let him keep it since it was just a dime ( )C. Spank him ( )

13. Your three-year-old child goes in the kitchen and pulls out your pots and pans. Would you:A. Scold him ( )B. Pick up the pots and pans and ignore the situation ( )C. Have the child pick up the pots and pans and return them

to the shelves ( )14. It is time to eat and your child asks for a cup of coffee. Would

you:A. Give it to him ( )B. Give him a coffee cup but put milk in it ( )C. Refuse to give it to him ( )

15. Your three-year-old child has been saying a curse word. Would you:A. Slap him ( )B. Laugh at him because it is cute at this age ( )C. Ignore the situation ( )

16. Your child of five comes home with a ball that belongs to a neighbor's child. Would you:A, Explain to your child that the ball doesn't belong to him and

have him return the ball ( )B. Spank him ( )G. Just let him keep the ball since the neighbor's child has

several other balls ( )I?. Your child picks up one of your favorite dishes that you have told

him never to touch, drops and breaks it. This makes you very angry. Would you:A, Spank him immediately ( )B, Wait until you had cooled off before deciding how to punish

the child ( )C, Tell him to get out of the room, and you pick up the pieces ( )

7218. You have picked up pecans and stored them in a basket on the porch.

Your child pours them out. Would youtA. Pick up the pecans again and return them to the basket ( )B. Have the child pick up the pecans and return them to the

basket ( )C. Scold the child for his misbehavior ( )

19. Your child is in the dime store with you and gets angry when yourefuse to buy him a new toy. He lies down and kicks. Would you:A. Pick him up and shake him good ( )B. Leave him and go on to another counter ( )C. Buy him a toy to get him to behave ( )

20. Your child of three falls down and scratches his leg. He begins to cry loudly. Would you:A. Cuddle and hold him in your lap until he stops crying ( )B. Spank him if he continues to cry ( )C. Tell the child you are sorry he hurt himself and get him

interested in something else ( )

APPENDIX E

COURSE EVALUATION QUESTIONNAIRE

Response Code: Circle SA If you strongly a^ree with itemCircle A If you aaree moderately with itemCircle D If you disagree moderately with itemCircle SD If you strongly disagree with item

1. I would take another course that was taught this way. SA A D SD2. The instructor seemed to be interested in students

as persons. SA A D SD3. I would have preferred another method of teaching

in this course. SA A D SD4. It was easy to remain attentive. SA A D SD

5. The instructor did not synthesize, integrate, or summarize effectively. SA A D SD

6 . Not much was gained by taking this course. SA A D SD

7. The instructor encouraged the development of new viewpoints and appreciations. SA A D SD

8. I learn more when other teaching methods are used. SA A D SD9. The course material seemed worthwhile. SA A D SD

10. The instructor was excellent. SA A D SD11. The instructor demonstrated a thorough knowledge

of her subject matter. SA A D SD12. I would rather not take another course from this

instructor. SA A D SD13. It was a very worthwhile course. SA A D SD14. Some things were not explained very well. SA A D SD

73

?415. The course material was too difficult. SA A D SD16. The instructor seemed to consider teaching as a

chore or routine activity. SA A D SD17. It was quite interesting. SA A D SD18. I think that the course was taught quite well. SA A D SD19. Excellent course content. SA A D SD20. Some days I was not very interested in this course. SA A D SD21. It was quite boring. SA A D SD22. Overall, the course was good. SA A D SD

Course Content: Please give your comments on the course content,subject matter and any particular relevance this course has had to you as a parent or a future parent.

Instructor; What are your general comments about the instructor:

Instructional Objectives: Were the instructional objectives clearlystated for this course:

Yes No Comment:

Five subjects of current interest in regard to children were discussed. Check which one you found most valuable to you as a parent or future parent.

( ) Parent Education ( )( ) Television and Children ( )( ) Sex Role Identity ( )( ) Day Care and Pre-school Needs ( )( ) Child Abuse ( )

(Above rate these subjects in order of interest to you

Five general areas of child development were discussed. Check which one you consider most helpful to you as a parent or future parent.

( ) Setting the Stage for Children/infancy( ) Guidance( ) Intellectual/Language Development( ) Social Development and Creative Activities at Home ( ) Physical and Emotional Development

Which of these general areas do you think needed further elaboration in this course? Comment.

