Esther Devall, Ann Vail, Marcel Montañez and Dawn VanLeeuwen ... (Barber, 1992; Johnson, Walker, & Rodriguez, 1997), and decreased rates of abuse.
Parenting Education
Parenting Education in New Mexico: Strengthening Diverse Families
Esther Devall, Ann Vail, Marcel Montañez and Dawn VanLeeuwen New Mexico State University
June, 2005
Paper presented at the Mexican International Family Strengths Conference Cuernavaca, Mexico
1
Parenting Education
2
Abstract This article describes the evaluation of a parenting education program to strengthen high-risk families. Teen, single, divorced, foster, abusive, substance affected, and incarcerated parents and their children participated in intensive classes lasting nine to 24 weeks. The sample consisted of 323 parents who provided complete pre- and post-test data on the revised Adult -Adolescent Parenting Inventory and the Nurturing Quiz. The subjects were primarily single (58%), Hispanic (60%), and female (60%). Parents showed significant increases in empathy and knowledge of positive discipline techniques, and significant decreases in parent-child role reversals, inappropriate expectations, belief in corporal punishment, and oppression of children’s independence.
Parenting Education
Parenting Education in New Mexico: Strengthening Diverse Families Parenthood is one of the most stressful and demanding of life roles, yet it is the role for which most adults receive the least preparation and support (Skolnick, 1991). Contemporary parents face many challenges including increasing poverty, family isolation, fewer supports for families, and a declining sense of community (Sviridoff & Ryan, 1996). The consequences of not educating parents are tremendous. Poor parenting skills are linked to societal problems such as teen pregnancy, adolescent substance abuse, and youth violence (Barnes & Farrell, 1992; Dishion & McMahon, 1998; Patterson, 1996). Many researchers have documented the impact of parenting education (Barber, 1992; Dembo, Sweitzer, & Lauritzen, 1985; Todres & Bunston, 1993; Wolfe, 1999). Parents who participate in parenting classes report greater knowledge of child development and parenting skills (Brems, Baldwin, & Baxter, 1993; Weinman, Schreiber, & Robinson 1992), increased confidence (Barber, 1992; Johnson, Walker, & Rodriguez, 1997), and decreased rates of abuse (Britner & Reppucci, 1997; Whipple & Wilson, 1996). Positive outcomes for children include fewer behavioral problems (Thompson, Grow, Ruma, Daly, & Burke, 1993), greater academic achievement (Dembo et al., 1985), and increases in social and intellectual development (Pfannenstiel, Lambson, & Yarnell, 1991). The transition to parenthood can be stressful when personal resources are scarce and maturity is low. For young parents, the often unplanned, unwanted transition forces them to experience a rapid change in their level of responsibilities. Along with the transition comes a qualitative shift in the types of daily activities they are involved in and people with whom they interact. These changes may increase the probability of experiencing social isolation, loneliness,
3
Parenting Education
4
low self-esteem and low parenting self-efficacy. Aside from the stresses of new responsibilities and activities, young mothers and their children are at high risk of experiencing health problems. Childbirth itself creates health risks for young mothers and their infants. For example, infants born to adolescent mothers have a higher probability of low birth weight than newborns of older mothers. Risk is partially explained by inadequate prenatal care and postnatal nutrition. However, other influencing factors are explained by the developmental stage of the young parents (Coley & Chase-Lansdale, 1998). Young parents are also at risk for poverty and therefore face additional challenges and adversities around parenting. Very young mothers are at a high risk for socioeconomic disadvantage because their situation often precludes them from completing the formal education that is needed to obtain gainful employment (Maynard, 1996; Roosa, 1991). Low-income parents, regardless of age, have fewer financial resources at their disposal. This may restrict parenting opportunities and promote less than optimal parenting practices. Such parenting practices may increase children’s risk for less adaptive developmental outcomes (Coley & Chase-Lansdale, 1998). A large proportion of adolescent parents are at a developmental stage where they are still developing socially, emotionally and cognitively and the need to attend to oneself and the needs of a young child may create competing demands on personal resources. Young mothers differ in terms of both the amount and quality of the behaviors displayed towards their children when compared to older mothers (Osofsky & Thompson, 2000). Given all of the challenges that low-income, young parents face, positive developmental outcomes in children, parents and families are possible and expected. In the current study, we
Parenting Education
5
will discuss how cultural strengths of the participants of a parenting program lead to high participation rates and outcomes that can be characterized as resilient. Despite the evidence for effectiveness of parenting education, there are many instances within the broader parenting education literature and among practitioners where improvements can be made. For example, most research on parenting education has been established using middle-class, White, American mothers. Although the body of literature is growing slowly, less is known about parenting education with culturally and economically diverse families. In addition, much of the previous research has targeted well-functioning families. High-risk families are less likely to participate in parenting programs (Powell, Zambrana, & Silva-Palacios, 1990; Schorr, 1988) and research studies. Many programs do not use evidence-based curricula or conduct evaluations using valid, reliable measures. Finally, many programs work only with parents instead of takin g a family -centered approach. Including children teaches program concepts to the entire family, and provides an opportunity to build family cohesion. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of a family-centered parenting program for culturally diverse, high-risk families using science-based curricula and evaluation tools. Mexican American Families Mexican Americans make up the largest percentage of Latinos in the United States. Many researchers have described the challenges and deficits that this group faces. However, fewer have described the strengths of this culture and how researchers and practitioners might capitalize on such cultural factors and incorporate them into parenting intervention programs. In this paper, we abandon the deficit models that are popular in the literature on Mexican
