Reflections

Subterms

    More stories

    • 163 Shares99 Views

      in Children

      Parental beliefs about online education: Reflections on the Italian experience during COVID-19 quarantine

      by

      Italy was the first western country hit by COVID-19 and one of the countries in Europe with the highest death rates. National lockdown restrictions came into force in March 2020 and schools were closed until the end of the academic year. Now new lockdowns are feared. Teachers’ and parents’ engagement in online schooling and remote learning has emerged as one of the most significant challenges for the country.
      Children experiencing lockdown measures at home are likely to have accumulated multiple stresses related to their lack of or low engagement in school-based instructional and social activities. With schools closed, parents have become full-time child care providers and home-school teachers, responsible, more than ever, for supporting their children’s educational and developmental needs.
      Now Italian young people, their families, and their teachers are facing the challenge of in-person or blended (partly in-person, partly online) education.

      “How well both parents and their children believe they are capable of handling challenges associated with online education was associated with higher child autonomy around online education, better academic performance, and fewer child emotional difficulties.”

      Last summer in Italy, we conducted an anonymous survey of parents with 6- to 18-year-old children about their beliefs about online education. Here are some preliminary data:
      250 parents, 83% of whom were mothers, answered the survey.
      The average age of the children was 11 (SD = 3.84) and 53% were boys.
      The parents were from the center and south of Italy.
      48% lived in an independent house, while 52% lived in an apartment.
      90% said they had WIFI in their home during the lockdown.
      Our study was inspired by Albert Bandura‘s studies on self-efficacy beliefs, which showed that people’s actions are strongly influenced by how much they believe they are capable of reaching a goal or effectively handling a challenging situation. We conducted a pilot study to examine parents’ self-efficacy beliefs toward the challenges of online education during quarantine (we asked, for example, “During quarantine, how well did you believe you were capable of supporting your child doing homework during online education?”). We also examined parents’ perceptions of their children’s beliefs about feeling capable of handling the challenges (we asked, for example, “During quarantine, how well do you think your child felt capable of asking for support to do homework from you/a classmate/a teacher during online education?”). Hereafter I refer to those constructs as parents’ and children’s efficacy beliefs toward online education.
      First, both parents’ and children’s efficacy beliefs toward online education were associated with higher autonomy on the part of the children around online education (e.g., “During quarantine, how often did your child attend online education autonomously, without you having to remind him/her it was time to do so?”). Similarly higher parents’ and [children’s?] efficacy beliefs correlated with better academic performance and fewer emotional difficulties on the part of the children at the end of academic year.
      Second, parents’ support for their children’s academic activities before the COVID-19 pandemic started, as well as parents’ and children’s familiarity with online communication platforms before the pandemic, were associated with higher parental self-efficacy beliefs toward online education.
      Greater parental difficulty in supporting their children in respecting homework deadlines and understanding teachers’ instructions about homework, as well as an overall parental feeling of powerlessness in understanding how they could support their children’s learning, predicted lower parents’ and children’s efficacy beliefs.
      In addition, higher parents’ and children’s beliefs in understanding others’ needs (empathic self-efficacy), handling anger and sadness in challenging situations, and expressing positive emotions (regulatory emotional self-efficacy) were associated with higher parents’ and children’s efficacy beliefs toward online education, as well as with youth’s autonomy toward online education.
      Parents’ hostile rumination (e.g., “I will always remember the injustices I have suffered”) and irritability (e.g., “I often feel like a powder keg ready to explode”) were associated with lower parents’ self-efficacy and children’s autonomy toward online education.

      “Facilitating family-school communications in the time of COVID-19 might decrease parents’ sense of powerlessness when supporting their children’s learning development.”

      Children’s negative emotions (e.g., anger and sadness), low effortful control (e.g., the ability to inhibit an action when there is a strong tendency to perform it), and higher problematic behaviors (e.g., aggressive behaviors, anxiety and symptoms of depression) before the COVID-19 pandemic were also associated with lower parents’ and children’s efficacy beliefs toward online education.
      In conclusion, Bandura’s self-efficacy theory supports the importance of taking into account how well both parents and their children believe they are capable of handling challenges associated with online education. Our preliminary findings show a correlation between these beliefs and developmental outcomes for Italian children during the difficult months of the lockdown.
      Facilitating family-school communication in the time of COVID-19 might decrease parents’ sense of powerlessness when supporting their children’s learning development. It could also increase their sense of efficacy around the challenges typically associated with online education.
      If parents and teachers know which parents’ and children’s characteristics are associated with better child outcomes, they might be able to think more effectively about how to manage their own and their children’s behaviors to maximize the chances of success for the children.
      Header photo: Nenad Stojkovic. Creative Commons.  More

    • 125 Shares119 Views

      in Children

      How to support parents with home learning during COVID-19 lockdowns

      by

      The COVID-19 pandemic takes a toll on all of us, but particularly on families with young children. In an effort to slow the spread of the virus, Germany – among many other countries – closed child care centers, prohibited the use of playgrounds, and implemented social distancing measures in spring 2020. This put parents of young children in a tight spot. They had to provide education and care at home while juggling other demands, including jobs and household chores. How did the lockdown affect parents’ ability to provide home learning activities for their children?
      Parents engaged in more home learning activities with their children during the lockdown than they did before the lockdown. This was the general trend in our survey (see Cohen, Oppermann, & Anders, 2020) of 7,048 German parents of 1- to 6-year-olds, conducted during the lockdown in Germany in April and May 2020. For instance, parents read more books with their children, spent more time together in nature, and played more (board) games or did more puzzles.