What improvements in this course would you suggest?

Please give your thoughtful evaluation of this course with comments. Are you satisfied with what you got out of this course? Do you consider it a valuable educational experience as a parent or future parent?

APPENDIX F

PRE AND POSTTEST REPORTED DEMOCRATIC RESPONSES TO CHILD-REARING QUESTIONNAIRE

Parents Pre PostCouple No. li Father 17 18

Mother 16 17Couple No. 2s Father 18* 17

Mother 19 16

Couple No. 3« Father 14 13Mother 14 13

Couple No. 4s Father 18* 11*Mother 12* 14*

Couple No. 5: Father 18* 14*Mother 17 17*

Couple No. 6s Father 9*Mother 12 17

Couple No. 7* Father 15Mother 17 19

Couple No. 8s Father 17*Mother 14 13*Mother No. 1 17 18Mother No. 2 18 17

^Indicates discrepancies in answering q u e s t i o n s . Parents added r e s p o n s e s , left responses unanswered or checked two responses.

77

LIST OF REFERENCES

Adams, A. Creativity and Children. Bulletin A-59. University o f Arizona Cooperative Extension and School o f Home Economics (February 19?0).

Adams, J, (ed.) Understanding Adolescence; Current Developments in Adolescent Psychology. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, 1973•

Aleamoni, L. and R, Spencer, The Illinois Course Evaluation Question­naire: A. Description of Its Development and a Report of Some

. of Its Results. University of Illinois: Measurement andResearch Division Office (May 197l)«

Badger, E. A Mothers' Training Program - The Road to a Purposeful Existance. Children. 18:168-173 (September-0ctoher 197l).

Biller, H. and S. Weiss. The Father-Daughter Relationship and the Personality Development of the Female. Journal of Genetic Psychology, 116:79-93 (March 1970).

Bossard, J. and E. Boll. The Sociology of Child Development (4th ed.). New York: Harper and Row, 1966.

Bridgeman, R. Scope and Purpose of Parent Education. Journal of Home Economics. 24:893-894 (Octoher 1932).

Brim, 0. Evaluating the Effects of Parent Education. Marriage and Family Living. 19:54-60 (February 1957)•

Brim, 0. The Sources of Parent Behavior. Children. 5:217-222 (November-December 1958).

Brim, 0. Changes and Trends in Child Rearing. Child Study. 36:23-27 (Fall 1959).

Bronfenbrenner, U. The Changing American Child - A Speculative Analysis. The Journal of Social Issues, 17:6-18 (l96l).

Brown, M. Research and Parent Education. Children, 5:232 (November- December 1958).

Buckland, C. Toward a Theory of Parent Education: Family LearningCenters in the Post-Industrial Society. The Family Coordinator. 21:151-162 (April 1972).

78

Gadden, V. 'Yes' to love and joyful faces. Life, 71:68,71,90 (December 17, 1971)

Campbell, D. and J. Stanley, Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Designs for Research. Chicago: Rand McNally, 1968.

Children Today. 2 (March-April 1973a).Children Today. 2:32 (May-June 1973b).Children Today, 3$27 (March-April 197^).Christensen, 0 . Eamily Education: A Model for Consultation.

Elementary School Guidance and Counseling. 7$121-129 (December 1972).

Christmas, E, Child-Rearing Practices of Lower and Middle-Income Mothers. Unpublished Master's Thesis, Florida State University (1965).

Condrey, J, The Rights of Children: Responsibility and Freedom.Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Eastern Psychological Assoc., Boston, Mass., April 28, 1972. ^(Available as ED 070 509. from ERIC Document Reproduction Service, January-December 1973)" -

Dees, J, Selecting a Nursery School or Day-Care Center. Bulletin 0,-238. University of Arizona Cooperative Extension and School of Home Economics (n.d.).

De Lissovoy, V. Child Care by Adolescent Parents. Children Today. 2:22-25 (July-August 1973).

DeRosis, H. Parenting: Is Education Necessary? Journal ofSchool Health. 60:321-323 (June 1970).

Dreikurs, R. and V. Soltz. Children: The Challenge. New York:Hawthorn Books, Inc., 1964.

Duvall, E, Teenagers and the Generation Gap. Fbmily Coordinator. 18:284-86 (July 1969).