Parenting Education
6
American families and instead describe a parenting intervention program that was tailored to complement the normative roles and characteristics of Latino families. The design of the intervention is based on the idea that specific cultural and social contexts support parental participation and success in a parenting intervention program. Intervention outcomes are amplified when participants become vested stakeholders in the process. One way to ensure that participation is optimal is to create a program that incorporates aspects of the cultural beliefs and behaviors of the target population. The intervention described in this paper incorporated several important aspects of Mexican American culture including sociocentrism, familismo , and compadrazgo. Parenting beliefs include what parents think about their child, childrearing, and themselves as parents. Contextual effects such as childrearing situations, social and political situations, poverty, and characteristics of one or more cultures in which individuals and families are embedded shape parenting beliefs. Some cultures may be structured to support parenting more than others. In Mexican and Chicano cultures, parenting, and especially mothering, is a revered status and is supported socially in a number of ways. If cultural characteristics include social expectations and support systems that promote positive parent, child and family outcomes, then one may consider the culture as a whole as an asset or categorical grouping variable which functions as a latent protective factor. Intervention strategies that capitalize on the strengths of the culture increase the probability of experiencing positive outcomes. One prominent characteristic of Latinos is that their culture can be considered collectivist. Collectivist cultures are sociocentric. Sociocentrism describes cultures characterized by interdependence, social relationships, and the understanding that one’s behavior
Parenting Education
7
is largely dependent on the thoughts, feelings, and actions of others (Markus & Kitayama, 1991). When social pressures promote positive outcomes, the construct of sociocentrism is considered a cultural asset or social capital. Sociocentrism is considered an integr al component of the intervention described in this paper. The intervention in the current study had high initial participation rates with low rates of attrition. Collectivist cultures tend to engage in more social exchanges with members of their social circles, and their socialization practices emphasize compliance more than autonomy (Harrison, Wilson, Pine, Chan, & Burie, 1990). When parent educators are accepted as members of the parents’ social circle, group members may feel a social obligation to comply with the rules of the parenting class that include weekly or biweekly attendance. Latinos tend to have extensive family networks and depend on a select few individuals for emotional support (MacPhee, Fritz & Miller-Heyl, 1996). Social networks may offer support to a parent by taking on childcare responsibilities, giving childrearing advice, or simply offering encouragement. Social support can be described in terms of the instrumental, informational, or emotional help provided by members of one’s social network (Osofsky & Thompson, 2000). The parenting intervention described in this paper functions in a similar manner as other components of Latino social networks and is therefore considered a component of social capital for Latino participants and their communities. Social support can increase the quality of parenting and family life. For example, mothers who receive greater informal support from friends tend to be more emotionally responsive to their children (Crnic, Ragozin, Greenberg, Robinson, & Bashham, 1983). Such support may come from grandparents, family members, and friends, coworkers or neighbors. Social networks can protect against feelings of loneliness and isolation that hinder the process of
Parenting Education
8
developing parenting skills. However, research has demonstrated that Mexican American mothers are less likely to consult agencies, services, institutions, and printed matter for help in childrearing concerns than are European American mothers (Martinez, 1993). In order for social support to be effective within the Latino culture, individuals must perceive the source of support as a component of their social networks. That is, for Latinas to assimilate an intervention into their working schema of social networks, it would have to include aspects of other components of the social network. For example, the intervention should be offered in Spanish and English and should include Latina trainers. In Individualistic cultures, where independence is highly valued, incorporating external sources of parenting support to ensure positive outcomes is less likely. One working hypothesis in the current study is that the high participation rate that was recorded was accounted for in party by Latina mothers’ awareness of the social expectations surrounding parenting and motherhood and belief that such expectations would be met by involving external sources of support such as the parenting program. Familismo or a strong family orientation has been show to be significantly higher in Latinos than in European Americans. The strong feelings and beliefs around family play an important role in determining child and parenting outcomes because parents with a high degree of familismo may see the family as an extension of the self (Vega, 1990). A bond between a primary caregiver and a child is strong even without considering the idea of familismo. However familismo includes psychological, emotional and social constructs that go beyond love. High levels of familismo lead to increased amounts of contact among extended family members. Having padrinos is strong custom of among Latinos and this custom has been referred to as compadrazgo (Vidal, 1988). In the context of parenting, padrinos are non-biological
Parenting Education
9
