The Effect of Parenting Style, Bilingual School, Social Environment, on Speech and Language Development in Preschool Children in Surakarta, Central Java

CORE Metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk Provided by Journal of Maternal and Child Health (JMCH) Journal of Maternal and Child Health (2018), 3(3): 184-196 https://doi.org/10.26911/thejmch.2018.03.03.03 The Effect of Parenting Style, Bilingual School, Social Environment, on Speech and Language Development in Preschool Children in Surakarta, Central Java Arum Wijayanti1), CSP Wekadigunawan2), Bhisma Murti3) 1)Masters Program in Public Health, Universitas Sebelas Maret 2)Faculty of Medicine, Universitas Sebelas Maret ABSTRACT Background: Childhood speech and language development is considered an important predictor of their future achievement. This study aimed to analyze the effect of parenting style, bilingual school, social environment, on speech and language development in preschool children in Surakarta, Central Java. Subjects and Method: This was an analytic and observational study with a cross-sectional design. The study was conducted at 25 preschools in Surakarta, Central Java, from February March 2018. A sample of 200 preschool children was selected by simple random sampling from 25 preschools selected by stratified random sampling. The dependent variable was speech and language develop-ment. The independent variables were sex, nutritional status, parental education, parenting style, family income, bilingual school, and social environment. The data of speech and language development were measured by pre-screening development questionnaire. Other variables were collected by questionnaire. The data were analyzed by a multilevel logistic regression using Stata 13. Results: Speech and language development increased with age (b= 2.03; 95% CI= 0.38 to 3.68; p= 0.016), nutritional status (b= 2.44; 95% CI= 0.38 to 4.08; p= 0.003), maternal education (b= 1.50; 95% CI= 0.14 to 2.86; p= 0.031), democratic parenting style (b= 2.76; 95% CI= 1.16 to 4.08; p<0.001), family income (b= 1.69; 95% CI= 0.15 to 3.23; p= 0.031), bilingual school(b= -4.46; CI= -6.53 to -2.39; p= 0.001), and social environment (b= 1.80; 95% CI= 0.10 to 3.50; p= 0.038). Intra- class correlation= 28.06% indicating considerable contextual effect of preschool. Conclusion: Speech and language development increases with age, nutritional status, maternal education, parenting style, family income, bilingual school, and social environment. Keywords: speech and language development, parenting style, bilingual school, pre-school children Correspondence: Arum Wijayanti. Program Magister Kesehatan Masyarakat, Universitas Sebelas Maret. Email: [email protected] BACKGROUND indicator of children development for school or future success. Therefore, it is Children development is the most import- important to identify early signs and ant thing in preparing children as the next problems of speech and language develop- qualified generation. These developments ment in children (Nayeb et al, 2014). In are the result of the interaction of matura- preschool, the growth and development of tion of the central nervous system with the children happen very quickly. The child organs affected including the development must be prepared for school, for that senses of neuro-muscular system, speech, emotio- and receptor receptors system of stimuli nal and social development (Mardiana and and memory process must be ready so that Indanah, 2016). Language and speech children are able to learn well. Entering development is considered as an important 184 e-ISSN: 2549-0257

Wijayanti et al./ The Effect of Parenting Style, Bilingual School, Social Environment, preschool, children begin to show their about. Some reports mention the incidence desires along with their growth and deve- of speech and language disorders in the lopment including speech and language range of 5-10% in children. Motor and development (Marmi and Raharjo, 2012). cognitive abilities develop according to the children’s age, as well as the acquisition of The development of speech and language increases through developmental language is the ability in spoken language processes ranging from first language, pre- in children which develop because of the school age and school age where language maturity of speech organs as well as other plays a very important role in the academic factors (Gunarsa, 2008). In pre-school achievement of children (Candrasari, years, the language development of child- 2014). ren is very active and rapid. Many problems in the learning process occur due to The development of speech and language delay in the preschool period. language in children can be influenced by Children who experience speech and langu- several factors, such as family economic age delay are