      “The largest predictor of parents’ ability to provide home learning activities was stress: Parents who said they were the most stressed provided the least amount of learning activities for their children.”

      Our study also showed that providing home learning activities during the lockdown worked better for some parents than for others. Parents with more than one child under age 6 and parents who were employed full time provided fewer activities than parents with only one child 6 and under and parents with part-time jobs.
      The largest predictor of parents’ ability to provide home learning activities was stress: Parents who said they were the most stressed provided the least amount of learning activities for their children. This finding is intuitive: Parents who are overwhelmed by all the demands have fewer resources to engage with their children. And the COVID-19 pandemic certainly did not make life easier for parents. Many were juggling working at home with caring for children (54% in our survey), and some had to deal with sudden unemployment (1%) or short-time leave (7%), which often led to financial strain (41%). Moreover, playgrounds were closed and families were stuck at home, often in apartments and houses that were too small (27%).
      These problematic situations caused stress, which impaired parents’ ability to provide learning activities for their children. This is not a new finding. Studies have shown that parents are better at supporting their children’s learning and development when they feel good themselves. However, the special measures taken to contain the spread of COVID-19 led to cumulative stress situations for many families. The implications are clear: If we want to ensure that parents provide a rich home learning environment during difficult times such as the COVID-19 lockdown, we need to support parents.
      How can we support parents in helping their children learn?
      As a parent, it is important to acknowledge your stress and take care of yourself. Take breaks, delegate tasks where possible, and seek support. Also, when it comes to supporting your children’s learning, keep in mind that everyday interactions make a difference. You don’t need to prepare learning sessions with your child. Rather, try to engage your child in an in-depth dialogue about everyday situations (e.g., by asking questions and helping children refine their thought process). Plenty of websites provide materials, ideas, and guidelines for parents to facilitate learning at home.

      “If we want to ensure that parents provide a rich home learning environment during difficult times such as the COVID-19 lockdown, we need to support parents.”

      As friends, relatives, or neighbors, you can provide emotional support by asking parents how they are doing or even offering hands-on help, e.g. with shopping.
      As teachers, you can help parents support their children when child care centers are closed by keeping in contact with the children and proving parents with ideas or materials fit for children’s individual developmental stages. In fact, 51% of the parents in our study said they wished preschool teachers gave them ideas and materials to foster their children’s learning at home.
      As policymakers, it is important to keep in mind that closures of child care centers are extreme measures that deprive children of the education and social contact they need while putting parents under immense stress. This can be particularly harmful for families living in disadvantageous circumstances. Thus, even though such closures may have less short-term impact on the economy and may be easier to implement than other restrictions, they potentially have the worst long-term outcomes for the future of our children.
      Header photo: Nenad Stojkovic. Creative Commons.  More

    • 188 Shares129 Views

      in Children

      Chaos at home and infants’ play: Your baby may be more adaptable than you think

      by

      Chaos in the home is bad for child development. Homes are chaotic if they are disorganized, unpredictable, and unstable. This could mean they are noisy, are crowded, have many people coming and going, or lack routines. The adverse effects of chaos at home on early cognitive and social-emotional development are well documented. Long-term exposure to chaos interferes with the development of important skills like self-regulation and cognition. But how can we interpret this research in a global pandemic? For many people, home life has become more chaotic since March. Daily routines have been disrupted and replaced. Busy parents are juggling work from home. And many parents are wondering: Should we be worried for our kids?
      How do young children respond to chaos in the home? Before the pandemic, we visited parents with infants (1-2 years old) while they played at home. With parents’ permission, we video recorded all the rooms in their house, getting an unprecedented look into their natural home settings. From the videos, we coded physical features of the homes that might reflect chaos, including the number of toys on the floor, items on the counters, unwashed dishes, piles of laundry, and scattered papers. We also analyzed infants’ play behaviors (e.g., the length of play and the objects selected for play) because play is an important way babies learn about their worlds. And the quality of infants’ play predicts cognitive and language skills. Based on research on chaos, we predicted that infants in highly cluttered, physically chaotic homes might experience disrupted play.
      Our preliminary findings surprised us: We found no evidence that any of the physical manifestations of chaos at home mattered for babies’ play. In fact, infants didn’t discriminate — they played with whatever objects were available to them, whether the objects were in bins or on the floor, and regardless of whether they were designed for play. They banged on pots and pans like a drum set, made a tower out of Tupperware, and played hide and seek in a pile of laundry. In other words, infants happily played and explored their environments, regardless of the state of their home.
      Any scientist or statistician will tell you that the absence of evidence is not the same as evidence in support of the counterhypothesis. In other words, we can’t conclude for sure that chaos at home doesn’t matter for infants’ play. Also, our study represents only physical manifestations of chaos. Children certainly need routines and structures to thrive. But when it comes to the state of your house? You can probably relax. And if your budget is tight lately, you can rest, knowing your baby is likely just as happy playing with Tupperware as with expensive gadgets. In coming studies, we plan to ask a different question. Rather than asking how chaos at home affects infants’ play, we want to know how infants learn to adapt to chaotic environments and play using whatever materials are available to them.
      The bottom line for parents is this: You’re probably doing a better job than you think. Your baby doesn’t care how organized your home is during the pandemic. Prolonged exposure to chaos is still not good for your child, but infants may be more resilient to mess than we previously thought. And their ability to adapt and even thrive amidst the chaos may actually surprise you.
      Header photo: Nenad Stojkovic. Creative Commons. More

