Table of Contents | Previous | Next |
6.0 Families’ Involvement with Their Children
6.1 Overview
This chapter focuses on Head Start’s interest in fostering family involvement with their children. The first section will present data on the level of activity family members engaged in with Head Start children. Subsequent sections will present findings on the effects of having fathers living in or out of their children’s households, as well as changes in household structures and how these changes affected children and families.
6.2 Family and Child Activities
Parents were asked how often family members engaged in weekly as well as monthly activities with their Head Start children. The weekly activities included the following:
- Told the child a story;
- Taught the child letters, words or numbers;
- Taught the child songs or music;
- Worked on arts and crafts with the child;
- Played with toys or games indoors or played a game, sport, or exercised together;
- Took the child along while doing errands like going to the post office, the bank or the store; and
- Involved the child in household chores like cooking, cleaning, setting the table, or caring for pets.
The monthly activities included the following:
- Visited a library;
- Went to a play, concert, or other live show;
- Visited an art gallery, museum, or historical site;
- Visited a zoo or aquarium;
- Talked with the child about family history or ethnic heritage;
- Attended an event sponsored by a community, ethnic, or religious group; and
- Attended an athletic or sporting event in which the child was not a player.
In a separate question, parents were asked how many days family members read to their Head Start children during the week prior to the interview. Across all activities, when parents indicated that reading or another type of activity had taken place, a follow-up question asked them to indicate which family members (mother, father, other household member, non-household member) participated in each activity with the children.
Weekly and monthly activity scores were generated by summing the number of activities each parent reported their family had engaged in with the child during the specified recall period. Total activity scores are based on the sum of the weekly and monthly activity scores. The total activity score for weekly and monthly activities indicated that families engaged in a mean of 6.2 activities with the children, out of a possible 14 activities (SD = 2.4). Weekly activities made up most of that total, with a reported mean of 4.1 activities of a possible seven (SD = 1.6), while a mean of 1.9 monthly activities was reported (SD = 1.5), also out of a possible seven.
Ethnic differences were noted in the number of activities families engaged in with their children. For total activity, there was a significant main effect across the three main ethnic groups, F(2, 2202) = 16.4, p < .0001. Scheffe post-hoc tests revealed that African American children had higher activity than either White or Hispanic children, and that White children had higher overall activity scores than Hispanic children. For the weekly activities, there was again a significant main effect for ethnicity F(2, 2203) = 12.2, p < .0001, with both African American and White children having more activity than Hispanic children. Finally, a third significant main effect for ethnicity was noted for the monthly activities, F(2, 2624) = 24.6, p < .0001, showing that the African American children had higher levels of activity than either the White or Hispanic children.
Because the follow-up questions asked who engaged in these activitie s with the children, it was possible to assess children’s activity with mothers, fathers, other household members, and non-household family members. Exhibit 6-1 presents the means of the weekly, monthly, and total activities by each of the four types of family members. Regardless of the type of activity, mothers were the individuals who most often engaged in these activities with their children.
|
While weekly activities generally occurred more often than monthly activities, having a grandparent in the home was particularly important to the levels of monthly and total activities. Children who were living in households where a grandparent was present had higher levels of monthly activity, t(2965) = 2.76; p = .0059, and subsequently, this had a similar effect on the total number of activities these families engaged in with their children, t(2502) = 2.03; p < .0425. As expected, the presence of a grandparent had an effect on the activities with children specifically attributed to other household members1. When a grandparent was present, total child activities with other household members were higher, t(2966) = 10.76; p < .0001, as were the reported numbers of weekly, t(2966) = 10.47; p < .0001, and monthly activities with other household members, t(2966) = 6.97; p < .0001.
The relationships between activities with children and selected child and family characteristics were assessed through bivariate correlations. As seen in Exhibit 6-2, participating in family activities with children was related to several positive outcomes. While family activities were positively correlated with scores on positive child behaviors2 and emergent literacy3, the patterns of correlations were negative between activities and problem behaviors. The exhibit shows that all three types of activity scores were negatively correlated with overall problem behavior4, as well as with aggressive5 and hyperactive6 behavior. Only withdrawn7 behavior evidenced a different pattern: a negative correlation with weekly activity, a positive correlation with monthly activity, and no significant relationship with total activity.
