Parenting Programmes: What the Parents Say A Case Study in Mixed Methods Social Science Research
Parenting Programmes: What the Parents Say
Katy Smart Parenting Programmes: What the Parents Say A Case Study in Mixed Methods Social Science Research
Katy Smart School of Education University of Bristol Bristol, UK ISBN 978-3-030-59501-2 ISBN 978-3-030-59502-9 (eBook) https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-59502-9 © The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020 This work is subject to copyright. All rights are solely and exclusively licensed by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed. The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use. The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and informa- tion in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, expressed or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. Cover illustration: © John Rawsterne/patternhead.com This Palgrave Pivot imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature Switzerland AG The registered company address is: Gewerbestrasse 11, 6330 Cham, Switzerland
I would like to dedicate this book to my husband Chris who has always believed in me and encouraged me to follow my passion to try and make a difference to the lives of children, young people and their families. I am so grateful for all the hours Chris has patiently listened to me as I have talked about every other aspect surrounding my Ph.D. research and then this book. I am so appreciative for all the time he has given up to spend with me over the years as I have worked on my research. When you undertake a Ph.D. and then decide to write a book about it, it is all encompassing and permeates most aspects of your life. It is especially thanks to Chris’ constant support, love and encouragement that I am now in a position to share my research with you.
Acknowledgements There are so many people that I want to thank for helping me complete the research that has led to this book Firstly, I must thank the participants, the parents, all of whom were so generous with their time completing questionnaires and taking part in the interviews; without them there would have been no research. Although I do not discuss the data from the trainers, they do deserve a thank you for the time they gave me. This provided triangulation of data sources and promoted the trustworthiness of the data. I must also thank the local authorities, children’s centres and schools who acted as gatekeepers and gave me permission to invite their parents to take part in my research. Without their support I would not have been so successful in recruiting so many parents. I would also like to thank my supervisors at the University of Bristol, Professor Anthony Feiler and Dr. Sara Meadows, for their ongoing support and encouragement throughout my Ph.D. The time and guid- ance they gave me was invaluable. Although sadly no longer with us I would like to thank Professor Roy Bhaskar for encouraging me to attend his fortnightly reading group sessions, annual conference and webinars at the Institute of Education in London, to help me better understand his multi-faceted philosophy of Critical Realism. He very sadly passed away on the 19 November 2014 however his philosophy lives on. vii
viii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Finally, I must thank my family, my husband Chris and children Nathan, Francis and Eleanor, for all their love and continual support throughout my research and the writing of this book. When you take on a Ph.D. so does your family and for this I am most grateful. I thank you all.
About This Book This book captures the key findings from my Ph.D. research at the University of Bristol looking at parenting programmes. The first two chapters address the reasons why I considered it neces- sary to undertake this research and highlight some key elements of my methodology. Chapter 2 also introduces the parents who took part in the study, in particular the eight interviewed parents. The following five chapters are each framed around one of the five key themes that developed from my analysis of the parents’ questionnaire and interview data. I make extensive use of direct quotations so that the parents’ voices can be heard. The final chapter summarises my key findings regarding the parents’ perspectives of the parenting programmes. It further demonstrates how parenting programmes are a real-world example of the Transplant model of parent-professional practice in action. Finally, I discuss how elements of my methodological approach might be more widely applicable within social science research. ix
Contents 1 Introduction 1 Introduction to Key Terms 3 Parents 4 Parenting Styles 4 Parenting Skills 4 Parental Involvement and Parental Engagement 4 Introduction to Parenting Programmes 5 Research Aims 7 A Critical Realist Research Approach 9 Summary 13 References 14 2 The Parents 17 Targeted Groups 18 Fathers and Parenting Programmes 18 Teenage Mothers and Parenting Programmes 19 Poverty and Parenting 21 Research Design 22 The Parents for Interview 27 The Interviews 28 Summary 30 References 32 xi
xii CONTENTS 35 36 3 The Importance of Learning and Using Parenting 39 Strategies 42 Theory of Good Parenting 44 Developing Parenting Skills 44 The Importance of Parental Confidence 45 The Parenting Programmes in This Research 45 Triple-P 46 Webster Stratton’s The Incredible Years 57 PEEP 59 What the Parents Say What This Tells Us 63 References 64 66 4 The Value of Spending Quality Time with Their Child 67 The Impact of Attachment on Parenting 72 The Impact of Parenting on Children’s Behaviour 74 What the Parents Say What This Tells Us 77 References 77 78 5 How Children Benefit from Opportunities That 78 Promote Their Development Assuring Confidentiality and Anonymity 80 Confidentiality 85 Anonymity 86 The Impact of Parenting on Children’s Development 87 and Attainment 89 What the Parents Say 90 Speech and Language Development 92 Social Development 93 Behavioural Development 95 Improved Confidence School Readiness and Education 97 What This Tells Us 98 References 6 The Significance of the Family Working Together Parenting Programme Critique
