School Readiness: Parents and Professionals Speak on Social and Emotional Needs of Young Children

Findings


Focus Group Discussions of Risks to School Success

The task of the focus group participants was to discuss problems they saw (in their practice, in the neighborhoods, or with their own children) as early warning signs of later preschool difficulty. They were asked to restrict their discussion to problems evinced within the first three years of life. The locus of the problems could be the child (e.g., speech delay), the parent (e.g., an overprotective parent), or the environment (e.g., no opportunity for peer play). The outcome "school difficulty" was intentionally vague to maximize the range of responses and open discussion among group members.

Each focus group generated an extensive list of "early warning signs." Table 3 presents several themes that were common across groups and across sites. The most striking finding is the similarity in the concerns of parents and providers. Interestingly, no one mentioned the lack of traditional pre- academic skills such as children's knowledge of numbers, letters, colors as a concern. Instead, participants in both Fremont County and Lawndale discussed more basic issues such as the development of self-control, respect for others, a sense of confidence and competence. Their concerns were broad, ranging from aspects of parenting, the child, and the child-parent relationship to the family as a socializing agent, and the larger context of the neighborhood. Parents and professionals were passionate and sincere, and readily voiced their concerns for the children of their communities. The observations of providers and parents alike were astute and their illustrations were often poignant and alarming.

Despite demographic differences (viz., urban vs. rural, race and ethnic composition), Lawndale and Fremont County participants were similar in terms of their concerns. Where differences did arise, they tended to reflect a greater range of troublesome circumstances or more severe forms of the risk conditions in Lawndale. Drug abuse and gang involvement is more widespread in Lawndale and appears to be taking a particularly heavy toll on family routines and the safety of young children. A social worker in Lawndale described just how extensively drug use can interfere with parenting -- for instance, one mother routinely sold WIC foods to buy drugs and fed her infant table scraps instead. She was proud her infant never ate "baby" food and kept her in the oven of their tiny one-room apartment because she couldn't tolerate the sound of her crying. As an aside, equally alarming is that the court did not find cause to remove this baby from her mother's home. The problems of drugs and alcohol are not confined to Lawndale, however. Fremont County parents and professionals also spoke of increasing numbers of parents with alcohol problems, and babies affected by parents' alcohol and drug use.

The most unexpected finding from the focus groups was the grave concern of both parents and professionals about increasing numbers of infants and toddlers who are unsupervised and left to raise themselves. Such families were described as lacking routines and schedules. When hungry, toddlers are expected to find themselves something to eat; when sleepy, they nod off wherever they are. When asked how a lack of supervision and routine in the home bode poorly for later school success, the groups were quick to share a well-reasoned developmental sequelae. One Fremont County mother said that lack of supervision leads to lack of respect for adults because children don't feel adults' rules are valuable or relevant. As a result, she offered, children left to raise themselves will have difficulty following rules in school and getting along with others, and are likely to end up as loners.

Parent Surveys of Concerns and Problems in the Infant and Toddler Years

Problems and concerns.
Survey participants were primary caregivers of one or more children under three years of age. Demographic characteristics of participants, by site, are presented in Table 4. Reflecting the racial and ethnic mix of the surrounding geographic communities, the majority of Fremont County mothers were Caucasian, and all participating Lawndale mothers were African- American. On average, respondents were in their mid-twenties, and had begun childbearing near the age of 20. Twenty-two percent of Fremont mothers, and 40 percent of Lawndale mothers had been, or were, teen mothers (younger than 18 years at first birth). Thirty-one percent of Fremont mothers and 47 percent of Lawndale mothers had not completed high school. Only seven percent of Fremont County mothers were single; whereas 41 percent of Lawndale mothers were without partners. No doubt reflecting the greater earning capacity of two-parent families, proportionately more Lawndale families reported incomes of less than $9,000 per year. The average household size was 4 persons in Fremont County and 5 persons in Lawndale. There was no significant difference in the proportion of infants (< 12 months) and toddlers (13 to 36 months) represented by families in the two communities. Both communities' samples contained slightly more families with a child under one year of age.