Exhibit 6-2 also shows how the three levels of activity correlated with selected family characteristics. The only family characteristic found to have a negative relationship with activity was parent depression.8 On the other hand, families’ applications of child-oriented rules in the home and reported social support9 for child rearing were both positively correlated with all three types of activity.
Monthly household income was positively correlated with monthly activity, but that was the only significant relationship for income. There was no relationship between any of the three activity levels and the total number of individuals or the number of children (under 18 years of age) reported to be living in the household.
| Total Activity | Weekly Activity | Monthly Activity | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Child Characteristics | |||
| Positive child behavior | .11**** | .14**** | .04* |
| Overall problem behavior | -.10**** | -.12**** | -.06*** |
| Problem behavior - aggressive | -.13**** | -.11**** | -.11**** |
| Problem behavior - hyperactive | -.10**** | -.11**** | -.06**** |
| Problem behavior - withdrawn | n.s. | -.06** | .04* |
| Emergent literacy | .19**** | .15**** | .17**** |
| Family Characteristics | |||
| Parental depression | -.06** | n.s. | -.11**** |
| Social support for child rearing | .14**** | .07*** | .17**** |
| Monthly household income | n.s. | n.s. | .06*** |
| Number of household rules | .16**** | .08**** | .19**** |
|
Data collection at multiple time points allowed an assessment of changes in the level of activity from fall 1997 to spring 1998. For the three types of activity (total, weekly, monthly), there were small but significant increases from the fall baseline interview to the spring follow-up interview. Total activity increased by an average of .27 activities (SD = 2.5, t(1919) = 4.83; p < .0001). Smaller increases were noted for weekly activities (M = .11 activities, SD = 1.8, t(1920) = 2.85; p = .0044) and monthly activ ities (M = .13 activities, SD = 1.5, t(2458) = 2.85; p < .0001). Increases in the levels of activity with children were noted for 45.7% of the families, while 16.2% of the families had no reported change in the number of activities, and 38.2% of the families had a decrease in the reported number of activities with children. The range for the number of increased activities with children was from 1 to 12, while the range for the number of decreased activities with children was from 1 to 9.
The number of significant correlations between changes in activity over time and changes in child and family characteristics was much lower than the number of significant relationships seen between activity and the same characteristics at baseline (Exhibit 6-2). For the child characteristics, increases in weekly activities were positively correlated with increased parent reports of positive social behaviors (r = .07; p = .0014) and emergent literacy (r = .08; p = .0008), but negatively correlated with changes in overall problem behaviors (r = -.05; p = .0264) and hyperactive behavior (r = -.07; p = .0021). Changes in total activities were positively correlated with positive social behaviors (r = .08; p = .0002) and emergent literacy (r = .11; p < .0001). Among the family characteristics, increases in total and weekly activities were positively correlated with increased support for child rearing (total: r = .05; p = .0143; weekly: r = .05; p = .0202), while higher monthly household incomes were positively correlated with increases in monthly activities (r = .04; p = .033).
Changes in some child and family characteristics were associated with changes in total activities with the child from fall 1997 to spring 1998. Significant main effects for activity change from baseline to spring (three categories: increase, no change, decrease) were found for positive child behavior, F(2, 1894) = 4.11, p < .0166, and emergent literacy, F(2, 2623) = 124.8, p < .0001. Post-hoc tests indicated that in families where activities with the children increased, parents reported significantly greater increases in positive social behaviors and emergent literacy than for children in families with declines in total activity. Among the family variables, significant main effects were found for activity change on support, F(2, 1909) = 4.4, p = .0123, and the use of household rules, F(2, 1887) = 4.82, p = .0082. Again the post-hoc tests showed that families with increases in total activities with children had significantly greater increases in child-rearing support and in the number of household rules used than families with declines in total activity. In the case of the use of household rules, families that increased total activity also had a significantly greater increase in the number of rules used in the home than families with no change in activity.