godparents or honorary parents and play a role in child development. The intervention discussed in this paper utilized this concept and parenting instructors developed a relationship with parents such that they were essentially padrinos to the parents and children. Such supportive social networks may be helpful in reducing stress, act as buffers against threatening events, provide emotional support and ultimately help increase parenting knowledge and beliefs (Osofsky & Thompson, 2000). An important component of the current intervention was to teach parenting strategies tha t would minimize corporal punishment. There is significant heterogeneity in parenting styles within any cultural group, especially when considering demographic characteristics. Child rearing of Latinos is diverse, ranging from permissive to authoritarian to authoritative and consisting of varied child guidance practices (Martinez, 1993). Previous research has shown that a large proportion of Mexican American mothers tend to favor more punitive methods of punishment with their children (Martinez, 1993). Low-income Mexican Americans are more predisposed to use authoritarian parenting styles with their children (Martinez, 1993). However, parents who have supportive networks available tend to have more nurturing styles of parenting, display more positive affect and responsiveness with their infants, and foster more stimulating home environments (MacPhee, Fritz & Miller-Heyl, 1996). Teenage mothers who live with parents use less punitive disciplinary practices with their children than if they live alone (King & Fullard, 1982). Finally, there is often less child maltreatment in neighborhoods with more social capital including childcare and several adults who take an interest in the child (MacPhee et al., 1996). In the following section, the family-centered parenting intervention will be discussed.
Parenting Education 10 The curricula and format for the classes will be described, and recruitment and retention methods explained. Program Description Curriculum Selection The families targeted for this initiative face similar challenges. Most have less than a high school education, are living in poverty, lack social support, and experience high levels of stress. Many are from minority cultural groups. The population of New Mexico is 42% Hispanic and 10% Native American (U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2000). The characteristics and needs of high-risk groups must be considered when choosing a parenting curriculum (Abell, Mize, & Shields, 1999; Remeika & Thornburg, 1999). Teen parents need their developmental issues addressed. Expectant parents need information on role changes and the needs of infants. Single parents need suggestions for managing loneliness and role overload, and maintaining the adult-child hierarchy. Divorced parents need help with coparenting issues and resolving conflict. Abusive and neglectful parents need information on child development and healthy coping strategies. Substance-affected families need help setting boundaries and establishing schedules and routines. Incarcerated parents need ideas for parenting at a distance and understanding how children change during the parent’s confinement. The Nurturing Parenting Program (Bavolek, 1984; Bavolek & Bavolek, 2002) was selected as the curricula that best met the varying needs of the high-risk families in New Mexico. The Nurturing Parenting (NP) Program has been extensively field-tested and validated with highrisk families, and was designated a Model Program by the federal government. The NP Program offers curricula designed for expectant parents, teen parents, parents with preschool, school-
Parenting Education 11 aged, and adolescent children, foster parents, and substance-affected families. There are also curricula for Spanish-speaking parents. Program Content, Format, and Materials Content. The Nurturing Parenting Program addresses self-nurturing and parenting skills. Self-nurturing topics include communication and conflict resolution, stress, personal power, and avoiding substance abuse. Parenting topics include family rules, rewards and punishment, choices and consequences, age -appropriate expectations, communicating with children, and establishing routines. Parents and children six years and older also received instruction in life skills and nutrition. However, that data is not reported in this study. Format. For every NP curriculum, the format is the same. Classes meet once a week, and each class session lasts 2½ hours. However, the number of class sessions per series ranges from nine to 24 (see Table 1). To be effective, interventions for high-risk families must be of longer duration than programs for well-functioning families. Interactive teaching strategies were used to present information on parenting, life skills, and nutrition. Parents were given time in class to practice skills and homework assignments to reinforce the new skills. Classes for children ran concurrently with classes for parents. Children participated in art, music, drama, and games designed to teach program concepts at a developmentally appropriate level. During the family nurturing time, parents and children came together for songs, games, and activities to promote family bonding. Materials. The program package for each NP curriculum ranges from $850 to $1620. Each package includes implementation and activity manuals, 15 parent handbooks, 15 children’s books, resource materials, parenting videos, evaluation measures, and certificates. Some
Parenting Education 12 packages also include family games and instructional aids. More information is available at www.nurturingparenting.com. Program Implementation Sites. The parenting classes were offered in schools, community centers, public health offices, family resource centers, and local agencies. Classes for teen parents were usually offered at teen parent programs or high schools. The classes for unmarried expectant parents were held at public health offices. Classes for incarcerated parents were held at state and federal prisons. Retention. Several strategies were used to retain families. Parent educators mailed post cards each week to thank parents for coming, announce the topic for the upcoming class, and let parents know they were missed if absent. They also called families before each class to encourage attendance. A graduation ceremony was held for those who completed at least 75% of the class sessions. The completion rate ranged from 33% to 100%, with an average completion rate across the 50 class series of 60%. Totals. Fifty class series (each series consisting of nine to 24 sessions) were completed in 14 counties in New Mexico. Almost 17,000 hours of education was provided to 660 parents and 816 children. The number of class series and the number of parents and children served are described in Table 2.