CONTENTS xiii What the Parents Say 102 What This Tells Us 104 References 106 7 The Importance of the Right Environment to Share 109 Parenting Experiences with Other Parents 111 What the Parents Say 114 What This Tells Us 118 References 8 Discussion and Conclusion 119 What Parents Thought About the Impact of Parenting Programmes 120 Research Question 2: Parents’ Views Regarding Parental Changes 120 Research Question 3: Parents’ Views on the Impact to the Children 122 Parenting Programmes as a Real-World Example of a Transplant Model in Practice 124 Research Question 1: Parents’ Views on Parenting Programmes 124 How My Methodology Can Serve as an Example for General Social Science Research 126 Critical Realism as a Philosophy 126 Maximising Participation Through Anonymity and Confidentiality 127 Engaging to Maximise Participation 128 Respecting the Data 129 Current Parenting Programme Availability 130 Conclusion 133 References 134 Index 137
About the Author Katy Smart has Ph.D. research interest, which forms the basis of this book, that came about through over 30 years of working with chil- dren, young people and parents. This included being a parent programme designer and facilitator, NVQ lecturer and assessor in childcare and educa- tion, Educational Psychologist Assistant, preschool leader and primary school teacher. She was also the Parent Support, Extended Services and Children’s Centre Advisor for 78 primary, secondary and special schools and 14 children’s centres for a local authority in the south-west of the UK for over six years. Her interest in parenting and parental engagement has also been influ- enced by 31 years of being a mother. As a mother she always treasured the time she spent with her three children from reading stories and playing with them as they discovered the world through encouraging them to develop and explore their imaginations and creativity, to supporting their learning with field trips and helping with homework, to embracing their passions and helping them achieve their dreams. Katy is currently a Post-doctoral Researcher at the University of Oxford; prior to that she was a Senior Teaching Associate at the Grad- uate School of Education at the University of Bristol. Since 2013 she has been the editor of the Psychology of Education Review, the journal of the Psychology of Education Section of the British Psychological Society. Previous publications by Katy include a chapter in Psychology Applica- tions and Developments III entitled Parenting Programmes: A Transplant xv
xvi ABOUT THE AUTHOR Model in Practice. She also was the co-editor of The Role of Competence Beliefs in Teaching and Learning, part of the Current Trends monograph series from the British Journal of Educational Psychology.
Abbreviations 1M First Moment in DCR 2E Second Edge in DCR 3L Third Level in DCR 4D Fourth Dimension in DCR ALSPAC Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children ASD Autistic Spectrum Disorder BPP Better Parenting Programme CR Critical Realism DCR Dialectical Critical Realism DCSF Department for Children, Schools and Families DfES Department for Education and Skills EYFS Early Years Foundation Stage LA Local Authority NICE National Institute for Clinical Excellence PALS Parents Altogether Lending Support PEEP Peers Early Education Partnership PEIP Parenting Early Intervention Programme PRU Pupil Referral Unit PSA Parent Support Advisor SES Socio-Economic Status xvii
List of Figures Fig. 1.1 Ontological layers in Critical Realism 10 Fig. 2.1 Research timeline 25 Fig. 2.2 Initial groupings of nodes 30 Fig. 2.3 Analysis process from transcript to themes 31 Fig. 3.1 Bronfenbrenner’s ecological systems model 37 xix
List of Tables Table 2.1 Parents recruited per programme 23 Table 2.2 Parents selected for interview 26 xxi
CHAPTER 1 Introduction Abstract Parenting is one of the most important and rewarding roles you can have, yet it comes with many challenges—it is not an innate skill. It is widely recognised that parenting contributes significantly to chil- dren’s development, learning and achievement. Consequently, the UK Government provided funding for the nationwide delivery of parenting programmes to increase positive parental engagement with their child and their child’s education, with the ultimate goal of improving the life chances of children and young people. Keywords Parenting programme · Parental engagement · Parental involvement · Critical Realism When it comes to children’s development and education, parents matter. Parents matter. Parents matter to me. When it comes to jobs the most important has to be parenting. Although without pay, it is arguably the most rewarding position you will ever have. Yet it comes with so many challenges and yes probably some heartbreak. I wish I could say being a good parent is innate, but even if you have a solid foundation in preparing you to be a parent you will, most likely, at some time be faced with situations that you do not know how best to handle. © The Author(s), under exclusive license to 1 Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020 K. Smart, Parenting Programmes: What the Parents Say, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-59502-9_1