at higher risk of learning condition, social environment, bilingual when they are at school age. The difficulty presence and family social environment in reading and writing will lead to less (Sumaryati, 2017). Family is a system academic achievement thoroughly and may where the system is formed from the parts continue into adulthood. The impact of that are interconnected and interacting delayed development of speech and langu- with each other. For example, a mother and age of children include excessive crying, children’s interaction are never going one difficulties in understanding, speech way (Sari and Budisetyani, 2016). Parents defects, speech impediment and speech become the first person in influencing the delay (Candrasari, 2014). good and bad of the child's life. But unfortunately, many parents are not aware According to the National Center for that the pattern of care they apply impact Health Statistics (NCHS), the incidence of on children’s development. A false parent- of speech disorders in children under 5 ing pattern will have an adverse effect on years is 0.9% and 1.94% is at 5-14 years. the children's development. There are The results of evaluations performed on several parenting styles of parents, inclu- school-age children showed an incidence ding authoritarian parenting, democratic rate of 3.8 times higher. Thus, it is parenting and permissive parenting. Diffe- estimated that speech and language dis- rences in parenting styles can be influenced orders in children are about 4-5% (Guna- by the age of parents, father’s involvement, wan et al, 2011). Based on the research of parental education, previous parenting Hartanto et al (2011), it was found that experiences and others (Sutisna, 2017). children aged 1-3 years experienced Differences in parenting style resulted in language delays for about 36 (50%) of 72 differences in children’s welfare and psy- total samples. In Kariadi Hospital during chological development. The best way to 2007 at the Child Growth Clinic, there was improve the language and speech develop- 22.9% of the 436 new visits come with late ment of children is to build a climate of speech complaints and 13 (2.98%) of them emotional connection between parents and experienced language development children (Guyer et al, 2016). disorder. The presence of bilingual or bilingual Late speech is a major complaint that shows that humans can learn two languages parents often complain about and worry e-ISSN: 2549-0257 185

Journal of Maternal and Child Health (2018), 3(3): 184-196 https://doi.org/10.26911/thejmch.2018.03.03.03 at once without any difficulty. One can 2. Population and sample learn two languages from birth or learn The target population in this study were all both languages because of the environment preschoolers who attended early childhood and immigration. The level of a person's education (PAUD) with their mothers. A skills in applying these two languages is sample of 200 preschool children was different. Some people can show similar selected by simple random sampling from abilities in both languages, but others also 25 preschools selected by stratified random show certain dominance in one language. It sampling. creates its own challenges in bilingual 3. Study variables studies (Costa and Galles, 2015). Environ- The dependent variable was speech and ment is everything that comes from outside language development. The independent of the children and can affect the growth variables were sex, nutritional status, and development of children because in the parental education, parenting style, family environment also provides the needs of income, bilingual school, and social children to grow and develop from the environment. womb to adulthood. The social environ- 4. Operational definition of variables ment can cause speech and language dis- Parenting style was defined as the way and orders in children, if the environment is not attitude of parents who are applied to supportive. Conversely, if the environment educate their children. The data were is good then it will support the growth of measured by Parenting Style Questionaire children (Hasmy, 2014). (PSQ). The measurement scale was conti- nuous. A similar study was conducted by Gunawan et al. (2011) entitled \"Overview of Bilingual was defined as the ability of Speech and Language Development of a child to use one or more languages to Children Aged 0-3 Years\". The difference communicate daily. The data were from the previous study is on the type of measured by Questionnaire Use Everyday study used. The previous study used Language. The measurement scale was descriptive type. While this study uses dichotomous, coded monolingual if the analytic observational research type that child can only master one language for the aims to explain the influence between daily