Dybwad, G. Leadership in Parent Education. Children. 1:10-14 (January-February 1954).

Endres, M. and M. Evans. Some Effects of Parent Education on Parents and Their Children. Adult Education Journal. 18:101-111 (Winter 1968).

80Prank, L, The Beginnings of Child Development and Family Life.

Education in the Twentieth Century. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 8s207-22? (Octoher 1962),

Ginott, H. Between Parent and Child. New Yorks Avon Books, 1965.Gordon, I. Bahy Learning Through Baby Play. New York: St. Martin's-

Press, 1970(a) 0 'Gordon, I. Reaching the Young Child Through Parent Education.

Childhood Education, 46 s24?-249 ('February 1970b) .Gordon, I., B. Guinagh and R. Jester. Child Learning Through Child

Play. New York: St. Martin's Press, 19?2.Hanford, J. New Pressures on Family Life. Social Casework. 50!3-9

(January 1969).Hawkins, R. Universal Parenthood-Training: A Laboratory Approach to

Teaching Child-Rearing Skills to Every Parent. Educational Technology, 11 $ 228-231 (February 1971/.

Hetherington, E. and J. Deur. The Effects of Father Absence onChild Development. Young Children. 25:233-246 (March 1971).

Huff, P. Does Family Life Education Change Attitudes Toward Child- Rearing? The Family Coordinator. 17:185-18? (July 1968).

Hurlock, E.' Child Development (5th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill, 19?2.Hymes, J. The Importance of Pre-Primary Education. Childhood

Education. 39:2-13 (September 1962).Joelson, R. Parent Orientation Groups - Family Outreach in a

Community Mental Health Center. Children. 1:11-13 (October 1972). "

Jorde, P. Living and Learning With Children. Stanford Center for Innovation in Research and Education, 1973•

Kagan, J. Do Infants Think? Scientific American. 226:74-82 (March 1972).Kates, S. and L, Diab. Authoritarian Ideology and Attitudes on Parent-

Child Relationships. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 51:13-16 (1955).

Kennedy, A. Educating for Parenthood.. Journal of Home Economics.23:136-137 (February 1931)..

81.Kerns, N. Attitudes of Undergraduate Women Concerning Child-Rearing

Effects on an Initial Course in Child Development and Relation to Academic Achievement. Unpublished Master's Thesis, School of Home Economics, The University of Arizona (1967).

Keyserling, M. Windows on Day Care. New Yorks National Council of Jewish Women, 1972.

Kruger, S. Education for Parenthood and the Schools. Children Today. 2:4-7 (March-April 1973)•

Landau, G. The Changing Role of American Parents: New Challenges,New Freedoms. Parents Magazine. 68sl6 (May 1973)•

Lang, C. and J. Kagan. The Real Differences Between the Sexes.Parents Magazine. 68:62-63 (September 1973)•

Levenstein, P., A. Kochman and H. Roth. From Laboratory to Real Worlds Service Delivery of the Mother-Child Home Program. American Journal of Ortho-psychiatry. 43:72-78 (January 1973) •

Licensing for Parenthood. Science News, 103:305 (May 12, 1973)°

Liebert, R., J. Neale and E, Davidson. The Early Window: Effects ofTelevision on Children a.nd Youth. New Yorks Pergamon Press,1973.

Lopez, N. You and Your Baby's First Year. Bulletin 0,-267° Univ. ofAriz. Cooperative Extension and School of Home Economics (n.d.).

Maccoby, N. The Communication of Child-Rearing Advice to Parents. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly. 7$199-204 (July 1961).

Mace, D, Family Problems and Prospects Around the World. The Family Coordinator. 18:278-281 (July 1969).

Mannino, F., J. Kisielewski, E. Kimbro and B. Morganstern. Relation­ships Between Parental Attitudes and Behavior. The Family Coordinator, 17$237-240 (October 1968).

Marland, S. Education for Parenthood. Children Today. 2:3 (March- April 1973).

Martin, C, Meal Time With Small Children. Bulletin Q-236. Univ. ofAfiz. Cooperative Extension and School of Home Economics (n.d.).

McCandless, B. Problems of Child-Rearing in a Changing Society.Journal of Education. Counseling and Services. 18:291-293(duly 1969).