    • 88 Shares99 Views

      in Children

      The evolved nest approach fosters children’s well-being

      by

      New parents today often are given conflicting information about how to raise their children. This was not always the case. Millions of years ago, our species established childraising practices that shaped children to be cooperative and intelligent. These practices were passed from one generation to another through children’s observation and practice before they became parents. With civilization, industrialization, and other historical trends, these practices have diminished and sometimes have been replaced by practices that have outcomes opposite to the original ones.

      “Millions of years ago, our species established childraising practices that shaped children to be cooperative and intelligent. It is time to remember them.”

      We call these practices the evolved nest. What are those long-established practices?
      1. Soothing perinatal experiences where mothers are highly supported during pregnancy and follow natural biological rhythms during childbirth, and where neither mother nor child are traumatized during childbirth or separated afterward
      2. Several years of on-request breastfeeding and frequent suckling that shape not only the jaw and skull, but also the brain and body, with the thousands of ingredients in breast milk, including ingredients that protect babies from infectious agents
      Babies who aren’t breastfed have less brain myelination at three months (myelination is associated with intelligence) and biological consequences related to obesity, asthma, and allergies.
      3. Nearly constant affectionate touch in the first years and no negative touch to shape multiple systems like the stress response, the vagus nerve (which interrelates with all major body organs), and the oxytocin hormone system
      4. Responsive, companionable care from mother and others that reassures the baby, keeping him or her optimally aroused during rapid neuronal growth, and keeping the child feeling supported and connected throughout life
      5. A social climate that welcomes children at every stage, keeping them in the middle of community activities
      6. Self-directed free play with playmates of different ages that builds executive functions (e.g., redirecting actions and plans, empathy, and control of aggression) and leadership skills
      7. Immersion in nature and ecological attachment so children feel like members of the earth community with responsibilities to non-human members
      We know that each evolved nest practice shapes the neurobiological structures of children’s brains and bodies to work optimally, affecting everything about the child, including personality, sociality, and morality. In my lab, we study these components and their relation to well-being, self-control, sociality, and morality.
      Babies are so immature at birth, looking like fetuses of other animals, that to grow well they need nearly constant touch. In a recent article, parents who endorsed providing greater affectionate touch and less corporal punishment, than parents with the opposite pattern, reported that their preschool-aged children had less psychopathology and greater sociomoral capacities, like empathy and cooperation. In another study, of mothers from at-risk situations, children who received more positive touch and less negative touch over the first years of life had better self-regulation and cooperation than children who received less positive touch and more negative touch.
      In a recent study, colleagues and I asked parents in the China, Switzerland, and the United States to report on their preschool children’s evolved nest experience, specifically, experiences of affection, corporal punishment, indoor and outdoor self-directed free play, and family togetherness inside and outside the home. In every country, children whose parents practiced more evolved nesting in the prior week were more likely to be thriving socially and mentally.
      In a survey study of 383 mothers of three-year-olds in China, we collected information on children’s behavior and attitude as they related to components of the evolved nest. Mothers also completed standardized measures of their children’s behavior regulation, empathy, and conscience. We found significant effects for most caregiving practices and attitudes on children’s outcomes after controlling for maternal income and education, and most effects remained significant after controlling for responsive, companionable care.
      In another study (Narvaez, Wang & Cheng, 2016), adults reported on their childhood experiences, as well as their mental and social health. Childhood experience more consistent with the evolved nest predicted ethical orientations of social engagement via a pathway through secure attachment, mental health, and perspective taking. In addition, experiences that lacked components of the evolved nest through low levels of secure attachment and less optimal mental health predicted social opposition through low perspective taking and social withdrawal through personal distress.
      The evolved nest provides concrete ways for parents to be responsive to the needs of their children to foster optimal neurobiology, as well as psychological and social development.
      Header photo: Proggie. Creative Commons.  More