communication and bilingual if the variables through hypothesis testing. child can master two or more languages used in everyday communication. Based on this background, the author is interested in conducting study entitled The social environment was defined \"The Effect of Parenting Style, Bilingual as the environment of the child to socialize School, Social Environment, on Speech and at home, school, and community. The data Language Development in Preschool Child- were measured by questionnaires. The ren in Surakarta, Central Java \". measurement scale was continuous, but for the purpose of data analysis, it was SUBJECTS AND METHOD transformed into dichotomous, coded poor 1. Study Design social environment if score <11 and good This was an analytic observational study social environment if score ≥11. with a cross sectional design. The study was conducted at 25 preschools in Surakarta, Maternal education was defined as Central Java, from February March 2018. the last formal education level ever pursued by the mother. The measurement scale was 186 e-ISSN: 2549-0257

Wijayanti et al./ The Effect of Parenting Style, Bilingual School, Social Environment, categorical, coded 0 for <High school and 1 analysis design with logistic regression for ≥High school. analysis test. It was conducted using STATA Family income was defined as a 13 program to know the influence of condition that describes the family income independent variable that is located at level (father and mother) every month earned one (individual) to the dependent variable, through the work done. The data were and also to know influence of contextual of measured by questionnaires. The measure- early childhood at the second level to the ment scale was continuous, but for the dependent variable. purpose of data analysis, it was transform- 6. Research Ethics ed into dichotomous, coded 0 for <Rp The research ethics included informed 2,000,000 and 1 for ≥Rp 2,000,000. consent by research subjects, anonymity, Children nutritional status was confidentiality and ethical clearance. The defined as a state of children health deter- ethical clearance in this study was mined by the degree of physical demand for conducted in Dr. Moewardi hospital, energy and other nutrients whose physical Surakarta. impact was measured by anthropometrics weight for age (WAZ). RESULTS Gender was defined as the difference The study subject characteristics in this between women and men biologically since study including the child's gender, maternal a person was born. The measurement scale education, maternal occupation, children was categorical. age, and maternal age. Table 1 shows that Children speech and language deve- most of the children were female (123.55%) lopment was defined as an aspect that and a small percentage of them were boys relates to the ability to respond to voice, of 77 (38.5%). Most children aged ≥5 years talk, communicate, and follow orders. The for about 110 (55.0%) while children ≥5 data were measured by measured by pre- years consisted of 90 (45.0%). As many as screening development questionnaire. 134 mothers (67%) were ≥Senior high 5. Data Analysis school. As many as 130 mothers (65%) The data analysis used in this study was worked at home. Maternal aged ≥30 years multivariate analysis with multilevel were 118 (59%). Table 1. The Characteristics of Subjects No. Characteristics Frequency (n) Percentage (%) 1. Gender 77 38,5 Male 123 61,5 Female 66 33,0 2. Maternal Education 134 67,0 < Senior high school ≥Senior high school 130 65,0 70 35,0 3. Maternal occupation Working at house 90 45,0 Working outside of home 110 55.0 5. Children’s Age 82 41,0 <5 years old 118 59,0 ≥ 5 years old 6. Maternal age < 30 years old ≥ 30 years old e-ISSN: 2549-0257 187

Journal of Maternal and Child Health (2018), 3(3): 184-196 https://doi.org/10.26911/thejmch.2018.03.03.03 The result of statistical description of education, family income, child nutrition research variables were parenting style, status, and children’s gender can be seen in bilingual, social environment, mother the following Table 2. Table 2. Univariate Analysis of Variables No. Variable Frequency (n) Percentage (%) 1. Parenting style Permissive and Authoritarian 85 42.5 Democratic 115 57.5 2. Bilingual Monolingual 117 58.5 Bilingual 83 41.5 3. Social Environment Poor 70 35.0 Good 130 65.0 4. Maternal education <Senior high school 66 33.0 ≥Senior high school 134 67.0 5. Family Income <Rp 2,000,000 70 35.0 ≥Rp 2,000,000 130 65.0 6. Children Nutritional Status Poor 52 26.0 Good 148 74.0 7. Children’s Gender Male 77 38.5 Female 123 61.5 Table 2 shows the description of each with education <SMA were 66 (33%). Most variable in the study. These variables were of them have the family income ≥Rp parenting style, bilingual, social environ- 2,000,000 for about 70 (35%) while the ment, maternal education, family income, other small amount of income was <Rp children nutritional status, and children’s 2,000,000. In this study, most children gender. Based on the table, most of the included in the category of good nutrition parents had democratic parenting style as status for about 148 (74%) and some others many as 115 (57.5%). As many as 85 mothers belong into the category of malnutrition for (42.5%) had permissive and authoritarian about 52 (26%). The final variable is about parenting style. the child's gender. Based on the result of research, it is found that most of the female Most children use monolingual or one child are 123 (61.5%) and 77 (38.5%) male language in everyday life that is for about children. 117 (58.5%) meanwhile, only 83 (41.5%) children have bilingual ability (can master Table 2 showed the description of each two or more languages). Most children grew variable in the study. The variables were up in a good social environment of 130 parenting style, bilingual, social environ- (65%) and those who grew up in a bad social ment, maternal education, family income, environment were 70 (35%). children's nutritional status, and the gender of children. Based on the table, most of the Most of the mothers graduate ≥ high parents in this study implemented good school for about 134 (67%) while mothers 188 e-ISSN: 2549-0257

Wijayanti et al./ The Effect of Parenting Style, Bilingual School, Social Environment, parenting style which was democratic apply poor parenting style (permissive and parenting by 115 (57.5%) while parents who authoritarian) were 85 (42.5%). Table 2. The results of univariate analysis No. Variable Frequency (n) Percentage (%) 1. Parenting Style Poor (Permissive and 85 42.5 Authoritarian) Good (Democratic) 115 57.5 2. Bilingual Monolingual 117 58.5 Bilingual 83 41.5 3. Social Environment Poor 70 35.0 Good 130 65.0 4. Maternal Education < High School 66 33,0 ≥ High School 134 67,0 5. Family Income <Rp 2,000,000 70 35,0 ≥Rp 2,000,000 130 65,0 6. Children’s Nutritional Status Malnutrition 52 26,0 Good Nutrition 148 74,0 7. Gender of Children Male 77 38,5 Female 123 61,5 Most of the children used monolingual or authoritarian parenting style (OR= 4.64; or single language in daily life which were 95% CI= 2.44 to 8.22; p<0.001). 117 children (58.5%) meanwhile, only 83 (41.5%) children who have bilingual ability There was an association between (mastering two or more languages). The bilingual on speech and language develop- children who grow in a good social environ- ment in children. Bilingual children were ment were 130 children (65%) and children 0.03 time less likely to have speech and who grow in poor social environment were language development compared to mono- 70 (35%). lingual children (OR= 0.03; 95% CI= 0.01 to 0.07; p<0.001). There was an association As many as 134 mothers (67%) had between social environment on speech and education level ≥high school. Family with language development in children. Children income ≥Rp 2,000,000 were 70 families who lived in good social environments were (35%). As many as 148 children (74%) had 5.52 times more likely to develop speech and good nutritional status. Most of children language compared to children who lived in were female (123, 61.5%). poor social environments (OR= 5.51; 95% CI= 2.80 to 10.85; p<0.001). Table 3 showed the results of bivariate analysis by Chi-square test. Democratic parenting style increased children speech and language development than permissive e-ISSN: 2549-0257 189

Journal of Maternal and Child Health (2018), 3(3): 184-196 https://doi.org/10.26911/thejmch.2018.03.03.03 Table 3. The results of Chi-square test about the effect of parenting style, bilingual, social environment, maternal education, family income, children's nutritional status, and children's gender on speech and language development Speech and Language 95% CI OR Lower Upper Independent Category Development p Variable Abnormal Normal Limit Limit n % n% Parenting Poor 42 49.4 43 50.6 4.64 2.44 8.82 <0.001 Style Good 20 17.4 95 82.6 Bilingual Monolingual 6 5.1 111 94.9 0.03 0,01 0.07 <0.001 Bilingual 56 67.5 27 32.5 2.80 10.85 <0.001 Social Poor 47 48.5 50 51.5 5.51 3.22 12.01 <0.001 Environment Good 15 14.6 88 85.4 Maternal <High school 38 57.6 28 42.4 6.22 2.24 7.99 <0.001 Education ≥ High 24 17.9 110 82.1 4.00 16.38 <0.001 school Family Income Low 36 51.4 34 48.6 4.23 1.09 3.68 0.025 High 26 20 104 80 Children Poor 34 Nutritional Good 28 65.4 18 34.6 8.09 Status 18.9 120 81.1 Gender Male 31 Female 31 40.3 46 59.7 2.00 25.2 96 74.8 There was an effect between maternal nutritional status (OR= 8.09; 95% CI= 4.00 education on speech and language develop- to 16.38; p<0.001). ment in children, and it was statistically significant. Mothers who were ≥high school There