Statistical tests of differences between the two samples showed that children in Lawndale were at greater socio-economic risk due to proportionately less household income and more teen mothers, single parents, and households with four or more children. Children in Lawndale were also at greater risk due to the accumulation of stressors. That is, a greater proportion of Lawndale parents could be characterized by two or more of the following five characteristics: low income, teen birth, less than high school education, large family size, or one-adult household. Seventy-eight percent of Lawndale families and 20 percent of Fremont County families surveyed had two of more of these five risk factors (Chi-Square = 40.39, p < .001).

Despite the social and demographic differences between Fremont County and Lawndale, parents' reports of their concerns were similar. In both communities, most concerns were about children's health and physical development (e.g., questions about feeding, sleeping, age of sitting, walking, and talking), followed by concerns about cognitive and emotional development (e.g., questions about discipline, how long to leave a baby crying, how to handle tantrums, whether to limit television viewing) and concerns about establishing and maintaining family habits and routines (see Table 5 for summary definitions of each area of concern and Appendix B for individual items).

As Table 6 indicates, parents in both communities were most likely to express concerns about health and physical growth (mentioned by 98 percent of parents in Fremont County and by 85 percent of parents in Lawndale). Next most common were concerns about cognition and emotional development (85% Fremont parents; 82% Lawndale parents), and then questions about family habits and routines (85% Fremont parents; 77% Lawndale parents). On average, parents in Fremont County described ten concerns; parents in Lawndale described nine.

Parents in the two communities were also surprisingly similar in their discussion of problems they experienced in caring for their infants and toddlers. The survey asked about demanding and defiant behaviors such as fussing, attention-seeking, and noncompliance; acting out and aggressive behavior such as biting, kicking, and being overly active; sullen, moody, or shy behavior; and signs of possible developmental problems such as short attention span, delayed speech, or accident proneness (see Table 7 for a summary of category definitions and Appendix B for individual items). Approximately two-thirds of parents in both communities reported problems with aggressive and demanding behaviors (Table 8). Just over half reported moody, dependent behavior. One-third of parents in Lawndale and nearly half of the parents sampled in Fremont County described language, motor lags, or attention difficulties.

"Serious" problems.
Because struggles for autonomy and independence are characteristic and developmentally appropriate within this age group, it is possible that most reported "problems" were simply exaggerations of age-appropriate behaviors. Thus parents were asked, "which if any of the problems you've described are of serious concern to you?" Approximately 20 percent of parents in both communities (a total of 23 parents) indicated that one or more problems were "serious"; most of these parents (21 of 23) described problems regarding toddler-age children. In Fremont County, ten of 12 parents described one serious problem and two parents described two serious problems. In Lawndale, 6 of 11 parents described one serious problem and five described two serious problems. Thirteen different problems were discussed. The most common, described by three or more parents, were child bites, kicks, or hits adults; child has temper tantrums; and child has speech or language difficulties. Most serious problems described by parents were behavioral. Four parents were seriously concerned about potential developmental problems and one parent had both behavioral and developmental concerns. The most common "serious" developmental concern, noted by five parents, was speech or language difficulty. Thus in the combined two-community sample, 16 percent (18 of 116 parents) reported serious behavior problems, 3 percent (4 parents) reported serious developmental concerns, and approximately one percent (one person) reported both.
Sources of help and advice.
When asked for their top three "preferred and most trusted" sources of advice and support regarding their children's development, parents in both communities most frequently indicated their own, and other, parents (see Table 9 for definitions of all help sources). This finding was particularly characteristic of Lawndale parents; 95 percent of those surveyed listed other and their own parents among their top three sources of advice (Table 10). The second most common source among the top three was health care and social service professionals; the third was local Family Center services. Interestingly, although many children attended daycare and preschool programs and many families included older, school-age children, relatively few (7 of 119 parents) considered education professionals among their top resources. The proportion who utilized education professionals (defined as daycare, preschool, or school teachers) was relatively higher among families with school-age children (12% vs. 3%) but was unrelated to whether the young sibling was of infant or toddler-age.