    • 100 Shares149 Views

      in Children

      How parents can support children’s learning at home

      by

      With no advance notice, children and teachers were thrust into using online learning during the COVID-19 pandemic, a crisis that is far from over. Those who are self-isolating face the prospect of distance learning for the foreseeable future; for others, positive COVID-19 test results or COVID-19 symptoms combined with the absence of testing will mean significant periods of time away from school. And as we face a second wave of the disease, many schools could close for long periods yet again.
      What do child development scientists have to say to parents who are tackling the issue of learning at home? We asked members of the Scientists’ Alliance for Communicating Child Development Knowledge, who provided a wealth of insights.
      Parents are the main influence on learning, but the pressures are great
      Parents are the main influence on learning, writes Jennifer Lansford on the Child & Family Blog. “Demonstrate to your children the value of education – that’s one of the most important ways a parent can encourage their learning.” But, as Suniya Luthar writes on our blog, the pressures on children at home are great. “In our research, by far the most important factor predicting anxiety and depression in children was low quality of relationship with parents. Following this was lack of structure to the day (separating time for leisure or fun), and high levels of distraction or inability to focus on schoolwork.”
      Photo: ADR. Creative Commons.

      Children learn through play and curiosity: an opportunity for parents
      During the COVID-19 pandemic, parents may feel pressure to teach children in traditional school-based ways. Yet there is nothing wrong with learning in playful ways that keep children’s interest and invite them to have fun at the same time. Numerous studies suggest that learning is a fundamental part of what occurs during play: Playing and learning are inextricably linked. For children, playing with adults is likely to be even more enriching.
      Play helps children explore a wide variety of emotions, and not just pleasant ones like excitement and joy. These experiences help children grow emotionally and cognitively. What’s more, children are aware that they are learning through play, and a study of 400 children showed that many of them thought the worlds of play and learning overlap in many ways.
      Lockdown learning through play can help build on children’s natural ways of learning by building on their curiosity and self-direction. Play with family members could also be essential for mitigating the loss of learning related to the pandemic, particularly for disadvantaged children.
      At the same time, playing with children is important for reducing stress and improving mental health among parents and caregivers.
      Photo: Unsplash.

      Top tips for parents on home learning
      The Internet features great material advising parents what to do. Below is a guide to it all. Another good place to start is asking children what was good and bad about the lockdown from March to June because, as Roberta Golinkoff and Marcia Halperin explain, children have insights on the benefits and challenges of remote learning: Just ask them.
      One of our favorite resources is Jelena Obradović’s tip sheet for parents supporting online learning at home. The sheet covers the themes of learning spaces, daily schedules, routines, goals and progress, as well as managing frustrations and ensuring closeness and connection. We have reproduced this sheet here:

      Learning Space
      Find a space in your home that can be used every day for distance learning.
      If the space is shared, create a cardboard or cloth separation to minimize noise and distractions.
      Offer your child the chance to decorate this space to feel welcoming (draw a sign, bring a favorite pillow, etc.).
      Make sure the space includes essential learning materials. Ask teachers for help.
      Daily Schedule
      Understand what teachers expect from your child. Email, call, or text to clarify.
      Write a simple list of activities that your child needs to complete each day.
      Include breaks for snacks, physical activity, wiggles or stretches, and free choice time. Younger children will need more breaks.
      Encourage your child to decorate the schedule and post it in their space.
      Revise to fit your family’s needs. Be flexible.
      Predictable Routine
      Start early when your child is rested.
      Review the daily schedule and make sure your child understands it (e.g., first you will…, then you can…).
      Help your child build independence (e.g., learn to prepare their own snack, troubleshoot computer problems).
      Let your child know when and how they can ask for help.
      Keep regular sleep times.
      Goals & Progress
      Together with your child, set behavioral expectations and review them daily.
      Set goals and timelines that your child can complete. It’s about progress, not perfection.
      Teach your child to use a timer to stay focused for a period of time. Start small!
      Mark daily progress (even on not-so-good days) with stickers, pennies, pebbles, etc.
      Use your child’s favorite activities as rewards for showing effort and progress.
      Managing Frustrations
      Use simple calming strategies: counting to 10, taking deep breaths, a short break.
      Help your child describe the problem and express their feelings (I feel…, when…).
      Together, come up with a potential solution and connect it to previously set expectations.
      Explain how the child’s behavior is linked to consequences. Set gentle and firm limits.
      Assume that everyone is trying their best. Be kind to yourself. Be patient with others.
      Ask teachers and others for help.
      Closeness & Connection
      Start each day with a brief joyful experience: a fun greeting, song, dance.
      Create opportunities for your child to be helpful (e.g., household chores, cooking prep, reading to siblings).
      Each day, try to connect with your child without any distractions. Highlight positive experiences. If you have time, do a fun activity together that the child selects.
      Create opportunities for your child to share their worries, and provide reassurance.