was an effect between children’s have 6.22 times greater likelihood of having gender on speech and language develop- children with better speech and language ment in children, and it was statistically development than mothers who were < high significant. Female children were 2.00 times school (OR= 6.22; 95% CI= 3.22 to 12.01; p more likely to develop speech and language <0.001). than male children (OR= 2.00; 95% CI= 1.09 to 3.68; p =0.025). There was an effect between family income on speech and language develop- Table 4 showed the results of logistic ment in children, and it was statistically regression test with multilevel approach. In significant. Children from families who have this table, the independent variable consist- income for about ≥Rp 2,000,000 were 4.23 ed of fixed effect and random effect. Fixed times more likely to develop normal speech effect consisted of parenting style, bilingual, and language (OR= 4.23; 95% CI= 2.24 to social environment, maternal education, 7.99; p<0.001). family income, children's nutritional status, and children's gender. While the random There was an effect between children’s effect was ECEP (Early Childhood Education nutritional status on speech and language Program). In this table, the result of ICC was development in children, and it was statis- 28.06%. It was indicated that early child- tically significant. Children with good nutri- hood education program (ECEP) has a tional status have 8.09 times greater likeli- contextual effect on the speech and language hood to have normal speech and language development among preschool children. development than children with poor From the Table 4, the result of likelihood ratio was 0.134. It shows the difference and 190 e-ISSN: 2549-0257

Wijayanti et al./ The Effect of Parenting Style, Bilingual School, Social Environment, statistically significant effect between the likely to improve speech and language models without looking at the effect of development of preschool children com- contextual model which in this case was pared to ECEP with B accreditation and ECEP. ECEP with A accreditation were more ECEP with no accreditation. Table 4. The result of multilevel logistic regression Independent Variable b CI (95%) P Lower Limit Upper Limit Fixed Effect 2.76 1.16 4.35 0.001 Parenting Style -4.46 -6.53 -2.39 <0.001 Bilingual 1.80 0.10 3.50 Social Environment 0.14 2.86 0.038 Maternal Education 1.50 0.15 3.23 0.031 Family Income 1.69 0.81 4.08 0.031 Children’s Nutritional Status 2.44 0.38 3.68 0.003 Children’s Gender 2.03 0.013 Random Effect 0.10 15.78 ECEP 1.28 Var (Constant) ICC = 28.06% Likelihood Ratio Test p = 0.134 DISCUSSIONS Democratically guided children have more possibilities for active learning than 1. The effect of parenting style on children who were raised in an undemo- speech and language development cratic manner. The best parenting style for of preschool children children was democratic parenting because it suited the stage of their development. This The result of this study showed that there parenting style set clear expectations and was an effect of parenting style on speech monitor children's behavior with logical and language development of preschool discipline, so that the child's motor, langu- children and it was statistically significant. age, and social development would be better Good parenting style (democratic) improved (Putri et al., 2016). speech and language development of pre- school children rather than poor parenting This study is consistent with a study by style. Bingham et al. (2017), which stated that parenting style was the most important The result of this study was in thing for child’s development. Parents who accordance with a study by Restiyani (2013), were democratic or have good parenting which stated that there was a strong would have children with high score in relationship between parenting style and the academic achievement. This study also development of speech and language in showed that parenting contributed directly children, if the parenting was good and in to the academic skills as well as the language accordance with the needs of children, the development of the children. development of speech and language would 2. The effect of bilingual on speech also be good. On the contrary, if the parent- ing style was not good enough and not and language development of pre- according to the needs of children, then the school children development of speech and language of the The result of this study showed that there children would also be poor. was an effect of bilingual on speech and e-ISSN: 2549-0257 191