2 K. SMART With the growing international recognition of the importance of the parental role in their child’s education, the UK Government commis- sioned Charles Desforges and Alberto Abouchaar to examine research findings on the relationship between family education, parental support and parental engagement on the one hand and their child’s achieve- ment and adjustment in schools on the other. Desforges and Abouchaar’s (2003) review suggested that to improve the educational achievement of children and young people parents need to support their children; this goes beyond providing the basic needs such as housing, love, safety and nutrition and extends to include parent–child interaction, helping with school work and educational choices and communication with their child’s educational setting. The most important finding from Desforges and Abouchaar’s review was that parental engagement in their child’s learning and development could have a notable positive impact on their child’s attainment and achievement. In the primary age range the impact caused by different levels of parental involvement is much bigger than differences associated with variations in the quality of schools. The scale of the impact is evident across all social classes and all ethnic groups. (Desforges and Abouchaar 2003, pp. 4–5) This suggests that parental engagement can have a greater impact on the child’s achievement than the variations in teaching quality between schools. This is quite a remarkable finding. I should highlight here that the terms “involvement” and “engage- ment” are frequently used interchangeably in the literature; I will clarify this distinction later in this chapter in the section Introduction to Key Terms. Before I share the details of my study, first a little about myself and why I considered this to be an important area that required investigation. My Ph.D. research interest came about through over 30 years of working with children, young people and parents. This has included being a parent programme designer and facilitator, Educational Psychol- ogist Assistant, preschool leader and primary school teacher as well as the Parent Support, Extended Services and Children’s Centre Advisor for a local authority in the south-west of the UK. The differences in relationships between children and their parents, through observation
1 INTRODUCTION 3 in my professional experience, appeared to have a noticeable impact on children’s behaviour, development, attainment, school attendance, social interaction and ultimately on their future outcomes. My interest in parenting and parental engagement has also been influ- enced by 31 years of being a mother. As a mother I have always treasured the time I have spent with my three children from reading stories and playing with them as they discovered the world through encour- aging them to develop and explore their imaginations and creativity, to supporting their learning with field trips and helping with homework, to embracing their passions and helping them achieve their dreams. However the knowledge and skills necessary for positive parenting do not come with the arrival of a new baby; for many parents they have not had posi- tive parenting experiences themselves or have lacked the opportunity to learn these skills. For parent and child, this can mean missing out on these formative shared experiences; for the child this can also mean not reaching their full academic potential without such valuable parental engagement. In my role as a parent programme facilitator, parents frequently shared with me that attending the programme had improved their knowl- edge around child development and made a positive difference to their parenting skills. A common comment after completing the programme was that they wished they had attended a course earlier. As a preschool leader and primary school teacher parents have thanked me for the time I have given them to discuss their child and for my support. This rela- tionship between myself, as an educational professional, and parents is I believe fundamental in promoting communication between home and the educational setting and in fostering partnership working. It can help parents feel less threatened about coming to talk to teachers around any concerns they may have or asking for assistance in explaining how they can best support their child with their education. This I believe helps promote parental engagement in their child’s education and subsequently improved achievement for their child. Introduction to Key Terms Throughout this book, a number of terms are introduced which might benefit from a clear definition of how I use them.
4 K. SMART Parents Although when using the term “parents” I am referring to both mothers and fathers, the parents involved in this study were predominantly mothers; in both my professional experience and the evidence from the literature it is still mainly mothers who are the primary caregivers (Shuffelton 2015) and it is the mother who usually attends a parenting programme. However there are fathers, albeit fewer, who are the primary caregiver and who attend the parenting programme so the use of parents rather than mothers is used to reflect this. Parenting Styles Parenting styles refers to the broader pattern of parenting practices relating to the behaviours and interactions between the parent and their child. For example Baumrind (1967) described four styles of parenting in her research: neglectful, permissive, authoritarian and authoritative. Gottman’s (1997) research also identifies four central parenting styles: the dismissing parent, the disapproving parent, the laissez-faire parent and the emotion-coaching parent. Parenting Skills Parenting skills are the techniques and tools that the parent can adopt in their interactions with their child including: using positive praise; estab- lishing routines; setting clear consistent boundaries; engaging in parent– child activities to support and promote their child’s social, emotional, physical and cognitive development. Parental Involvement and Parental Engagement Specifically here I will be referring to parental involvement and engage- ment with their child’s education and development. Parental involvement focuses primarily on the educational process and educational setting. This is largely concerned with information sharing between parents and school or school-related activities including: parents’ evenings; school assemblies; home/school agreement; supporting the Parent Teacher Association; helping out in the library. These activities are not directly associated with the child’s learning and may have little impact on the child’s attainment (Harris and Goodall 2007).