Parenting Education 13 Method Procedure The institutional review board at NMSU approved the procedures, sampling plan, and instruments before data collection began. The author trained parent educators in obtaining informed consent, maintaining confidentiality, and keeping the data secure. At the first class, parents were informed about the research project and given a consent form. Participation in the research was voluntary, and not required for attending the classes. Parents who consented were given a packet of questionnaires to complete. Identification numbers were used instead of names to protect parents’ privacy. At the last class, parents completed the same questionnaires. Sample Of the 660 parents who enrolled in the parenting classes, 573 agreed to participate in the study. However, if post-test data were missing or more than 20% of the responses were incomplete, the individual was dropped from the analyses. The final sample consisted of 323 parents, or 56% of the available sample. The participants were diverse. Although more mothers than fathers particip ated, 40% of the sample were men. Parents ranged in age from 14 to 70, with a median age of 27. Most (60%) were Hispanic, although 10% were Native American. Almost half (46%) had not completed high school. Many did not complete the income question on the demographic questionnaire, but 84% reported a household income below the poverty line during program intake. The majority (58%) were single parents. The number of children ranged from one to nine, with a median size of two children. A description of the sample is provided in Table 3.
Parenting Education 14 Instruments Three questionnaires were administered at the first and last class. Parents completed the materials in either English or Spanish. Parent educators read items aloud for low-literacy individuals. The Adult-Adolescent Parenting Inventory (AAPI-2) has five subscales: (a) inappropriate expectations of children; (b) lack of empathy towards children’s needs; (c) strong belief in the use of corporal punishment; (d) reversing parent-child roles; and (e) oppressing children’s power and independence (Bavolek & Keene, 1999). The AAPI-2 has 40 items and a five-point scale ranging from strongly agree to strongly disagree. For each subscale, raw scores are converted into standard scores ranging from one to 10. Low scores indicate a high risk for abusive or neglectful parenting. The internal reliability of the subscales ranged from .54 to .84. The Nurturing Quiz (NQ) assesses parents’ knowledge of effective discipline techniques such as praise, redirection, and consequences (Bavolek, 1984). For each item, there are four or five possible answers but only one is correct. There are different versions of the NQ depending on the age of the child. The three versions were the NQ for Prenatal Families (9 items), the NQ for Parents of Preschool Children (26 items), and the NQ for Parents of School-age Children (24 items). The split-half reliability of the three versions ranged from .54 to .84. The 34-item Family Social History Questionnaire (FSHQ) was used to gather infor mation on the parent’s age, gender, marital status, ethnicity, religion, education, occupation, and income (Bavolek, 1984). Parents were also asked to indicate the number and ages of their children.
Parenting Education 15 Results A two-way (time x curriculum) analysis of variance was conducted for each of the subscales of the AAPI-2 and each version of the NQ. There were no significant main effects for curriculum, and no interaction effects. Therefore, only the main effects of time are presented in Table 4 and Table 5. All p values are one-tailed. Post-test means were significantly higher than pre-test means for the first AAPI construct, Inappropriate Expectations of Children (p = .00). The improvement was estimated to be 0.65 points on the 10-point scale. Post-test means were also significantly higher than pre-test means for Lack of Empathy for Children’s Needs (p = .01). The improvement was estimated to be 0.43. Parents exhibited a significant mean improvement from pre-test to post-test on Strong Belief in the Use of Corporal Punishment (p = .00). The improvement was estimated to be .81. The improvement from pre-test to post-test for Reversal of Parent-Child Roles (0.67) was also significant (p = .00). Finally, parents showed significant gains on the Oppression of Children’s Power and Independence (p = .00). The improvement from pre -test to post-test was .58. Post-test means on the NQ for Prenatal Families were estimated to be 2.75 points higher than pre-test means. This improvement was statistically significant (p = .05). On the NQ for Parents of Preschool Children, post-test means were 2.48 points higher (p = .00). Similarly, parents made significant gains (2.19 points) on the NQ for Parents of School-Age Children (p = .00).