Journal of Maternal and Child Health (2018), 3(3): 184-196 https://doi.org/10.26911/thejmch.2018.03.03.03 language development of preschool children ing environments would cause speech and and it was statistically significant. A biling- language disorders in children. ual child would decrease his/her speech and language development rather than mono- The social environment formed from lingual child. the mature people which in this case were the educators and also the peers. Stimula- The result of this study was in accord- tion sourced from the social environment ance with a study by Mardiana and Indanah would be captured by the five senses and (2016), which stated that there was a signi- then the process of obtaining the language ficant relationship between bilingual and the would occurred. Therefore, a good social development of speech and language in environment would improve the develop- children. Every language certainly has a very ment of speech and language of a child. Poor striking difference, perhaps from the social environment decreased children grammar and others. Parents need to intro- speech and language development (Siregar, duce bilingual language wisely to the 2002). children, when the children should use the 4. The effect of maternal education on language, and when the children should switch to another language so that the speech and language development children did not feel confused which could of preschool children lead to disruption in their development. The result of this study showed that there was an effect of maternal education on This was in line with the idea of Meyer speech and language development among (2012), who stated that bilingual may lead to preschool children. High maternal educa- the developmental speech and language tion increased speech and language develop- disorders in children. A bilingual child may ment among preschool children rather than experience errors in the use of language for mothers who were <high school. communication, especially in languages that did not become dominant or languages The result of this study is consistent whose ability was weaker than other with a study by Safriana (2017), which languages. This lead to confusion in children stated that there was a positive relationship so that the development of speech and between maternal education and the deve- language could be hampered. lopment of speech and language in children. 3. The effect of social environment on Highly-educated mothers would seek infor- mation to improve their knowledge and speech and language development skills in nurturing their children. Highly- of preschool children educated parents tend to be easy to received The result of this study showed that there informations and applied in behavioral was an effect of social environment on change. speech and language development of pre- school children and it was statistically signi- A high level of maternal education has ficant. A good social environment improved the ability to absorb information about the speech and language development of pre- development of speech and language of the school children rather than poor social children. The informations could be obtain- environments. ed from social media, information from trusted persons, and health personnel. This study was in line with Jaenudin in Therefore, the informations could be used to Hasmy (2014), who stated that children provide the stimulation for children to social environment can lead to speech and improve their speech and language develop- language disorders in children. Unsupport- ment (Hastuti, 2010). 192 e-ISSN: 2549-0257

Wijayanti et al./ The Effect of Parenting Style, Bilingual School, Social Environment, Other studies have also shown a families with low incomes cannot provide strong, consistent, and positive relationship the basic needs of children who can between maternal education and the stimulate their growth, especially their development of speech and language of speech and language development (Soetji- children. Maternal education was a strong ningsih, 2012). predictor of the development of speech and 6. The effect of children nutritional language in children. Children who were raised by families or mothers with low level status on speech and language of education would experience slow speech development of preschool children and language development than children The result of this study showed that there who were raised by mothers with high level was an effect of children nutritional status of education. High maternal education on speech and language development of would make mothers to be more creative in preschool children. Good children nutri- teaching their children to read and stimulate tional status improved speech and language their children so that the speech and development among preschool children. language development of their children would be more quickly than low-educated The result of this study is consistent mothers (Bingham et al, 2017). with a study by Zulaikhah (2010), which 5. The effect of