1 INTRODUCTION 5 Parental engagement goes one step further with parents actively taking a role in supporting or creating activities to promote their child’s devel- opment and education. This could include: developing a stimulating and positive home learning environment; actively taking an interest and supporting their child’s schoolwork and homework; engaging in activi- ties with their child that would promote their child’s social, emotional, physical and cognitive development. Parents are “doing with” rather than “being done to” or “doing to”. I have defined above how I use and interpret these two terms, however in the literature these phrases are often used interchangeably; an example of this would be when Desforges and Abouchaar use the term “involve- ment” yet when Goodall and Vorhaus (2011) refer to this document they use the term “engagement”—both referring to the same parental inter- actions. Feinstein and Symons (1999) is another example who refer to “involvement” however by my definition they are talking about “engage- ment”. Other than in direct quotations I will be using my definition to avoid ambiguity. Introduction to Parenting Programmes Desforges and Abouchaar’s (2003) review was a key factor that led to the UK Government introducing a number of initiatives aimed at promoting children’s attainment through parental interaction with their children and their children’s school. Particular emphasis was placed on local author- ities’ engagement with parenting programmes and the recruitment of a new workforce of Parent Support Advisors (Lindsay et al. 2009) to help bridge the gap between schools and parents. The success of Parent Support Advisor (PSA) pilot programmes resulted in specific Government funding being provided to introduce this scheme to all local authori- ties across the country, with additional funding being made available to provide training for and delivery of parenting programmes. To access this funding, each authority was presented with five evidence-based parenting programmes to choose from. An expected outcome from this provision was the improvement of parental engagement with their child’s education and a subsequent improvement in their child’s educational attainment. Children’s centres also received funding to ensure they provided similar support for parents whose children were not yet in school, including the delivery of parenting programmes.
6 K. SMART In 2009 I was asked to lead on the Parent Support Advisor project for a south-west local authority, and my responsibilities included co-ordinating the recruitment and training of all the Parent Support Advisors across the borough. Each cluster of schools, a cluster comprising a secondary school and its primary feeder schools, recruited one PSA. I worked closely with the head teachers from each cluster to recruit the PSA that would best suit their cluster; it was important that the heads were involved in this process as they would be referring the parents they considered needed support to their PSA. All the PSAs received extensive training including being trained as a parenting programme facilitator. The importance of the parental role in their child’s development and education was further substantiated in 2010 when the UK Government commissioned Frank Field to conduct an independent review on life chances and poverty. Field’s review also acknowledged the importance of the role of parents in preventing poor children becoming poor adults: Nothing can be achieved without working with parents. All our recom- mendations are about enabling parents to achieve the aspirations that they have for their children. (Field 2010, p. 6) Field’s review highlighted the increasing number of parenting programmes being offered at the time of writing his report in support of disadvantaged families, particularly those with children in the early years, and the positive impact such programmes can have on parenting and the home learning environment. One of his recommendations was that all new parents should be encouraged by children’s centres to take advantage of a parenting programme. However it was not long before the Government started to with- draw funding, first from the PSA initiative and then from the children’s centres. Frustrated by this change of direction, which seemed to be based on factors other than feedback about the efficacy of the programmes, I submitted my research proposal to the University of Bristol—and so my Ph.D. study began. During my research I watched the funding being taken away completely from the PSA initiative and then gradually from the children’s centres who were also delivering parenting programmes.