For the final type of activity, reading to the child in the home, 92.0% of the parents reported that they or another family member read to the children during the past week. Almost two fifths of the children (37.5%) were read to every day, while 28.5% were read to three or more times and 26.8% were read to once or twice during the week prior to the interview. The smallest proportion, 7.1%, represented children who were not read to at all. The individuals most likely to have read to the children during that week were mothers (80.4%), followed by other (non-parent) household members (30.2%), fathers (23.8%), and non-household family members (10.2%). Across the three main ethnic groups, a significant main effect was noted for differences in reading to children, F(2, 2623) = 124.8, p < .0001. Scheffe post-hoc tests indicated that White children were read to more often than either African American or Hispanic children, and that African American children were read to more often than Hispanic children. Over the Head Start year, about one half of the families (47.0%) showed no change in the number of days family members read to the children, while 24.0% showed an increase in the number of days the children were read to, and 26.5% reported a decrease in the number of days the children were read to during the week prior to the interview. Reading frequency was positively correlated with emergent literacy scores, in both fall 1997, r = .15; p < .0001, and spring 1998, r = .17; p < .0001, but increases in reading from fall to spring were not correlated with improvements in emergent literacy scores.
6.3 Fathers’ Involvement with Their Children
Within Head Start’s mission to emphasize the roles of parents in the lives of their children, increased attention has been given to the role of fathers, including those who do not live in the home with their children. In the fall 1997 interview, 5.1% of the respondents were identified as fathers. A set of questions was added to the interview to gain additional information about those fathers who were not living with their children.
Descriptive Information on Fathers
At the time of the baseline data collection10, fathers were reported to live in 44.2% of the households. Among the fathers who did not live in the home with their Head Start children, 46.2% contributed to the financial support of their children, and 55.4% lived within a one-hour drive of their children. Differences across the ethnic groups were striking in terms of whether fathers were present in the home. African American children were 2.8 times more likely than White children to live without a father in their home (OR = 2.79; 95% CI = 2.30, 3.38), while Hispanic children were one third less likely than the White children to have a non-household father (OR = .65; 95% CI = 0.53, 0.80).
The fall 1997 baseline data indicated that 75.8% of the household fathers were employed, 3.4% were in prison, and 0.5% in the military. Almost two fifths had less than a high school diploma (37.6%), 31.1% had a diploma or GED, and 18.1% had attended college or received a degree. In comparison, only 55.7% of the non-household fathers were working, 6.7% were in jail or prison, 2.9% were in school or training, and 1.5% were away in the military. Over one third had not yet achieved a high school diploma or GED (34.5%), 26.0% had a diploma, and 6.3% had a GED as their highest level of education, while 13.2% had attended some college or had a college degree. The highest level of education for the non-household fathers was reported as unknown by 9.4% of the respondents and in almost one quarter of the cases (21.9%), the respondents did not know the current status of the children’s non-household fathers.
Sixty percent of the children without a father in their household had someone who served as a father figure for them. Individuals who were most frequently named as father figures included non-household relatives (30.7%), the respondents’ spouses or partners who lived in the household (29.8%), and spouses or partners who did not live in the household (18.6%). Almost one tenth of the children (9.7%) rarely or never saw their non-household father and had no father figure, a group that represented 5.4% of the entire sample of children. By spring 1998, this latter number was only slightly lower, at 4.7% of the overall sample.
Over the approximately six months between the fall 1997 and the spring 1998 interviews, there was little change in the proportion of fathers who lived in households with their children. Fathers who were living out of the household in fall 1997 and were living with their children at the time of the spring 1998 interview represented 5.6% of the overall sample, while 3.5% of the fathers who had been living with their children left the home during that time.
Non-household Fathers’ Financial Support of and Visitation with their Head Start Children
As noted above, at the time of the baseline data collection, over one half of the non-household fathers (55.4%) were reported to live within a one-hour drive of their children. Two fifths of the non-household fathers (39.9%) rarely or never saw their children, including 24.4% of those who lived within one hour of their children. In contrast, 26.4% of the non-household fathers saw their children several times a week or every day. Less than one half of the non-household fathers (46.2%) were reported to have contributed to the financial support of their children, a figure that included only 37.5% of those fathers who lived within one hour of their children, over the same time.
Overall changes in financial support and contact were minimal from fall 1997 to spring 1998. While 3.4% of the non-household fathers began giving their children financial support between fall 1997 and spring 1998, 4.0% of the non-household fathers stopped contributing during the same time period. The proportion of non-household fathers who increased the frequency with which they saw their children between fall and spring was 8.4%. However, an almost equal proportion of fathers (8.7%) decreased the frequency with which they saw their children.