family income on stated that there was a relationship between children nutritional status and the develop- speech and language development ment of speech and language in children. of preschool children Nutritional status or the fulfillment of nutri- The result of this study showed that there tional needs was one of the factors that was an effect of family income on speech influenced the development of children. If and language development among preschool the children's nutritional needs were not children. High family income increased the fulfilled, then it would inhibit the develop- speech and language development among ment of the children. preschool children. According to Hidayat (2008), nutri- The result of this study is consistent tional needs were very important in with a study by Dharmayanti et al. (2015), supporting the continuity of the growth and which stated that family with high income development process of the children, there- would maintain the health condition of their fore, the fulfillment of good nutrition was family and would make their family to live necessary so that the children development healthy including to provide good nutrition could run normally. for children in order to improve children's 7. The effect of children’s gender on speech and language development. speech and language development Income in the family also contributed of preschool children to the child's development. Families with The result of this study showed that there adequate income allowed the parents to was an effect of children’s gender on speech provide a game tool as means of stimulating and language development among preschool children's development. The family also children. Female children had higher speech tend to provide an environment that indi- and language development than male. The rectly help the child to interact, therefore, result of this study was in accordance with a the developmental stimulation occurred study by Aprihantara et al. (2012), which both physically and verbally (Freitas, 2013; stated that female children have better Martini, 2012; Hastuti, 2009). Otherwise, speech and language development than male, and one of the factors that affected e-ISSN: 2549-0257 193

Journal of Maternal and Child Health (2018), 3(3): 184-196 https://doi.org/10.26911/thejmch.2018.03.03.03 speech and language development was REFERENCES gender. In the first year of childhood, there was no difference in vocalizations between Apriana R (2009). Hubungan Pendidikan male and female. But from the age of two, Anak Usia Dini (Paud dengan Perkem- female children showed faster development bangan KognitiF Anak Usia Praseko- than male children. lah di Kelurahan Tinjomoyo Kecamat- an Banyumanik Semarang. Skripsi This was in line with a study by tidak diterbitkan. Semarang : Program Apriana (2009), which stated that in gene- Studi Ilmu Keperawatan Fakultas ral, women tend to have high scores in Kedokteran Universitas Diponegoro. terms of pronunciation. This could be due to a better association between the right and Aprihantara A, Astini PSN, Maryati LG left brain in women. A study by Arifuddin (2012). Hubungan PAUD dengan Per- (2010) showed that in female children, brain kembangan Bahasa Anak Usia Pra- activation took place in both hemispheres sekolah di Desa Sumerta Kaja Tahun and in larger areas. Women were more 2012. Program Studi Ilmu Keperawat- likely to remember a number of emotional an Fakultas Kedokteran Universitas images than men, and women were emo- Udayana. Bali. tionally more effective than men in the development of speech and language Arifuddin (2010). Neuropsikolinguistik. naturally. Jilidan Pertama. Jakarta: PT Raja- 8. The early childhood education grafindo Persada. program on speech and language Bingham GE, Jeon HY, Kwon KA (2017). development of preschool children Parenting Syle and home literacy Multilevel analysis result of ICC was opportunities: Associations with child- 28.06%. The indicator indicated that ECEP ren’s oral language skills. WILEY. Pp condition in each accreditation has contex- 1-18. tual effect to speech and language develop- ment of preschool children by 28.06%. Candrasari A, Putri DEF, Warraihan, Parisa ECEP with A accreditation were more likely V (2017). Pengaruh Lingkungan ter- to improve speech and language develop- hadap Perkembangan Bahasa Anak. ment of preschool children compared to The 5TH Urecol Proceeding. UAD ECEP with B accreditation and ECEP that Yogyakarta. hlm. 972-978. have no accreditation. The result of this study was in line with a study by Aprihan- Candrasari JP (2014). Hubungan Pola Asuh tara et al. (2012), which stated that there Orang Tua dengan Perkembangan was a significant relationship between ECEP Bahasa Anak Prasekolah di RA Semai and speech and language development of Benih Bangsa Al-Fikri Manca Bantul preschool children, in other words, ECEP Yogyakarta. Skripsi. Sekolah Tinggi provided optimal developmental influence Ilmu Kesehatan Aisyiyah Yogyakarta. for preschool children, especially the deve- lopment of speech and language. Costa A, Galles NS (2015). How does the bilingual experience sculpt the brain?. ECEP provided social experience Europe PMC Funders Group. 15(5): under the guidance of trained teachers who 336-345. guide and help the children to develop their speech and language development. Dharmayanti I, Hapsari D, Azhar K (2015). Asthma among Children in Indonesia: Causes and Triggers. Jurnal Kesehat- an Masyarakat Nasional. 9(4): 320- 326. 194 e-ISSN: 2549-0257