82

McNeil, M. A New Lifestyle for Low Income Parents. American Vocational Journal. 4?$66-69 (November 1972).

McQuire, 0. and G. White. The Measurement of Social Status. Un­published Research Paper in Human Development No. 3 (revised), Dept, of Educational Psychology, The University of Texas(March 1955).

McWhirter, J. Influencing the Childs A Program for Parents.Elementary School Guidance and Counseling, 7:26-31 (October 1972)~

Meyer, W. and A. Wacker. Origin of Perceived Self-Responsibility As a Function of Age for Independence-Training. Archiv fur Psychologie. 122:24-39 (July 1970).

Nash, J. The Father in Contemporary Culture and Current Psychological Literature. Child Development. 36$261-297 (March 1965),

Orth, M. The American Child-Care Disgrace. Ms., 1:88-90, 94-95 (May 1973).

Parents Magazine, 68 (May 1973)•Peterson, D., W. Becker, L. Hillmer, D. Shoemaker and H. Quay.

Parental Attitudes and Child Adjustment. Child Development. 30:119-130 (March 1959).

Pickarts, E. Parent Education: Questions From an InternationalConference, The Family Coordinator. 19:124-133 (April 1970).

Pringle, K. 1909-1960: A Half Century of the White House Conferences.- Child Study. 37:3-8 (Winter 1959-1960).

Ridenour, N. The Critics and Parent Education. Children. 2:185-187,(S eptember-Octo ber 1955).

Rosoff, S. Education for Parenthood - An Overview, Children Today.2:inside cover (March-April 1973)•

Rue, V. Television and the Family:. The Question of Control. The Family Coordinator. 23:73-81 (January 1974).

Schaefer, E. Parents as Educators: Evidence from Cross-SectionLongitudinal and Intervention Research. Young Children. 27:227-239 (April 1972).

- . 83Schaefer, E. and R. Bell.. Development o f a Parental Attitude

Research Instrument. Child Development. 29$339-36l (September 1958)•

Senn, M. Fads and Facts as the Bases of Child-Care Practices.Children. 4:43-47 (March-April 195?)•

Shoben, J. The Assessment of Parental Attitudes in Relation to Child Adjustment, Genetic Psychology Monographs. 39$101-148 (February 194971

Siegel, S. Monparametric Statistics for the Behavioral Sciences.New York: McGraw-Hill, 1956« •

Silva, F„ Relationships Between Mothers" Written Knowledge of Child Development and Their Expressed Child Rearing Practices, Unpublished Master's Thesis, School of Home Economics, The University of Arizona (l9?l).

Smart, M. and R. Smart. Children: Development and Relationships.New York: The Macmillan Co., 196?.

Stant, M. The'Young Child. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall,Inc., 1972.

Stein, S. and C. Smith. Return of Mom. Saturday Review of Education. 1:37-40 (April 1973).

Stoener, H. Plain Talk About Child Abuse. Denver: The AmericanHumane Association, 1972.

Stott, L. and M. Berson. Some Changes in Attitudes Resulting from a Pre-Parental Education Program. . Journal of Social Psychology,34:191-202 (November 1951).

Tasch, Rc The Role of the Father in the Family. Journal of Exceptional Education. 20:319-361 (June 1952).

Today's Child,' 21:5 (February 1973a).Today's Child. 21:5 (April 1973b). ^Today's Child,' 21:4 (September 1973c).Vincent, C. An Open Letter to the 'Caught Generation.' The Family

Coordinator. 21:143-150 (April 1972).Ward, S. Components of a Child Advocacy Program. Children Today.

1:38-40 (March-April 1972).

Ward, V

Watson,

White,

Wyden,

Educating for Life: A Public Preschool Program and ItsPlace in Society. Unpublished Master's Thesis, School of Home Economics, The University of Arizona (1972).G. Some Personality Differences in Children Related to Strict or Permissive Parental Discipline. The Journal of Psychology. 44:227-249 (July 1957).B. An Analysis of Excellent Early Educational Practices: Preliminary Report. Interchange, 2:71-88 (1971)•B. Growth: 45 crucial months. Life, 71$93-95 (December 17,1971).

Zaiman, J. An Approach to Jewish Parent Education. Jewish Education. 41:17-22 (Spring 1972).

8