Fathers and Activity with Their Children
As noted in Section 6.1, increased family activity with the children was related to several positive outcomes for children. While the earlier section focused on overall family activity, this also was true for activities with fathers, even in cases where they did not live with their children. In order to look at the effect of fathers on activities with children relative to other family members, fathers were categorized according to their availability to their children. Three categories were used: 1) fathers living in the homes, 2) non-household fathers who were more available (they saw their children a few times a month or more), and 3) non-household fathers who were less available (they saw their children several times a year or less).
An ANOVA found no differences in overall total activities, weekly activities, or monthly activities based on the availability of the fathers, but, as might be anticipated, clear differences were noted across the categories on activities with the children involving fathers. Significant main effects were found for availability on fathers’ total activities, F(2,2915) = 381.2, p < .0001, fathers’ weekly activities, F(2,2915) = 309.5, p < .0001, and fathers’ monthly activities with their children, F(2, 2915) = 207.0; p< .0001. As expected, for each type of activity, the post-hoc comparisons showed that in-home fathers had significantly higher levels of activity with their children than either category of non-household fathers, while the non-household fathers who were more available to their children were more active with their children than the non-household fathers who were less available to their children.
A series of analyses indicated that other family members’ activities with the children varied by the fathers’ availability, perhaps to compensate for non-household fathers. The total and weekly activities with children attributed to mothers also had significant main effects across the categories of fathers’ availability. For mothers, total activities, F(2, 2915) = 11.4; p < .0001, and weekly activities, F(2, 2915) = 15.5; p < .0001, with their children were higher when fathers were not in the household than when fathers lived at home, regardless of how available fathers were to the children. A main effect for fathers’ availability was significant, F(2, 2915) = 5.3; p < .0001, for weekly activities involving other household members. Where the children’s fathers were less available, the other household members engaged in significantly more weekly activities with the children than in families where the fathers lived in the homes.
In terms of the effect of fathers’ availability on activities attributed to non-household family members, significant main effects were found for all three types of activities: total activities, F(2, 2915) = 33.9; p < .0001; weekly activities, F(2,2915) = 23.6; p < .0001, and monthly activities, F(2, 2915) = 25.4; p < .0001. Again, post-hoc tests showed the same pattern of findings. Regardless of how available the non-household fathers were, non-household family members were more involved in activities with the children when fathers were out of the home than when fathers resided in the home with the children.
Exhibit 6-3 shows that fathers’ activities with their children were significantly correlated with the corresponding activities for the mothers, particularly in the case of the monthly activities. Correlations were generally higher for the monthly activities, a finding particularly evident among the correlations of fathers’ activity with activity scores for other household members and non-household members. This is not surprising since the monthly activities were generally group-oriented activities that multiple family members might engage in together.
| Availability of Fathers | Activity with Mother |
Activity with other Household Members |
Activity with Non- Household Members |
|---|---|---|---|
| Total Activity | |||
| Household fathers | .19*** | .12*** | .07* |
| Non-household
fathers: See children a few times a month or more |
.27*** | .20*** | .31*** |
| Non-household
fathers: See children a few times a year or less |
.16*** | n.s. | n.s. |
| Weekly Activity | |||
| Household fathers | .08** | n.s. | n.s. |
| Non-household
fathers: See children a few times a month or more |
.17*** | n.s. | .25*** |
| Non-household
fathers: See children a few times a year or less |
.16*** | n.s. | n.s. |
| Monthly Activity | |||
| Household fathers | .58*** | .48*** | .15*** |
| Non-household
fathers: See children a few times a month or more |
.45*** | .43*** | .35*** |
| Non-household
fathers: See children a few times a year or less |
.24*** | .18*** | n.s. |
| ***p < .0001; **p < .01; *p< .05 |
Fathers and Their Effect on Children and Families
Fathers, whether or not they were present in the home, had a significant effect on the ability of families to access resources, like household income, community services, and social support, all of which may be necessary to foster a proper developmental environment for children.
As expected, non-household fathers who saw their children only several times a year or less (“less available”) provided significantly less child-rearing support to the mothers than did non-household fathers who saw their children at least a few times a month (“more available”), t(952) = 25.82; p < .0001. Differences in fathers’ child-rearing support were noted based on the gender of the children. It was noted that non-household fathers had higher ratings of support when the Head Start children were boys, regardless of whether they were in the less available category, t(961) = 2.46; p = .0140, or the more available category, t(408) = 2.35; p = .0194.