Parenting Education 16 Discussion The Strengthening Families Initiative was developed to provide intensive parenting education to high-risk families in New Mexico. Parents with limited resources, low social support, and high levels of stress were recruited for parenting classes lasting nine to 24 weeks. Curricula from the Nurturing Parenting Program were used. The average completion rate was 60%. Parents showed significant improvements in their empathy for children’s needs, and knowledge of positive discipline techniques. They reported significant decreases in parent-child role reversals, inappropriate expectations of children, belief in corporal punishment, and restriction of children’s independence. Prior research has demonstrated that parents with these characteristics raise well-adjusted, competent children (Baumrind, 1967, 1973, 1989). The project had several strengths. Much of the previous research utilized European American, middle -class mothers. The participants in this study were low-income, ethnic minority parents. Pre- and post-test measures were administered rather than relying on a posttest only design. Finally, an evidence-based curriculum with valid, reliable instruments was used. Group parent education is an effective format for high-risk audiences. One advantage is the social support offered by other parents. The combination of economic deprivation and low support creates a potentially dangerous situation for children (Garbarino & Kostelny, 1992). The support from a parenting class that meets two to six months helps buffer families from stress and reduces the likelihood of abuse. Offering classes within the community increases program participation and the likelihood of sustaining support. Group parent education is also cost-
Parenting Education 17 effective. It would be expensive to deliver the same number of instructional hours on an individual basis. Finally, group parent education provides many opportunities to learn new skills. Parents practice skills during class, apply the skills at home, and then discuss challenges at the next session. Parents are also available for re-teaching. When working with high-risk families, it is important to address self-nurturing. Self-care is a foreign concept to many low-income families because they are overwhelmed with daily tasks and feel unable to provide for their own needs (Webster-Stratton, 1997). However, when parents nurture themselves, they are better able to nurture their children. Parents reported a decreased belief in the value and use of corporal punishment and increased knowledge of positive discipline techniques as a result of participation in the parenting classes. Although some researchers have described Mexican American parents as authoritarian, others present evidence of an authoritative parenting style (Martinez, 1993; Vega, 1990). In a more recent study, Mexican American mothers scored higher on discipline, especially items related to corporal punishment, and lower on nurturance than Anglo -American mothers (Cardona, Nicholson, & Fox, 2000). The inconsistency of the results may be due to differences in education and social class. Generally, parents from lower SES groups are more likely to be authoritarian and condone physical punishment. Most of the parents in this study lacked a high school education and lived in poverty. However, with support and education about parenting, they began to endorse a more authoritative parenting style. We also examined inappropriate expectations of children. Before taking the classes, many parents expected their children to be more capable than they were. High levels of unrealistic expectations are positively associated with negative attributions of children’s
Parenting Education 18 misbehavior and greater use of physical punishment (Azar, 1998), and an increased likelihood of child abuse (Azar & Rohrbeck, 1986). Young parents in this study showed significant positive changes in their understanding of developmentally appropriate expectations for children. Despite living in a limited-resource and high-stress environment, these parents demonstrated strength by seeking out parenting information and gaining knowledge of child development. There were no differences in the attitude or knowledge scores of parents who took the class series in the standard format (once a week) as compared to either intensive format (daily for four weeks or twice a week for 12 weeks). Total dosage may be more important than the number of weeks. There were no differences in the attitude or knowledge scores of parents who took the class series in English as compared to Spanish. The videos and parent workbooks for the curricula are similar but not identical. However, the materials are based on the same underlying principles and appear to have the same impact on parents. For four of the five key variables of interest, there were no significant differences between teen parents and adult parents. However, the teen parents showed greater improvement than the adult parents in the Reversal of Parent-Child Role Responsibilities subscale. Teen parents had lower scores at the pre-test, and higher scores at the post-test, than adult parents. Interventions that help young parents avoid reversal of roles are critical, given that children of teen parents are at greater risk of being abused. According to Connelly and Straus (1992), the likelihood of physical child abuse is inversely related to the age of the mother when she gave birth. Young parents have less understanding of child development and are more likely to have unrealistic expectations of the child. Teen parents often report having a baby so that someone will love them, and expecting the child to meet their emotional needs. Participation in