1 INTRODUCTION 7 Research Aims A number of parenting programmes have been developed, both inter- nationally and in the UK, to meet the varying needs and approaches most suitable to parents. One of the key aims of many parenting programmes is to help parents develop positive parenting skills to support them in preventing or reducing challenging behaviour in children. Other aims integral to the philosophy of parenting programmes include strengthening the parent–child relationship, increasing children’s social and emotional learning, promoting school readiness, promoting parents’ awareness of children’s development and the importance of maximising learning opportunities. As part of a wider agenda, parenting programmes have had a greater emphasis placed on their value after the research findings of Desforges and Abouchaar; this had a powerful influence on local authorities offering and delivering more parenting programmes. The existing research into parenting programmes has primarily focused on their impact to children’s behaviour; this could be attributed to the primary aim of many parenting programmes being directed in this area. However, having a background in psychology and education I was additionally interested in the impact that the programmes have on parental behaviour and the subsequent effects on children’s development and attainment. Specifically, I was interested in the parents’ perspectives; my research provided parents the opportunity to express their views on parenting programmes. My study followed a number of families through one of three parenting programmes and beyond. My aim was not to advocate any particular parenting programme or indeed parenting programmes in general; rather my purpose was to explore parents’ perspectives on whether they consid- ered parenting programmes to have had an impact on their own behaviour and whether they considered this had subsequently had any impact on their child. My study explored the longitudinal perspective by revis- iting the families participating in my research one year after they had completed a parenting programme to examine the parents’ perceptions of any lasting influence. The three parenting programmes my research focused on were, Triple-P , Webster Stratton’s The Incredible Years and Peers Early Education Partnership ( PEEP ), three of the most popularly adopted programmes across the south-west of the UK at the time of starting my research. I will describe these programmes in more detail in the next chapter. In total 136 parents attending 20 courses took part in my study.
8 K. SMART By gaining the parents’ perspectives I aimed to establish how effec- tive parenting programmes are in terms of being a vehicle to deliver advice and guidance—how well do they succeed in getting across infor- mation and new ideas? Do they ensure parents feel empowered by the programme rather than being made to feel inadequate? Do parenting programmes change how a parent interacts with their child? Does this in turn improve the child’s progress? Does this really change the cycle that affects so many families—poverty (Blanden et al. 2005), teenage preg- nancies (Smart 2003) and mental health problems (Murray and Cooper 1997). An investigation into the parenting programme process was a key component of my research. It is suggested that if a parent has formed a positive attachment to their child and continues to interact and take an interest in their life, it will have a positive impact on their future outcomes (Ainsworth et al. 1978; Bowlby 1980). Many factors come into play that influence how a parent develops a relationship with their child: their own role models when growing up; mental health issues; domestic violence; addiction (drugs, alcohol, gambling); socio-economic factors; their own education; initial mother–infant attachment. How do parenting programmes fit into this landscape? The main aim of my research was to explore the parents’ perceptions, but to ensure a degree of triangulation and to promote trustworthiness in the data, I needed to seek a secondary source to provide an alternative perspective to the parents’ reports. To this end my research incorporated the views from parent programme trainers—they saw the parents typically on a weekly basis, following them through the entirety of the course, and were well-placed to provide this additional perspective. However the focus of this book is solely on the parents’ voices. With these considerations in mind, my study addressed the following three research questions: 1. What are the views of parents regarding the parenting programme? 2. What are the views of parents regarding the changes that parents have made as a result of attending a parenting programme? 3. From the perspective of parents, what impact has the parenting programme had on the children? My research questions were framed in this way to allow for the voices of the parents to be heard and for them to share their views on the parenting
1 INTRODUCTION 9 programme process, any parental behaviour changes and any impact on the child. The heart of my research is the parents’ voices and as such I have tried to include as many as possible in this book; a key compo- nent will be the use of direct quotations from parents, allowing their voices to be heard in the context of my research. These quotations come from both questionnaire responses and interviews and will be identified as such. Responses from the post-programme questionnaire are labelled “Q- post”; responses from the one-year-on questionnaire “Q-year”; interview quotations will be labelled with the participant’s pseudonym. Transcribed phrases starting mid-way through a sentence will be prefixed with an ellipsis (…), words inserted for contextual clarity will be contained within square brackets [ ], emphasised phrases will be underlined and a pause in the participant’s response will be indicated with two dots (..). A Critical Realist Research Approach The purpose of my research was to increase the knowledge and under- standing of the impact of parenting programmes without actually affecting what already exists; my aim was to develop this understanding without distorting the mechanisms that led to its generation. Further, my research goes beyond a direct empiricist view and uses the parents’ stories to better appreciate the underlying reality—in other words I wanted to try and understand more about what mechanisms might be causing the impacts that are observed. This placed my study comfortably within Bhaskar’s (1975) Critical Realist philosophy in that by employing inter- views with participants I would gain an insight into the underlying reality through an analysis of their experiences. Also in line with this philosophy it is possible to view the parenting programmes as “an ensemble of struc- tures, practices and conventions that individuals reproduce or transform” (Bhaskar 1991, p. 76). I wanted to make connections between what the parents were saying and what was happening in their lives. Sims-Schouten and Riley (2014) consider this as providing a sense of justice to their research participants. Central to Critical Realism is the concept of different ontological domains or layers—the Real, the Actual and the Empirical—see Fig. 1.1. As each deeper layer is revealed and understood it becomes necessary to return to the original event for further critical analysis. Here the Real encapsulates the underlying structures, mechanisms and processes that are ultimately responsible for what we can observe; the Real