When asked for their number-one preferred source of advice, over half the parents surveyed in Fremont and Lawndale mentioned their own and other parents. Health and social service professionals were ranked first by 32 percent of parents in Fremont and 18 percent of parents in Lawndale. Family Center services were ranked first by ten percent of families in Fremont and three percent in Lawndale (Table 11).

Specific concerns and help sources.
Tables 12 and 13 present, in rank order, the 22 concerns discussed with parents in each community. Over half the parents surveyed in Fremont and Lawndale had concerns regarding how to tell if their child was developing normally, how to identify physical illnesses, how much and how often to feed their children, when and how to discipline, and what to do about their child's irritability and crying. In addition to these, over half the Fremont County parents were also concerned with toilet- training, teething, how to make the child's environment hazard- free, how to help children feel secure, when their children would sleep through the night, and how to choose quality child care. Parents in both communities discussed a large number of concerns (N = 599, Fremont; N = 512, Lawndale), and all 22 concerns were discussed by at least 20 percent of parents in each community (the prevalence of individual concerns ranged from 20 to 71 percent).

Fremont parents' responses to questions regarding specific developmental concerns were somewhat incongruous with their previously stated "top" source of advice. Previously, 53 percent selected "other parents" as their preferred source of advice and only 31 percent selected health and social service professionals. However, specific developmental concerns were referred to these two sources almost equally (175 and 184 concerns respectively, see Table 12). The third most frequently endorsed source of advice was the Family Center's services. Lawndale parents' responses more closely approximated their overall rankings. Of 512 concerns, 222 were referred to other parents and 142 were referred to health and social service professionals. Relatively few concerns were referred to the Family Center and few sought assistance from formal parenting education (e.g., through WIC).

In Fremont, no single concern was the exclusive domain of other parents, health and social service professionals, or the Family Center; yet the data do suggest some degree of "consumer" specificity. Questions regarding feeding, developmental ability, teething, and illness were at least three times more likely to be referred to health and/or social service professionals, whereas more personal decisions regarding feeding mode (breast or bottle), discipline, pacifiers, bedtime routines, and returning to paid employment were preferentially discussed with other parents. In Fremont, questions regarding toilet training and the attainment of other developmental milestones were discussed equally with other parents, health and social services providers, and the Family Center.

The pattern was slightly different among Lawndale parents (see Table 13). With the exception of questions regarding developmental level, parents sought the advice of other parents as often, or more often, than any other source. For example, parents with questions about childhood illnesses were just as likely to turn to other parents as they were to seek advice from health professionals. As in Fremont, parents perceived the Family Center's expertise to include information about toilet- training and choosing child care.

Specific problems and help sources.
The three most common problems discussed by parents in Fremont and in Lawndale were temper tantrums, moodiness (is easily upset), and stubbornness. Each problem was discussed by at least one-third of parents in each community (see Tables 14 and 15). In addition, at least 20 percent of Fremont parents described the following problems: short attention span, sleep problems, hurting other children, child is overly active, child is fearful, child is lagging in language or speech development, and child is too demanding. Fremont parents discussed a total of 237 problems (Table 14). The most common sources of help were other parents, health and social service professionals, and the Family Center. Problems were referred almost equally to these three sources; however, parental concerns regarding child's attention span, an indicator of possible developmental delay or behavior disturbance, were 2.5 times as likely to be referred to other parents or the Family Center as they were to health or social service providers.

Lawndale parents discussed a total of 230 problems (Table 15). In addition to the three most common problems shared by parents in Fremont County, over 20 percent of Lawndale parents reported problems with children hurting other children, being overly active, being too demanding, constantly seeking attention, and hitting, biting, or kicking adults. Sixty percent of all problems for which a help source was mentioned were referred to other parents. As in Fremont County, even potential signs of developmental delay were typically referred to other parents. For example, parents who noted children's speech problems were just as likely to turn to other parents for help as to health and social service providers.