Parenting Education 19 the parenting program appears to help teen parents better understand and accept their responsibilities as a parent. Limitations and Contributions The current study had several limitations. First, there was no control group. It is possible that other variables beside the intervention contributed to the gains found at post-test. However, recruiting a control group for an educational intervention can be difficult. This is particularly true when the target audience is low-income minority families. A second limitation is that data was gathered using self-report measures. Parents may not accurately report their childrearing attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors in an attempt to present themselves as competent parents. However, parents in the study reported negative attitudes and beliefs on the pre-test. Finally, the results of the study only generalize to low-income, young Mexican American parents in the southwest who voluntarily participate in a parenting program. They may be different from parents of other ethnic backgrounds and social class, or parents whose participation is not voluntary. Despite these limitations, the study makes unique contributions to our understanding of Mexican American participants of parenting education programs. Specifically, we have demonstrated that a program that incorporates culturally specific design and components can have very positive outcomes with at-risk groups. Much of the research on Latino families has focused on pathology and the “culture of poverty” (Harwood, Leyendecker, Carlson, Asencio, & Miller, 2002). Although many of the parents in this study faced challenges such as limited income, lack of education, and single parenthood, the desire to improve their parenting skills and the commitment to finishing a program that typically lasted four to six months is indicative of
Parenting Education 20 resilience. Implications To maximize the probability of achieving positive outcomes with Mexican American parents in a parenting program, the cultural characteristics of sociocentrism, familismo, and compadrazgo are helpful if not essential. In the current study, we attribute parents’ decision to participate and motivation to complete a lengthy program to the incor poration of these specific cultural characteristics. When researchers move away from deficit models of cultural and ethnic groups and adopt an ethnocentric approach to program design, implementation, and delivery, they can expect to have higher rates of participation and lower rates of attrition. Thus, the target group will benefit if they become stakeholders in programs that include aspects of their own culture. In order to ensure that cultural characteristics are relevant and sensitive, programmers can bring in members of the target population early in the process to help guide creation of the program. Practitioners may find it useful to create committees that include members of the community to discuss cultural issues in the planning stages. This provides insight into participant responses or reactions to specific aspects of the program, and can avoid potentially negative situations. Another approach to maximize the probability of community members becoming invested in the intervention is to use focus groups, and ask what specific elements of the training they would like to receive. The benefits of this approach include the early building of the relationships between practitioners and participants (compadrazgo), a sign of respect (respeto) for participants, and acknowledgement of their own understanding of their situation and needs.
Parenting Education 21 References Abell, E., Mize, J., & Shields, E. B. (1999). Challenges to providing parenting education in rural, low-resource communities: Lessons from the Begin Education Early project. Family Science Review, 12(2), 87-100. Azar, S.T. (1998). A cognitive behavioral approach to understanding and treating parents who abuse their children. In D. Wolfe & R. McMahon (Eds.), Child abuse: New directions in prevention and treatment across the life span (pp. 78-100). New York: Sage. Azar, S.T., & Rohrbeck, C.A. (1986). Child abuse and unrealistic expectations: Further validation of the Parent Opinion Questionnaire. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 54, 867-868. Barber, J. G. (1992). Evaluating parent education groups: Effects on sense of competence and social isolation. Research on Social Work Practice, 2(1), 28-38. Barnes, G., & Farrell, P. (1992). Parental support and control as predictors of adolescent drinking, delinquency, and related problem behaviors. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 54(4), 736-777. Baumrind, D. (1967). Childcare practices anteceding three patterns of preschool behavior. Genetic Psychology Monographs, 75(1), 43-88. Baumrind, D. (1973). The developmental of instrumental competence through socialization. Minnesota symposium on child psychology, Vol. 7 (pp. 3-46). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. Baumrind, D. (1989). Rearing competent children. In W. Damon ( Ed.), Child development today and tomorrow (pp.349-378). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Parenting Education 22 Bavolek, S. J. (1984). Nurturing Parenting Program. Park City, UT: Family Development Resources, Inc. Bavolek, S. J., & Bavolek, J. D. (2002). Nurturing Parenting Program. Park City, UT: Family Development Resources. Bavolek, S. J., & Keene, R. G. (1999). Adult-Adolescent Parenting Inventory (AAPI-2): Administration and development handbook. Park City, UT: Family Development Resources, Inc. Brems, C., Baldwin, M., & Baxter, S. (1993). Empirical evaluation of a self psychologically oriented parent education program. Family Relations, 42(1), 26-30. Britner, P. A., & Reppucci, N. (1997). Prevention of child maltreatment: Evaluation of a parent education program for teen mothers. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 6(2), 165-176. Cardona, P.G., Nicholson, B.C., & Fox, R.A. (2000). Parenting among Mexican American and Anglo-American mothers with young children. Journal of Social Psychology, 140(3), 357-365. Coley, R.L., and Chase-Lansdale, P.L. (1998). Adolescent pregnancy and parenthood: Recent evidence and future directions. American Psychologist, 53, 152-166. Connelly, D.C., & Straus, M.A. (1992). Mother’s age and risk for physical abuse. Child Abuse and Neglect, 16, 709-718. Crnic, K.A., Ragozin, A.S., Greenberg, M.T., Robinson, N.M., & Bashham, R.B. (1983). Social interaction and developmental competence of preterm and full-term infants during the first year of life. Child Development, 54, 1199–1210. Dembo, M. H., Sweitzer, M., & Lauritzen, P. (1985). An evaluation of group parent education:
Parenting Education 23 Behavioral, PET, and Adlerian programs. Review of Educational Research, 55(2), 155200. Dishion, T. J., & McMahon, R. J. (1998). Parental monitoring and the prevention of problem behavior: A conceptual and empirical formulation. In R. Ashery, E. Roberton, & K. Kumpfer (Eds.), Drug abuse prevention through family interventions (pp. 229-259). National Institute of Drug Abuse (NIDA) Research Monograph 177. Garbarino, J., & Kostelny, K. (1992). Child maltreatment as a community problem. Child Abuse and Neglect, 16(4), 455-464. Harrison, A.O., Wilson, M.N., Pine, C.J., Chan, S.Q., & Burie, R. (1990). Family ecologies of ethnic minority children. Child Development, 61, 347-362. Harwood, R., Leyendecker, B., Carlson, V., Asencio, M., & Miller, A. (2002). Parenting among Latino families in the U.S. In M.H. Bornstein (Ed.), Handbook of parenting: Social conditions and applied parenting (Vol. 4, pp. 21-46). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Johnson, D. L., Walker, T. B., & Rodriguez, G. G. (1997). Teaching low-income mothers to teach their children. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 11(1), 101-114. King, T., & Fullard, W. (1982). Teenage mothers and their infants: New findings on the home environment. Journal of Adolescence, 5, 333-346. MacPhee, D., Fritz, J., & Miller-Heyl, J. (1996). Ethnic variations in personal social networks and parenting. Child Development, 67, 3278-3295. Markus, H., & Kitayama, S. (1991). Culture and the self: Implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation. Psychological Review, 98, 224-253.
Parenting Education 24 Martinez, E.A. (1993). Parenting young children in Mexican American/Chicano families. In H. P. McAdoo (Ed.), Family ethnicity: Strength in diversity (pp. 184-195). Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Maynard, R. A. (Ed.). (1996). Kids having kids: A Robin Hood Foundation special report on the costs of adolescent childbearing. New York: Robin Hood Foundation. Osofsky, J. D. & Thompson, M. D. (2000) Adaptive and maladaptive parenting: Perspectives on risk and protective factors. In J.P. Shonkoff & S. J. Meisals. (Eds.), Handbook of early childhood intervention. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Patterson, G. R. (1996). Some characteristics of a developmental theory for early-onset delinquency. In M.F. Lenzenweger & J.J. Haugaard (Eds.), Frontiers of developmental psychopathology (pp. 81-124). New York: Oxford University Press. Pfannenstiel, J., Lambson, T., & Yarnell, V. (1991). New parents as teachers: Evaluation of an early parent education program. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 4(1), 1-18. Powell, D. R., Zambrana, R., & Silva-Palacios, V. (1990). Designing culturally responsive parent programs: A comparison of low-income Mexican and Mexican-American mothers’ preferences. Family Relations, 39(3), 298-304. Remeika, C. C., & Thornburg, K. R. (1999). Low -income mothers’ parenting education program preferences. Family Science Review, 12(2), 101-112. Roosa, M. (1991). Adolescent pregnancy programs collection: An introduction. Family Relations, 40, 370-372 Schorr, L. B. (1988). Within our reach: Breaking the cycle of disadvantage. New York: Doubleday.