Wijayanti et al./ The Effect of Parenting Style, Bilingual School, Social Environment, Freitas TC, Gabbard C, Cocola PP, Monte- Madyawati L (2016). Strategi Pengembang- belo, Santos (2013).Family socioeco- an Bahasa Pada Anak Edisi Pertama. nomic Status and the Provision of Jakarta: Prenadamedia Group. Affordances in the Home. Epub. 17(4): 319-27. Marmi, Raharjo K (2012). Asuhan Neona- tus, Bayi, Balita dan Anak Prasekolah. Gunawan G, Destiana, Rusmil K (2011). Yogyakarta: Pustaka Pelajar. Gambaran Perkembangan Bicara dan Bahasa Anak Usia 0-3 Tahun. Sari Meyer B (2012). Ad hoc interpreting for Pediatri. vol. 13, no. 1, hlm. 21-25. partially language-proficient patients. John Benjamins Publishing Company. Guyer A, Jarcho J, Edgar P, Degnan K, Pine 4: 100-113. D, Nathan F, Nelson E (2016). Tempe- rament and Parenting Styles in Early Nayeb L, Wallby T, Westerlund M, Salameh Childhood Differentially Influence EK, Sarkadi A (2014). Child Health- Neural Response to Peer Evaluation in care Nurses Believe That Bilingual Adolescence. J Abnorm Child Psychol. Children Show Slower Language Deve- 43(5): 863-874. lopment, Simplify Screening Procedu- res And Delay Referrals. Foundation Hartanto F, Selina H, Zuhriah, Fitra S Acta Paediatrica. hlm. 198-205. (2011). Pengaruh Perkembangan Ba- hasa Terhadap Perkembangan Kognitif Putri RA, Murti B, Indarto D (2016). Effect Anak Usia 1-3 Tahun. Sari Pediatri. of Nurturing at Child Care Center on 12(6): 386-390. Gross and Fine Motoric, Language and Social Development in Children Aged Hasmy R (2014). Perbedaan Perkembangan Under Five Years in Ungaran Barat Bahasa pada Anak Usia Toddler di RW Subdistrict, Ungaran. Journal of 17 Kelurahan Pisangan Kecamatan Maternal and Child Health. 2(1): 1-9. Ciputat Timur dengan Anak Usia Toddler di PSSA Balita Tunas Bangsa Restiyani, Lestari S, Halida (2013). Hubung- Cipayung. Skripsi. Universitas Islam an Pola Asuh dengan Perkembangan Negeri Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta. Bicara Anak Usia 4-5 Tahun TK AL- Falah Mempawah. Artikel Penelitian. Hastuti (2010). Nilai Anak, Stimulasi Psi- PG-PAUD, FKIP Universitas Tanjung- kososial, dan Perkembangan Kognitif pura, Pontianak. Anak Usia 2-3 tahun pada Keluarga Rawan Pangan di Kabupaten Banjar- Safriana L, Salimo H, Dewi YLR (2017). negara,Jawa Tengah. Institut Pertani- Biopsychosocial Factors, Life Course an Bogor. Jurnal Ilmu Keluarga dan Perspective, and Their Influences on Konsumen. 3(1): 21-34. Language Development in Children. Journal of Maternal and Child Health, Hidayat AA (2008). Pengantar Ilmu Kese- 2(3): 245-256. hatan Anak untuk Pendidikan Kebi- danan. Jakarta: Salemba Medika. Sari S, Memy Y, Ghanie A (2015). Angka Kejadian Delayed Speech Disertai Israfil (2015). Hubungan Pola Asuh Orang Gangguan Pendengaran pada Anak Tua dengan Perkembangan Anak Usia yang Menjalani Pemeriksaan Pendeng- Prasekolah. Seminar Psikologi & aran di Bagian Neurootologi IKTHT- Kemanusiaan. Program Studi Magister KL RSUP Dr.Moh. Hoesin. Jurnal Sains Psikologi. Universitas Muham- Kedokteran Dan Kesehatan. 2(1): 121- madiyah Malang. 127. e-ISSN: 2549-0257 195

Journal of Maternal and Child Health (2018), 3(3): 184-196 https://doi.org/10.26911/thejmch.2018.03.03.03 Sari, Budisetyani W (2016). Konsep Diri berdaya Masyarakat. dalam Hamid I, Pada Anak Dengan Orangtua Yang Yakob N dan Moh Z (edt.) . UNG Press Bercerai. Jurnal Psikologi Udayana. Gorontalo. 3(2): 283-291. Siregar MA (2002). Pengaruh Stimuli Ter- hadap Pemerolehan Bahasa Anak Pra- Soetjiningsih (2012). Tumbuh Kembang sekolah. Thesis. Medan: Program Anak. Jakarta : EGC. Studi Linguistik Universitas Sumatera Utara. Sumaryanti L (2017). Peran Lingkungan Zulaikhah S (2010). Hubungan Status Gizi terhadap Perkembangan Bahasa Anak. dengan Perkembangan Anak Usia 2 MUADDIB. 07(01): 72-89. sampai 3 Tahun di Wilayah Kerja Puskesmas Gambiran Kota Surakarta. Sutisna I (2017). Pola Asuh Orang Tua dan Karya Tulis Ilmiah. Universitas Se- Perilaku Agresi Anak. hlm 105-114. belas Maret Surakarta. Prosiding Seminar Nasional dan Lokakarya PLS FIP UNG Reaktualisasi Pendidikan Luar Sekolah sebagai Pem- 196 e-ISSN: 2549-0257