10 K. SMART Empirical Actual Real Fig. 1.1 Ontological layers in Critical Realism cannot be seen but we can speculate on it, although it is not something we have any direct knowledge of. An example of this would be gravity; we do not see gravity however we know if we drop an object it will fall. Above the Real, the next layer is the Actual; this refers to events, the events that are caused by the Real mechanisms. We cannot observe the Real however we can observe the Actual: using the example of gravity we can see the object drop, that is to say we cannot observe gravity itself but we can observe an event caused by gravity. Finally the third ontological level of Bhaskar’s Critical Realism is the Empirical, the domain of the experience, where the Actual events translate into measurable outcomes. This is the position occupied by the researcher and is characterised by the measurements and observations that they make. For example in the case of gravity, the Empirical domain includes the measurements of how long an object took to fall. Applying this ontological model to my research reveals how the responses from individual parents and trainers comprise an empirical view of parenting programmes. Through the combination and analysis of these experiences I aim to uncover an understanding of the actual impacts of the programmes and then ultimately to determine the real mechanisms and processes that led to these outcomes. Through my research I am gaining knowledge from individual parent’s experiences and using induction to draw conclusions about larger populations (Danermark et al. 2002); however as part of this induction I have to revisit my understanding of the original event. This steady cycle of discovery, understanding, more discovery and amendment will get me closer to an accurate conclusion (Patomäki and Wight 2000).
1 INTRODUCTION 11 A second key component of Critical Realism is the recognition of the epistemic fallacy—the mistaken idea that ontological questions can be translated into purely epistemological terms, whereby being can be explained by our knowledge of being. Bhaskar highlights this fallacy through his ontological model presented above; the existence of the underlying reality, the domain of the Real, is independent of our knowl- edge and awareness of it, as experienced in the Empirical domain. Bhaskar goes on to further distinguish these two entities as an intransi- tive underlying reality compared to a transitive and changeable empirical understanding of that reality. Continuing the earlier example of gravity, we can see how Newton’s laws of gravity have been superseded by Einstein’s General Relativity as our epistemological understanding of this phenomenon, however the ontological reality of gravity has remained unchanged. In terms of my research, this distinction allows me to recog- nise that the impact of parenting programmes, the underlying reality, will be experienced and reported differently by different participants. I there- fore need to combine multiple perspectives in order to fully appreciate the impact. It could be argued that allowing the voices of the participants the opportunity to tell their story is enough. This would be a purely narra- tive approach and would flow naturally from the interview structure of my research. However Clough and Nutbrown (2002) suggest that social research is political and question the point of any research that does not have an impact on either the researcher or society. Dowling and Brown consider research can bring with it a means of understanding the world that you did not have before, which could impact on your own “profes- sional practices” (Dowling and Brown 2010, p. 1) as well as encouraging further research. My research could have focused on the stories of one or two families however I feel it is important to go beyond the narra- tive, where the reader is left to draw their own conclusions, and rather to explicitly analyse the real mechanisms and processes behind the impact of parenting programmes in order to propose further research and poten- tially influence social policy. Bhaskar’s (2008) four planar social being MELD model helps me to do this, where the four planes are defined and characterised as: • First Moment or 1M: stratification and the epistemic fallacy • Second Edge or 2E: absences and negative power2 • Third Level or 3L: totality and reflexivity
12 K. SMART • Fourth Dimension or 4D: transformative agency and positive power1 To help understand this model and how it applies to my research I need to clarify some of the terminology Bhaskar uses, namely the elements that I drew upon in my research. The First Moment (1M) refers to basic Crit- ical Realism which is the starting point for the model, beginning with the stratification into the three ontological levels as shown in Fig. 1.1 earlier and the recognition of the epistemic fallacy. The Second Edge (2E) intro- duces the concept of absence and its associated negative “power2”. It highlights the importance of elements that we cannot see but which have significant effects. Collier (1998) uses the example that the absence of vitamin C in our diet would cause scurvy. Through observation of crew members on long sea voyages it was the absence of fresh fruit and vegeta- bles that was discovered to be the direct contributory cause that led to this disease. In the Third Level (3L) Bhaskar explains that totalities “must exist for social life to be possible” (Bhaskar 1998, p. 629). He relates how each individual exhibits a subset of the features of the larger group to which they belong and therefore the experiences of an individual need to be analysed and understood within this wider context. Recognition of these totalities is a vital step on the path to influencing change, which is the ultimate goal of Bhaskar’s Fourth Dimension (4D), wherein the posi- tive “power1” of transformative agency, the human ability to change the world, is captured. To demonstrate how this model works I have outlined below how my research contributes by mapping it onto the MELD framework: • 1M observe and collect the perspectives of parents and trainers on the parenting programme process, changes in parental behaviour and impact on the child, understanding how each individual’s experience is one manifestation of the underlying reality. • 2E identify what was the nature of the changes reported by parents, recognising the nature of both becoming and “be-going” (Bhasker’s terminology for changes associated with loss or absence). What is or was missing in regard to parenting behaviours and child develop- ment. Are there any contradictions in what parents and trainers are saying?