Parenting Education 25 Skolnick, A. (1991). Embattled paradise: The American family in an age of uncertainty.New York: Basic Books. Sviridoff, M., & Ryan, W. (1996). Prospects and strategies for community-centered family services. Milwaukee, WI: Family Service America. Thompson, R. W., Grow, C. R., Ruma, P. R., Daly, D. L., & Burke, R. V. (1993). Evaluation of a practical parenting program with middle- and low -income families. Family Relations, 41(1), 21-25. Todres, R., & Bunston, T. (1993). Parent education program evaluation: A review of the literature. Canadian Journal of Community Mental Health, 12(2), 225-257. U.S. Bureau of the Census (2000). State and county QuickFacts. Data derived from Population Estimates, 2000. Vega, W. A. (1990). Mexican American families in the 1980’s: A decade of research. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 52, 1015-1024. Vidal, C. (1988). Godparenting among Mexican American Americans. Child Welfare, 67 (5), 453-459. Webster -Stratton, C. (1997, March/April). From parent training to community building. Families in Society: The Journal of Contemporary Human Services, 78(2), 156-171. Weinman, M. L., Schreiber, N. B., & Robinson, M. (1992). Adolescent mothers: Were there any gains in a parent education program? Family and Community Health, 15(1), 1-10. Whipple, E. E., & Wilson, S. R. (1996). Evaluation of a parent education and support program for families at risk of physical child abuse. Families in Society: Journal of Contemporary Human Services, 77(4), 227-239.
Parenting Education 26 Wolfe, R. B. (1999). Listening to children: A new approach to parent support, education, and empowerment. Family Science Review, 12(4), 275-293.
Parenting Education 27 Table 1 Curriculum and Number of Class Sessions per Series ___________________________________________________________________ Curriculum Class Sessions per Series ___________________________________________________________________ Nurturing Program for Prenatal Families Nurturing Program for Teenage Parents and Their Families Nurturing Program for Parents and Their Infants, Toddlers, and Preschoolers Nurturing Program for Parents and Their School-Age Children 5-11 Years Nurturing Program for Parents and Their Adolescent Children 12-18 Years
9 20 24
Nurturing Program for Foster and Adoptive Parents
12
15 12
Nurturing Program for Families in Recovery from Substance 18 Abuse ___________________________________________________________________
Parenting Education 28 Table 2 Number of Class Series and Enrollment by Target Audience _______________________________________________________________ Target Audience Class Series Parents Children _______________________________________________________________ Teen Parents Unmarried Expectant Parents Single Parents (Hispanic) Single Parents (Native American) Divorced Parents Parents Referred by Social Services Foster Parents Families with Substance Abuse Issues
11 6 11 3 1 4 1 1
125 32 182 46 10 36 11 7
60 22 241 54 16 31 11 6
Incarcerated Parents
10
211
375
TOTAL 50 660 816 _______________________________________________________________ Note. Each class series lasts 9 to 24 weeks, depending on the curriculum.
Parenting Education 29 Table 3 Demographic Characteristics of Sample _________________________________________________________ Characteristic Percent __________________________________________________________ Gender Female Male Ethnicity Hispanic European American Native American African American Asian American Other Not given Age 19 years and younger 20-29 years 30-39 years 40-49 years 50 years and older Not given
60% 40% 60% 21% 10% 4% 1% 2% 1% 23% 24% 27% 12% 3% 1%
Education Less than high school 46% High school graduate or GED 26% Some college 17% College graduate 5% Not given 6% Marital Status Single 58% Married 26% Divorced or Separated 15% Widowed 1% Number of Children Pregnant 18% 1-2 children 51% 3-4 children 24% 5 or more children 4% Not given 3% _________________________________________________________________
Parenting Education 30
Table 4 Comparison of Pre- and Post-Test Means on the AAPI-2 _______________________________________________________________ Subscale
Pre-Test Post-test Standard F p Mean Mean Error _______________________________________________________________ Inappropriate Expectations 5.50 5.96 .13 26.65*** .00 Lack of Empathy 5.55 5.98 .14 9.14** .01 Corporal Punishment 5.60 6.41 .15 29.79*** .00 Reversing Roles 4.91 5.58 .12 32.31*** .00 Oppression of Power 5.37 5.96 .14 16.97*** .00 ________________________________________________________________ Note. *p < .05, **p < .01, ***p < .001
Parenting Education 31
Table 5 Comparison of Pre- and Post-Test Means on the Nurturing Quiz _______________________________________________________________ Version Pre-Test Post-Test Standard F p Mean Mean Error _______________________________________________________________ Prenatal 6.00 8.75 1.16 5.61* .05 Preschool Children 15.14 17.62 .29 70.78*** .00 School-aged Children 14.36 16.55 .40 29.47*** .00 ________________________________________________________________ Note. *p < .05, **p < .01, ***p < .001