      You can download the tip sheet in English, Arabic, Cantonese, Filipino, Mandarin, Portuguese, Spanish, Urdu, and Vietnamese here.
      Photo: David Brookes. Creative Commons.

       
      We found more tips from other researchers.
      Learning space 
      If possible, dedicate a specific device to learning. (NPR, How to turn your home into a school without losing your sanity)
      Schedule and routine
      Plan the day together, including when to do activities. Engaging children in creating a schedule helps build their self-awareness and motivation. (Cathie Tamis-LeMonda & Erin Bogan, The science of learning and teaching at home during Covid-19)
      Have a good shake at the end of the day! (NPR, How To Turn Your Home Into A School Without Losing Your Sanity)
      Be a good role model: Parents should stick to their own routine, too! (Cathie Tamis-LeMonda & Erin Bogan, The science of learning and teaching at home during Covid-19)
      Managing frustrations 
      When children aren’t motivated to learn, parents and caregivers can make it more fun by incorporating documentaries, or changing the topic and giving children the choice to return to the work later. (Cathie Tamis-Lemonda & Erin Bogan, The science of learning and teaching at home during Covid-19)
      It is important for parents to manage their own emotions because children can’t learn in high-stress environments. In doing this, adults provide the conditions necessary to learn. (Cathie Tamis-Lemonda & Erin Bogan, The science of learning and teaching at home during Covid-19)
      Working with teachers
      Schedule time with teachers, both to clarify what is expected of your child and to make use of available teaching resources. (Cathie Tamis-LeMonda & Erin Bogan, The science of learning and teaching at home during Covid-19)
      Consider if your child can join meetings with the teacher. This can help children feel more motivated and closer to the teacher. (Cathie Tamis-LeMonda & Erin Bogan, The science of learning and teaching at home during Covid-19)
      Be specific with questions when meeting with teachers. (Cathie Tamis-LeMonda & Erin Bogan, The science of learning and teaching at home during Covid-19)
      Doing things with your child
      Break down tasks into bite-sized pieces. (APA, Recommendations on starting school during the COVID-19 pandemic)
      Friends and family can help with teaching, especially if parents don’t feel comfortable with certain topics. (Cathie Tamis-Lemonda & Erin Bogan, The science of learning and teaching at home during Covid-19)
      When parents aren’t sure about something, they can model problem solving with their children. By working out something together, they help improve children’s practical problem-solving skills, which shapes the way they approach future challenges. (Cathie Tamis-Lemonda & Erin Bogan, The science of learning and teaching at home during Covid-19)
      Make learning meaningful. If children don’t understand why they’re learning something or why it’s important or useful, they can easily disengage from the material. Other ways to make information applicable to students’ lives are to include material relevant to students’ race, culture, and ethnicity. (APA, Recommendations on Starting School during the COVID-19 pandemic)
      Learning style
      Allow children to use a variety of approaches for completing tasks and solving problems. The strategies they have been taught may not be the only or best ways to answer a specific question or solve a particular problem. (APA, Recommendations on starting school during the COVID-19 pandemic)
      By asking your child to teach you the content he or she has just learned, it will be easier to identify gaps. Parents can then work with teachers on these gaps. (Cathie Tamis-LeMonda & Erin Bogan, The science of learning and teaching at home during Covid-19)
      Photo: Unsplash.

      Header photo: Nenad Stojkovic. Creative Commons.  More

    • 150 Shares159 Views

      in Children

      Pandemic shows children’s well-being depends on parents staying in good mental shape

      by

      The mental health of stressed young people was transformed at the start of the COVID-19 pandemic: Many felt better. Anxiety and symptoms of depression dropped among older, high-achieving children in the United States. That was particularly true for students about to graduate from high school, our research in U.S. schools has found.
      Why? Children relaxed … for a bit. COVID-19 provided a full stop to the busyness of some teenage lives. The treadmill of pressure, activities, and commitments halted. Out went crisscrossing among band practice, sports clubs, social activities, and hours of homework into the small hours. Lockdowns brought that high-octane life to a sudden standstill.
      Children got more sleep – they weren’t leaving home at 7 am. Many schools had staggered hours and reduced the pressure, shifting from grading assignments to awarding a pass or fail. Social anxiety was reduced – a teenager didn’t need to worry about being left out of the lunch table or not being invited to parties that no longer happened. Missing out on a romantic relationship didn’t matter as much – kids were not seeing seemingly happy couples at school or at social gatherings.
      But this break didn’t last. As we worked with schools through the arrival of summer, we found that anxiety and depression had risen again among older high school students. Their initial relief morphed into feeling that life was unsettling, scary, and lonely — young people experienced grief about incomplete endings and fears about what might lie ahead.

      “Anxiety and depression dropped initially for older, high-achieving children in the United States.”