1 INTRODUCTION 13 • 3L looking at the whole picture, the totality, of the impacts of the parenting programme process. Examining this totality through multiple time points, multiple perspectives, both parents and trainers, and multiple methodologies. • 4D using this new knowledge and understanding to pursue real change; refocusing the Government and local authority attention to addressing these changes. Although it is my longer-term intention to influence social policy, my research was not intended to change the objects or events which form part of the study itself; I was simply observing through the information from the questionnaires and interviews. This allowed me to develop knowl- edge and understanding through the experiences of the participants. It was through critical examination of the questionnaires and interview tran- scripts and other data collected, including casual conversations whilst taking part in group sessions, that themes were developed. Although I was looking at events on the surface, the relationship with the real underlying mechanisms and structures needed to be understood; Critical Realism helped me appreciate that my observations were just abstractions of the true reality and that I needed to critically interpret these observations to fully understand the deeper causal relationships. Summary Parenting programmes have been developed and delivered as part of a wider initiative to increase positive parental engagement with their child and their child’s education, with an ultimate goal of improving the life chances of children and young people. In my professional experience I have seen first-hand how much difference parental engagement can make and I felt there was a real need to explore parents’ perceptions of whether or not parenting programmes can make a difference in this regard. I there- fore considered it important to explore parents’ views on the structure, content and delivery of parenting programmes, how they have personally been impacted by attending such a programme and finally whether or not this might be affecting their child. In the next chapter I will move away from discussions of why I under- took this research and introduce the parents who took part in my study, in particular the eight interviewed parents, along with a description of how I collected and analysed their perspectives.
14 K. SMART The following chapters will be framed around five key themes that developed from my interactions with the parents as part of this research: • Chapter 3 discusses how the parents valued the parenting strategies that they had learnt and the impact it had on their parenting and their relationship with the child; • Chapter 4 shows that having attended a parenting programme parents are now appreciating spending quality time with their child; • Chapter 5 goes on to demonstrate how the children benefit from opportunities provided by their parents that promote their develop- ment; • Chapter 6 raises the importance of the family working together to adopt these new strategies and the potential consequences of not doing so; • Chapter 7 discusses the significance of the right environment to share parenting experiences with other parents. This chapter will look at the aspects of the environment that the parents considered particularly important. Finally in Chapter 8 I will summarise the key findings from my study and look at how aspects of my methodological approach might be applicable more widely within social science research. References Ainsworth, M. D., Blehar, M. C., Waters, E., & Walls, S. (1978). Patterns of attachment: A psychological study of the strange situation. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; distributed by Halsted Press Division of Wiley. Baumrind, D. (1967). Child care practices anteceding three patterns of preschool behavior. Genetic Psychology Monographs, 75, 43–88. Bhaskar, R. (1975). A realist theory of science. Leeds: Leeds Books Ltd. Bhaskar, R. (1991). Philosophy and the idea of freedom. Oxford: Blackwell. Bhaskar, R. (1998). Critical realism and dialectic. In M. Archer, R. Bhaskar, A. Collier, T. Lawson, & A. Norrie (Eds.), Critical realism: Essential readings. London: Routledge. Bhaskar, R. (2008). Dialectic: The pulse of freedom. London: Routledge. Blanden, J., Gregg, P., & Machin, S. (2005). Intergenerational mobility in Europe and North America. Report supported by the Sutton Trust, Centre for Economic Performance, London School of Economics. London: Centre for Economic Performance, London School of Economics.