However, in two of the three categories of availability, fathers’ support for child rearing was correlated with fathers’ activities with children as well as a number of child-related characteristics.Exhibit 6-4 shows that support for child rearing was significantly and positively correlated with the amount of activities the fathers engaged in with their children. In this case, non-household fathers who were more available to their children were more like the household fathers than like the less-available non-household fathers.
| Support for Child Rearing from | Fathers' Activity with Children - Total |
Fathers' Activity with Children - Past Week |
Fathers' Activity with Children - Past Month |
|---|---|---|---|
| Household fathers |
.19* | .17* | .14* |
| Non-household fathers: See children a few times a month or more |
.20* | .17* | .18* |
| Non-household fathers: See children a few times a year or less |
n.s. | n.s. | n.s. |
|
Fathers’ support for child rearing also was related to reported improvements in child behavior and academic skills. The findings in Exhibit 6-5 indicate that child-rearing support from household fathers was positively correlated with positive social behaviors in children and negatively related to overall problem behaviors, including the three problem behavior subscales indicating aggressive, hyperactive, or withdrawn behavior. Support for child rearing from non-household fathers who were more available was positively correlated with emergent literacy and negatively correlated with overall problem behavior and aggressive behavior. Even among non-household fathers who were less available to interact with their children, the more helpful they were to mothers in raising their children, the more mothers rated their children as having positive social behaviors and the less they reported aggressive and hyperactive behaviors.
| Support for Child Rearing from |
Emergent Literacy |
Child Positive Social Behaviors |
Child Problem Behaviors |
Child Aggressive Behavior |
Child Withdrawn Behavior |
Child Hyperactive Behavior |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Household fathers | n.s. | .10*** | -.13**** | -.09** | -.13*** | -.08** |
| Non-household fathers: See children a few times a month or more |
.11* | n.s. | -.12* | -.22**** | n.s. | n.s. |
| Non-household fathers: See children a few times a year or less |
n.s. | .13**** | n.s. | -.09** | n.s. | -.08* |
| ****p< .0001; *** p< .001; **p< .01; *p < .05 |
Discipline was another area affected by the presence of a father in the household. Both forms of discipline that were addressed in the parent interview, time outs and spanking, were more likely to occur when fathers were not present in the homes. Children who were reported to have been given a time out in the week prior to the parent interview were 1.2 times more likely than children who did not receive a time out to have a father who did not live in their home (OR = 1.19; 95% CI = 1.02, 1.39). Similarly, children who were spanked during the week prior to the interview were 1.2 times more likely to not have their father living with them than children who were not spanked (OR = 1.23; 95% CI = 1.15, 1.49).
In terms of family resources, the presence of fathers in the home had a significant impact. Families who were reported to receive TANF were 4.2 times more likely to have the father living out of the household than families not receiving TANF (OR = 4.19; 95% CI = 3.51, 5.02). The need for and use of family services also decreased for families in which fathers resided. Comparing families’ need for and use of services across the three categories of father availability, significant main effects were noted. In comparing the number of services needed, F(2, 2915) = 78.1; p < .0001, the post-hoc tests indicated that families with less available, non-household fathers had the greatest need for services, and that families with more available non-household fathers needed more services than families with a resident father. Comparisons on the number of services received revealed a significant main effect for availability, F(2, 2841) = 99.5; p < .0001, and the identical pattern among the post-hoc tests.
However, regardless of the number of services needed or received, there was a relationship between the number of services and the support fathers provided for child rearing. As shown in Exhibit 6-6, when fathers were in the home, there was a significant, negative correlation between the levels of child-rearing support fathers offered with both the number of services the families needed and the number of services they received. This relationship was even stronger for families with non-household fathers who made themselves available, but it was non-existent for families with fathers who were less available for their children.
| Support for Child Rearing from | Number of Family Services Needed |
Number of Family Services Received |
|---|---|---|
| Household fathers | -.10* | -.10* |
| Non-household fathers: See children a few times a month or more |
-20** | -.17* |
|
Non-household fathers: |
n.s. | n.s. |
|
An additional link was noted between the presence of fathers in the household and parental depression. Compared with non-depressed mothers, mildly depressed mothers were 1.4 times more likely not to live with the children’s fathers (OR = 1.44; 95% CI = 1.21, 1.72), moderately depressed mothers were 1.7 times more likely (OR = 1.75; 95% CI = 1.40, 2.18), and severely depressed mothers were almost 2.5 times more likely to live in a household without the children’s fathers (OR = 2.45; 95% CI = 1.92, 3.13).