      Middle school children less relieved
      Children in middle school did not have even the initial relief – in our survey, anxiety and depression stayed at previous levels for them. That’s probably because virtual communication is more challenging for children of this age. Their peer groups are less well formed and less stable than those of 16- to 18-year-olds. If you are an awkward, insecure 12-year-old with few social connections, it can be easier to casually share confidences with friends at soccer practice or while walking around than to do so from home via Zoom. Self-consciousness kicks in: “Will they like my room?” “Will they see my family?”
      We’ve learned a lot about what helps children of all ages feel good in a period characterized by prolonged uncertainty, with no end in sight. Two predictors of their well-being stand out: the well-being of parents and the supportiveness of teachers.
      Photo: kris krüg. Creative Commons.

      Parents and teachers vital for resilience
      First, we found strong, unique links between adolescents’ depression and anxiety and whether they felt their parents were coping well. When children felt their parents maintained a calm, stable home and were in good enough shape to provide emotional support, they were likely to be doing well. This was true across ages, genders, and races. Our finding is in sync with a major report published last year on children’s well-being by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. Its take-home message: If you want children to do well, the single most important step is to ensure that the parents are doing well themselves.

      “When children felt their parents maintained a calm, stable home and were in good enough shape to provide emotional support, they were likely to be doing well.”

      Second, our research found that the support of key adults – and teachers in particular – was vital to children in maintaining their well-being. In open-ended questions on what was going well in their schools, children and youth responded most often with answers such as, “My teacher cares about me and reaches out to me,” and ‘I really like that my teachers check in on how I’m feeling and not just my school work.”
      Parents need proper care 
      These two observations should inform practice and policy. The first highlights that we need to expand the focus of policy and practice beyond just styles of parenting. Children’s well-being depends not simply on quality of care but is linked directly to parents’ own well-being. During the pandemic, adults – just like children – also require love, gentleness, comfort, and stability. This helps the adults ensure that their children feel well looked after.
      “Burned out” teachers need help, too
      Teachers’ welfare is also important, not just for its own sake, but also because these adults provide valuable care and support for students. During the pandemic, we surveyed U.S. teachers’ well-being. Stress rates stayed steady, but clinically significant burnout has risen sharply among educators since March 2020. The risk factors seem to be lack of clarity about what they are required to do and blurry boundaries between work and recreation. These findings reflect how many teachers have worked long hours and had few breaks over the summer. Their needs should also be supported, especially if they are to play their role in bolstering children’s resilience.
      Which aspects of home life were most helpful?
      Our research about children during the COVID-19 pandemic identified three factors, , that reliably predicted anxiety and depression in children. By far the most important was having a low-quality relationship with parents. Following this was lack of structure to the day (separating time for leisure or fun), and high levels of distraction or inability to focus on schoolwork.
      Parents and schools can help address each of these factors. For parents, the challenge in these very difficult circumstances is to stay well themselves. Stress levels have risen for all and it is important that parents share their burdens with others and, where necessary – and if they can – seek professional help.
      Manage technology, expectations, and assignments
      For schools, an important task is to support their teachers well. Professional development programs must address directly the psychological burdens educators take on as they support their students through the pandemic. For students, schools should ensure that their days are well-structured and that lessons are not too long. Online technology should be streamlined so children are not juggling between different platforms. Educators should scale back expectations and focus on the core skills children need, letting go of much of the rest. Teachers should coordinate with other teachers when making assignments and scheduling due dates. It doesn’t take much figuring out to ensure, for example, that Monday is science homework day, Tuesday is math homework day, and so on. This helps children have a predictable and manageable week.
      None of us should forget, if life begins to return to how it once was, that there was something wrong with the overly busy schedules of many children’s lives. The figures for serious anxiety and depression tell the story. COVID-19 has brought its own problems, but the temporary sense of relaxation it has offered some children shows that life was not that healthy beforehand. Children deserve better than the old normal.
      Header photo: Unsplash.  More

    • 163 Shares169 Views

      in Children

      Race and racism: the blind spot in research on poverty and child development

      by

      Amidst the intertwined pandemics of COVID-19 and racism, something unprecedented should be happening in research on poverty and children’s development. Scholars should be looking in the mirror and starting to see their blind spots regarding race and racism. Scholars of color (who are in the minority) have been aware of this for years. Others are only just starting to see how their own training hinged on certain models that are White and WEIRD (Western, educated, industrial, rich, Democratic). They are starting to see how their own mentors reinforced privilege by allowing access to pipelines of opportunities that looked like their own. They are beginning to understand how their own research about “others” (i.e., people from places, experiences, and histories unlike their own) hinges on theories, methods, and importantly, assumptions that excluded the realities, experiences, and expertise of the very people being studied, particularly with respect to race and racism.
      Blind spots are hard to see; by definition, they are about omission. Yet blind spots – such as clinical color blindness, overlooking issues of race and racism, or consigning race to a static variable – contribute to the creation of future scholarship and science, and to the fostering of explanations that can be terribly misguided. Such blind spots are harder still to address. Training and education – our typical responses — are only as effective as accepting what is reflecting back from the mirror and our efforts to continually shift and re-shift those reflections.