Associations between family characteristics and concerns, problems, and help sources.
A series of analyses were performed to identify relations between aspects of the family and reported concerns, problems, and parents' help-seeking behavior. For the first set of analyses, regarding associations with socio-economic factors, a cumulative risk index was constructed of five binary variables: annual income of less than $9000, four or more children in the household, mother less than 18 years of age at first birth, mother with less than high school education, and only one adult in household. Thus, the risk index could be a number from zero (none of these risk indicators) to five (all five risk indicators) for any given family. The range was from zero to four for Fremont families, and from zero to five for Lawndale families.

Pearson correlations between family risk and number of reported concerns and problems suggested only a weak linear relationship with most variables ( r < .30; p > .05), so the family risk index was dichotomized based on fewer (less than 2) vs. more (2 or more) stressors. Chi-square tests were computed to learn whether family hardship was related to perceived sources of advice and support, or to reported developmental concerns and problems. For the most part, parents at relatively different levels of socio-economic stress reported similar help-seeking behavior except that in families with fewer stressors, parents were more likely to include self-help efforts (e.g., reading, and observing others' children) among their resources (Chi-square = 7.08; p < .01). Level of socio-economic stress was not significantly related to parents' report of developmental concerns, or to the total number of concerns they discussed.

Socio-economic stress was related to the number of problems parents discussed, but in an unexpected way. In families with fewer stressors, parents reported significantly more problematic behaviors. On average, parents in the lower-stress group reported five problems; the average of the higher-stress group was three (t > = 2.71; p < .01). Analyses by problem types showed that parents in the lower-stress group reported more problems of all types; differences between the groups were statistically significant (p < .05) for dependent, moody behaviors and for resistant, demanding behaviors.

Results of these analyses raise two comments. First, because the absolute number of problems of each type was small (less than two problems of each type on average), the inverse relation between socio-economic stress and number of behavior problems should be regarded with caution. One possible interpretation is that, in the absence of unrelenting family hardships such as extreme poverty and lack of adult-adult support, parents are more likely to identify and discuss disruptive behavior. Second, it must be acknowledged that Lawndale families are over-represented in the "high" risk group because, in these data, site and risk are confounded. However, the pattern of findings for the combined group is similar to that within each site, thus it seems unlikely that the noted associations with socio-economic stress are related to inherent differences between the two communities such as locality or ethnicity.

A second set of analyses examined potential differences between families whose youngest child was an infant (< 12 months) versus a toddler. The results showed no significant relation between child's age and parents' help-seeking behavior. Similarly, there was little relation between child's age and parents' report of developmental concerns and problems; recall that most parents endorsed concerns of all types (Table 6) and as many as two-thirds described problems of the types probed (Table 8). Where differences were found, they were in the area of physical and intellectual development. More parents of infants expressed concerns about health and physical development and more parents of toddler-age children described potential developmental problems, though few noted they were of "serious" concern. These group differences were not statistically significant (p < .05).

Promoting school success begins in infancy.
The final set of survey questions asked parents directly about early learning activities in the home. Over two-thirds of parents reported that they felt they had enough time to provide quality learning experiences in the home. The most common activities were reading, casual talking, playing, or singing, and more formal teaching of verbal routines such as prayers, names of letters and colors, child's name, and address (see Table 16). Understandably, given the age range of this study, few parents reported separate or scheduled learning activities such as educational outings, lessons, or structured pre-academic activities such as "Hooked On Phonics." Parents of toddlers were significantly more likely to describe skill-building activities incorporated in family routines (43% vs. 24%; Chi-square = 4.76; p <.05).

When asked how community members could help parents prepare children to do well in school, responses ranged from parent- focused programs (such as parent education, home-visiting programs, etc.), to the need for better outreach regarding existing programs, to ways of strengthening links between home and school (see Table 17). In addition to increasing parent involvement and knowledge of resources, both groups recommended several child-focused activities. The most popular suggestion was the provision of peer play groups. The common vision was of mixed-age groups facilitated by knowledgeable adults who would take primary responsibility for activities, but attended by parents as well. Nearly half the sample reported that providing assistance with transportation and providing evening and weekend activities would help them take greater advantage of new or existing programs.


Continue to the next article.
Return to the School Readiness Publication Contents Page.