Fathers and Exposure to Violence
The presence of a father in the home appears to be an important factor in assessing and understanding the current status and previous history of a child and family with regards to their exposure to violence, both in the neighborhood and in the home. Children who were witnesses to violent crime or domestic violence were 2.5 times more likely to have non-household fathers than children who were not reported to have witnessed violent crime or domestic violence (OR = 2.46; 95% CI = 2.00, 3.03). As well, children who were reported to have been victims of violent crime or abuse were 3.6 times more likely than children who were non-victims to have their fathers living out of the household (OR = 3.65; 95% CI = 2.11, 6.30). Of the children who were reported to have been victims of violent crime or domestic violence, 83.8% lived in homes without fathers present. Finally, children who lived in households with someone who had been arrested or charged with a crime or had biological fathers who had been arrested or charged with a crime were 3.0 times more likely than children in other households to have fathers who did not live in their homes (OR = 3.09; 95% CI = 2.56, 3.75).
6.4 Changes Within the Households
To further the understanding of how Head Start families were affected by their environments, changes in household structures were investigated. The parent interview assessed changes in the composition of each household from fall 1997 to spring 1998. At each interview point, respondents were asked to report how each individual currently living in the household was related to the Head Start child. Changes in the presence of each designated relationship were assessed across time. While the numbers presented here indicate that household changes occurred for many children, these numbers are conservative estimates of change. For example, in cases where a person coded as a female non-relative left the household and was replaced by another female non-relative, no change would have been noted in that category for that household, even though there was a different person in the household.
Based on respondents’ reports across both years, household changes were noted in 40.8% of the households, including 10.1% that had 3 or more reported changes. New household members were reported for 30.7% of the homes, while 26.2% of the households had someone leave during the Head Start year. In 2.5% of the households, three or more individuals entered, and 2.2% of the households had three or more individuals exit between the baseline interview and spring 1998. Overall, as seen in Exhibit 6-7, changes occurred for almost one half (46%) of the households with African American children, while 42.7% of the households with Hispanic children and 34.0% of the households with White children had changes.
Although any changes in household structure may have consequences for the children or family, it was expected that changes among certain adult household members would have additional effects because they likely had prominent roles within their households. To investigate this notion further, two categories of ‘key’ adult family members were constructed to include individuals who may have been important contributors to either the emotional or the financial resources of their households, or both. These include, for ‘key adult males,’ fathers, stepfathers, foster fathers, grandfathers, or male spouses or partners of the mother. Similarly, the category of ‘key adult females’ included mothers, stepmothers, foster mothers, grandmothers, or female spouses or partners of the fathers. Changes involving these key males affected 18.7% of the households, while only 8.0% of the households experienced a similar change involving key females. Exhibit 6-7 shows the proportion of households that experienced such changes. Across each of the primary ethnic groups, the pattern held for key males effecting structural changes in about twice as many households as key females.
| Household Changes | Weighted | Percentages | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| All (n = 2,543) |
African American (n = 933) |
White (n = 698) |
Hispanic (n = 635) |
|
| Key Males | ||||
| Into the household | 8.6 | 8.7 | 6.4 | 11.2 |
| Out of the household | 5.2 | 7.3 | 4.4 | 4.6 |
| In & out of the household | 5.0 | 3.6 | 6.3 | 5.1 |
| No change | 81.3 | 80.4 | 82.9 | 79.1 |
| Key Females | ||||
| Into the household | 3.0 | 3.1 | 2.6 | 3.1 |
| Out of the household | 4.4 | 5.0 | 3.9 | 4.8 |
| In & out of the household | 0.7 | 1.4 | 0.5 | 0.3 |
| No change | 92.0 | 90.5 | 93.1 | 91.8 |
| Households with any change | 40.8 | 46.0 | 34.0 | 42.7 |
For families having key males enter their households, there were significant increases in total activities with children, t(144) = 3.82; p = .0002, and in the children’s emergent literacy, t(189) = 11.15; p < .0001, as well as significant increases in the monthly household incomes, t(183) = 4.84; p < .0001. No effects were found for changes in child behavior, parental depression, or support for child rearing. When key males left the household, the noted changes were significant increases in both reports of children’s aggressive behavior, t(146) = 2.36; p = .0195, and emergent literacy, t(14) = 8.86; p < .0001. In addition, there were significant decreases in monthly household incomes t(140) = -4.43; p < .0001.