      “The lived experience of families in poverty intersects with experiences of race, immigration status, and the structures and systems that perpetuate injustice.”

      Historically, the neglect of race and racism in research on poverty and child development has been shaped by denial and fear of race — as immutable – carrying the burden of explaining poverty. This neglect is shaped by over-application of models that reinforce notions that being poor is less a condition of society and more a condition of being a member of a lesser-than-non-White group, whether Black, Latino, or indigenous in the U.S. context. And scholars with good intentions unintentionally began practicing “assimilationist” racism, preferring to ignore the issue rather than face it head on. The recent publication of Lawrence Mead’s “Poverty and Culture” in a peer-reviewed journal showed that, 50 years after Senator Daniel Moynihan’s report, The Negro Family: The Case for National Action, all these blind spots are surprisingly alive and well in poverty research.
      How can family and child development scholars build a dynamic and resilient world view and a professional architecture to directly address race and racism in their research? How can scholars disrupt the perpetuation of inaccurate ideologies, and recalibrate power imbalances to optimize discourse and guide policy?
      First, scholarship of and for children and families should stay grounded in lived experience. Data, whether in the form of numbers or words, do not emerge free of history and context; history and context should be the starting point. The lived experience of families in poverty intersects with experiences of race, immigration status, and the structures and systems that perpetuate exclusion and racism. At the same time, lived experience is the daily routines, survival strategies and resistance to oppression that parents, caregivers, workers, educators, and children and youth engage in every day. Research on poverty should be enriched by greater integration of quantitative, qualitative and mixed-methods literatures on intersectionality; racial socialization and identity; experiences of and responses to discrimination; representation, racial composition, and intergroup relations in  the contexts of work, schools, and media, and funds of knowledge and traditions of socialization in racially, linguistically, and culturally diverse communities. This list can go on. These areas of research are robust and growing, each typically with both basic developmental and applied/intervention studies. Research on mainstream poverty needs to change and view these emerging areas as core, not neglected.
      Photo: Unsplash.

      Second, as scholars, we can surround ourselves in authentic ways with others who are outside our inner disciplinary circles, ask for and be open to accepting authentic critiques, and strive toward richer research questions that may generate more powerful implications. Poverty scholarship can go deeper than controls for race, considering it a fixed and context-free characteristic. How can experiences of racism at household, neighborhood, structural, or policy levels be integrated into policy research on poverty and child development? Would our proposals for anti-poverty policy be more effective if they integrated attention to racial segregation and other disparities by race in opportunity and social mobility? We can be much bolder in straying from conventional silos and daring to cross disciplines and levels of analysis. Race and racism are inherent at all layers of Bronfenbrenner’s ecological model, from macro-level structures to micro-level interactions. But because poverty researchers and race researchers largely do not overlap or collaborate, a number of novel questions are neglected. What would it mean to address structural sources of racism in tandem with other areas of anti-poverty policy? Can social movements change the linked and mutually reinforcing narratives around race and poverty?
      Third, scholarship can and should start with understanding and questioning existing assumptions and pushing toward changing these defaults. Are we assuming that every child is born on a level playing field even though Black-White racial differences in household wealth are large and constrain the ability of Black families to respond to economic shocks? Are we naïve in assuming that enhancing income — the conventional realm of safety net policies – is enough to address intergenerational disparities of wealth, without concurrent efforts to adjust the many tax and transfer policies that disproportionately benefit the wealthy?
      Fourth, we can diversify the poverty policy and scholarship research “workforce.” At any established public policy and social science, population, and developmental science research conference where poverty scholars convene, you witness a sea of White people, sometimes predominantly White male people. Contrast this with convenings focused on race, ethnicity, or immigration and child development: You see scholars who are closer to representing the diversity of the United States. A much more robustly diverse pipeline of scholars across disciplines is required. Fellowship programs recently initiated by the Russell Sage Foundation, and those set up years ago by the Foundation for Child Development, the American Psychological Association, and the National Institutes of Health, are important first steps toward diversifying the pipeline of scholars, but are only a start (and will fail as a singular source of interventions). If admissions to graduate training programs; hiring processes in research institutions and universities; and the topics of research valued in curricula, departments, and peer review do not change priorities, we will continue to see the artificial and ultimately harmful divide between research on poverty and race among both scholars and scholarship.

      “Are we naïve in assuming that enhancing income — the conventional realm of safety net policies – is enough to address intergenerational disparities of wealth, without concurrent efforts to adjust the many tax and transfer policies that disproportionately benefit the wealthy?”

      Fifth, we can be louder and more active in our universities as we pursue or engage in external funding, in our roles as peer reviewers and editors, and as participants and leaders of professional organizations. Scholars who have profited from existing systems can and should demand more change toward inclusion. This opportunity to lead brings together the substance, messages, and models, explicit and implicit, conveyed by our research. This is an opportunity to step away from privilege and question how the public profile and output of your work is framed through an anti-racist lens. This is also an opportunity to create mechanisms – publishing avenues, grants, forums for speaking engagements — that were previously closed.
      Addressing race and racism in research on poverty and children’s development is going to be hard. However, the rewards will be full and rich, and will ultimately increase the impact of developmentally informed anti-poverty policies and practices. Our work will otherwise stagnate if we continue with siloed and segregated approaches, dipping into the same tools and perspectives that have shaped poverty research to date. That is, if we do not actively strive for change now, anti-racist poverty policy will not make progress. With such progress, we will be better positioned to overcome inequality in race and income, instead of chaotically reacting to public health and economic shocks like those triggered by COVID-19.
      Header photo: Miki Jourdan. Creative Commons.  More

    • 250 Shares99 Views

      in Children

      The negative impacts of physical punishment and psychological aggression on child development are similar in high-, middle- and low-income countries

      by

      The increased focus on the rights of children worldwide has drawn greater attention to child maltreatment and the lost developmental potential of children who live in difficult social and economic circumstances. Yet depending on economic resources and political and social will, attention to physical discipline remains elusive in several low- and middle-income countries. In the main, such discussions are much needed at the societal and local levels in many of the poorer nations of the world to further advance the rights and welfare of children in today’s global community.
      Across cultural communities, parents and caregivers use different levels of psychological control (e.g., making children feel worthless, guilty), physical control (e.g., restraining, hitting children), and behavioral control (e.g., setting limits, offering structure) during childrearing. In high-income countries, high levels of psychological, physical, and behavioral control affect children’s social adjustment and academic performance negatively. However, it remains unclear whether these effects generalize to low- and middle-income countries, where endorsement of the use of physical punishment can be high. At the same time, there appears to be a good deal of confusion among parents across low- and middle-income countries about physical punishment and discipline. Physical punishment is meant to inflict pain in the child as a way of dealing with behavioral difficulties and noncompliance. By contrast, discipline is meant to teach children desirable ways of behaving through redirection, explanation, reasoning, and induction.
      Photo: Unsplash.

      As august bodies (e.g., American Academy of Pediatrics, 2018) and researchers continue to warn about the developmental risks associated with physical discipline, it is beneficial to weigh in on what we know about the impact of harsh parenting in the developing countries of Africa. Over the last two decades, we have assessed the impact of harsh parenting across multilingual Caribbean countries. In diverse Caribbean countries, there is high endorsement of the use of physical discipline, but the outcomes of physical discipline on children’s social and cognitive skills are inconsistent. Here, we share findings from an analysis in about half of the countries in Africa of the links between maternal use of nonphysical discipline (explaining), harsh physical discipline (hitting child with an object), physical discipline (spanking), and psychological aggression (berating child) and preschoolers’ social skills, literacy skills, and behavioral difficulties. Our analysis drew on the UNICEF Micro Indicator Surveys of 32,817 biological mothers and their children in 25 African countries: Algeria, Benin, Cameroon, Central African Republic, Chad, Côte d’Ivoire, Democratic Republic of Congo, Gambia, Ghana, Guinea, Guinea Bissau, Kenya, Madagascar, Malawi, Mali, Mauritania, Nigeria, Sao Tome and Principe, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Somalia, Swaziland, Togo, Tunisia, and Zimbabwe.
      What implications might harsh and non-harsh forms of discipline have for child development in Africa? In our research, a high percentage of mothers used explanations with children, but endorsement and use of physical discipline were also prevalent across countries. Across countries, harsh physical discipline, physical discipline, and psychological aggression were each associated with higher levels of behavioral difficulties such as biting, hitting, and kicking other children and adults. That is, berating children had adverse effects on children that were similar to using physical discipline. Not surprisingly, non-physical discipline that involved the use of explanations and redirection was positively associated with children’s literacy skills. Only harsh physical discipline was negatively associated with children’s social skills, such as displaying independence and following directions.

      “Some researchers have argued that in cultural communities where physical punishment is seen as an appropriate method of discipline, the effects of harsh discipline on child development should be less severe. Our analysis offered little support for such a proposition.”

      Some researchers have argued that in cultural communities where physical punishment is seen as an appropriate method of discipline, the effects of harsh discipline on child development should be less severe — the normativeness hypothesis. Our analysis offered little support for such a proposition and instead suggested that harsh forms of maternal discipline have direct negative consequences for children’s behavior and early literacy skills across the African countries we studied.
      These findings from 25 low- and middle-income African countries add to the growing body of evidence on the harmful effects of harsh parenting practices on child development. Moreover, developmental risks associated with harsh forms of discipline become magnified in families with poor material resources, poor access to health care, in the presence of neighborhood difficulties (e.g., violence), and with limited access to preschool education. It is difficult for children to show prudential interest in their social world and moral concern for others when parents hit, slap, pull, and belittle them.
      Header photo: Unsplash. More