When key females entered the household, significant increases were reported in both children’s aggressive behavior, t(74) = 2.66; p = .0095, and emergent literacy, t(75) = 4.72; p < .0001. Monthly household incomes also increased, but not significantly. Increases in weekly family activity with the Head Start children, t(84) = 2.01; p = .0472, and in the children’s emergent literacy, t(109) = 7.53; p < .0001, were evident in homes where key females left during the year. Again, changes in other variables, including corresponding decreases in monthly household incomes, were not significant.
6.5 Summary
Chapter 6 presents findings related to how family members interact with the Head Start children and how the involvement of family members may relate to selected characteristics of the children and the families. The key findings from this chapter are summarized below.
Family and Child Activities
-
African American children were involved in more activities with family members than either White or Hispanic children, and White children had more family activity than Hispanic children. For the weekly activities, African American and White children had more involvement than Hispanic children, and for the monthly activities, African American children had more activity than either the White or Hispanic children.
-
Children who were living in households where a grandparent was present had more total and monthly activities. The presence of a grandparent increased the amount of activities with children by non-parental household members.
-
Family activities had significant positive correlations with the positive child behaviors and emergent literacy, but all three types of activities were negatively correlated with overall problem behavior as well as with aggressive and hyperactive behavior.
-
Families’ use of child-oriented rules in the home and reported social support for child rearing were both positively correlated with activities. The only family characteristic found to have a negative relationship with activity was parent depression.
-
Increases in activities with children were noted for almost one half of the families, while 16.2% of the families had no reported change in the number of activities, and almost two fifths of the families had a decrease in the reported number of activities with children.
-
Almost two fifths of the children were read to every day, while 28.5% were read to three or more times and slightly over one quarter were read to once or twice during the week prior to the interview. Less than 10% of the children were not read to at all. Over the Head Start year, about one half of the families showed no change in the number of days family members read to the children, approximately one quarter showed an increase in the number of days the children were read to, and slightly more than one fourth reported a decrease in the number of days the children were read to during the week prior to the interview.
Fathers’ Involvement with Their Children
-
Fathers were reported to live in 44.2% of the households. Among the non-household fathers, 46.2% contributed to the financial support of their children, and 55.4% lived within a one-hour drive of their children. African Americ an children were 2.8 times more likely than White children to live without a father in their household while Hispanic children were one third less likely than the White children to have non-household fathers.
-
Sixty percent of the children without fathers in their household had someone who served as a father figure for them, most often non-household relatives or the respondents’ spouses or partners who lived in the household. Almost one tenth of the children rarely or never saw their non-household fathers and had no father figures, a group that represented 5.4% of the entire sample of children.
-
Two fifths of the non-household fathers rarely or never saw their children, including one fourth of those who lived within one hour of their children. In contrast, over one fourth of the non-household fathers saw their children several times a week or every day. Less than one half of the non-household fathers were reported to have contributed to the financial support of their children.
-
In-home fathers were significantly more active with their children than either category of non-household fathers, while the non-household fathers who were more available to their children were more active with their children than the non-household fathers who were less available to their children.
-
Mothers’ total and weekly activities with their children were higher when fathers were not in the household than when fathers lived at home, regardless of how available fathers were to the children. In cases where the children’s fathers were less available, the other household members were significantly more active with the children than in families where the fathers lived in the homes. Regardless of how available the non-household fathers were, non-household family members were more involved in activities with children than non-household family members were when fathers resided in the home with the children.
-
As expected, non-household fathers who saw their children several times a year or less provided significantly less child-rearing support to the mothers than did non-household fathers who saw their children at least a few times a month. It was noted that non-household fathers had higher ratings of support when the Head Start children were boys, regardless of whether they were in the less available category or the more available category.
-
Support for child rearing was significantly and positively correlated with the number of activities the fathers engaged in with their children. Both forms of discipline that were addressed in the parent interview, time outs and spanking, were more likely to occur when fathers were not present in the homes.
-
Families who were reported to receive TANF were four times more likely to have the fathers living out of the households than families not receiving TANF. Families with non-household fathers had the greatest need for and use of community services. There was a significant, negative correlation between the levels of child-rearing support fathers offered with both the number of services the families needed and the number of services they received.
-
Children who were witnesses to violent crime or domestic violence were two and one half times more likely to have non-household fathers, while children who were reported to have been victims of viole nt crime or abuse were over three and one half times more likely than children who were non-victims to have their fathers living out of their households.
Changes within the Households
-
Household changes were noted in two fifths of the households from fall to spring, including 10.1% that had 3 or more reported changes. New household members were reported for almost one third of the homes, while slightly more than one fourth of the households had someone leave during the Head Start year. In 2.5% of the households, three or more individuals entered, and 2.2% of the households had three or more individuals exit between the baseline interview and spring 1998. Overall, changes occurred for almost one half of the households with African American children, while two fifths of the households with Hispanic children and one third of the households with White children had changes.
-
Changes involving key males affected slightly less than one fifth of the households, while only 8.0% of the households experienced a similar change involving key females.
-
For families having key males enter their households, there were significant increases in total activities with children, in the children’s emergent literacy, and in monthly household incomes. When key males left the household, the noted changes were significant increases in both aggressive behaviors and emergent literacy, and significant decreases in monthly household incomes.
-
When key females entered the households, significant increases were reported in aggressive behaviors and emergent literacy. Monthly household incomes also increased, but not significantly. Increases in weekly family activities with the Head Start children, and in the children’s emergent literacy, were evident in homes where key females left during the year.
1In the interview, parents were asked about child-oriented activities with the other family members in the household (non-parents) and non-household family members. The specific relationships of these individuals to the children were not specified, but could have included the grandparents.(back)
2 A summary score of 7 parent-reported behavior items rated on a 3-point scale ranging from “not true” to “very true or often true.” Scores ranged from 0-14, with higher scores representing more positive behavior.(back)
3A summary score of 5 parent-reported child skills including whether child can identify all of the primary colors, recognize most or all letters of the alphabet, count to twenty or higher, write rather than scribble, and write own name. Scores ranged from 0-5.(back)
4An adaptation of the Achenbach Child Behavior Checklist (Total Problem Behavior Index). Each of 12 behavior items, based on parent report, is rated on a 3-point scale ranging from “not true” to “very true or often true.” Summary scores ranged from 0-24, with higher scores representing more frequent or severe negative behavior.(back)
5A subscale of the Total Problem Behavior Index, each of four items is rated on a 3-point scale ranging from “not true” to “very true or often true.” Items include parents’ reports of whether child hits and fights with other children, has temper tantrums, doesn’t get along with others, and is disobedient at home. Subscale scores ranged from 0-8.(back)
6A subscale of the Total Problem Behavior Index, each of three items is rated on a 3-point scale ranging from “not true” to “very true or often true.” Items include parents’ reports of whether child can’t pay attention for long, is very restless, and is nervous, high-strung, or tense. Subscale scored ranged from 0-6.(back)
7A subscale of the Total Problem Behavior Index, each of five items is rated on a 3-point scale ranging from “not true” to “very true or often true.” Items include whether child is unhappy, worries, feels worthless, has difficulty making changes, or acts too young. Subscale scores ranged from 0-8.(back)
8The CES-D Scale (12-item version) measures levels of depression among parents. Scores ranged from 0-36. Zero-4 = Not depressed; 5-9 = Mildly depressed; 10-14 = Moderately depressed; 15 or more = Severely depressed. M = 7.2; SD = 6.7.(back)
9Summary support score is based on respondents’ ratings of how helpful individuals were in helping them raise their Head Start children over the past six months. Each of nine categories of individuals was rated on a 3-point scale ranging from “not very helpful” to “very helpful.” Summary scores ranged from 0 to 27, with higher scores representing more support. M = 13.5; SD = 5.2.(back)
10In Chapter 4, the discussion used spring 1998 data for consistency with other data being discussed in that section. The percentages presented here are from fall 1997, and may be slightly different from those in Chapter 4.(back)
| Table of Contents | Previous | Next |