1 INTRODUCTION 15 Bowlby, J. (1980). Attachment and loss III: Loss, sadness and depression. New York: Basic Books. Clough, P., & Nutbrown, C. (2002). A student’s guide to methodology: Justifying enquiry. London: Sage. Collier, A. (1998). The power of negative thinking. In M. Archer, R. Bhaskar, A. Collier, T. Lawson, & A. Norrie (Eds.), Critical realism: Essential readings. London: Routledge. Danermark, B., Ekstrom, M., Jakobsen, L., & Karlsson, J. C. (2002). Explaining society: Critical realism in the social sciences. Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge. Desforges, C., & Abouchaar, A. (2003). The impact of parental involvement, parental support and family education on pupil achievement and adjustment: A review of literature. Nottingham: DfES Publications. Dowling, P., & Brown, A. (2010). Doing research/reading research: Re- interrogating education. London: Routledge. Feinstein, L., & Symons, J. (1999). Attainment in secondary school. Oxford Economic Papers, 51, 300–321. Field, F. (2010). The foundation years: Preventing poor children becoming poor adults: The report of the Independent Review on Poverty and Life Chances. London: Cabinet Office. Goodall, J., & Vorhaus, J. (2011). Review of best practice in parental engagement. London: Department of Education. Gottman, J. (1997). Raising an emotionally intelligent child. Seattle, WA: Gottman Institute. Harris, A., & Goodall, J. (2007). Engaging parents in raising achievement: Do parents know they matter?: A research project commissioned by the Specialist Schools and Academies Trust. Warwick: University of Warwick. Lindsay, G., Davis, H., Strand, S., Cullen, A. M., Band, S., Cullen, S., et al. (2009). Parent support advisor pilot evaluation: Final report. Warwick: University of Warwick. Murray, L., & Cooper, P. J. (1997). Effects of postnatal depression on infant development. Archives of Disease in Childhood, 77, 99–101. Patomäki, H., & Wight, C. (2000). After postpositivism? The promises of critical realism. International Studies Quarterly, 44, 213–237. Shuffelton, A. (2015). Re-privatizing the family: How “opt-out” and “parental involvement” media narratives support school privatization. Critical Educa- tion, 6(12). Sims-Schouten, W., & Riley, S. (2014). Employing a form of critical realist discourse analysis for identity research: An example from women’s talk of motherhood, childcare, and employment. In P. Edwards, J. O’Mahoney, & S. Vincent (Eds.), Studying organizations using critical realism: A practical guide. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Smart, C. (2003). The effects of educational provisions on teenage pregnancies. Master of Education: University of Bristol.
CHAPTER 2 The Parents Abstract This book focuses on the voices of parents. It gives them the opportunity to share their views around the process and outcomes associ- ated with attending a parenting programme. This chapter introduces the parents who supported my research, in particular those who took part in the interview phase, and describes the methodologies I employed to collect and analyse their perspectives. Keywords Parenting · Fathers · Teenage mothers · Socio-economic status Meet the parents: Adelajda, Ava, Emily, Emma, Isabella, Jacob, Olivia, Sophia. The whole purpose of my research, and this book, is to capture the voices of the parents who attended a parenting programme. My research was all about understanding what they had to say about the programmes and how they perceived the programmes had made an impact on them and their families. Therefore I consider it important that I dedicate this chapter to introducing the parents who formed the core of my study, describing the process by which I selected the parents, particularly those who took part in my interviews, the techniques I used to collect their views and the methodologies I adopted to analyse what they told me. © The Author(s), under exclusive license to 17 Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020 K. Smart, Parenting Programmes: What the Parents Say, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-59502-9_2
18 K. SMART Before I go on to talk about my research design in more detail and how I selected the parents to take part in the interview phase of the study, I would like to briefly share some of the research litera- ture around the groups of parents that were identified as those who would particularly benefit from attending a parenting programme (DfES 2007). These Government targeted groups comprise of fathers, teenage mothers and parents with a low socio-economic status. Understanding why these specific parent categories were identified as target recipients for the programmes is especially important as it was essential that I listened effectively to the voices from each of these demographic groups. Targeted Groups Fathers and Parenting Programmes The first group that were targeted by local authorities were fathers. With increases in the number of women working and the time fathers spend with their child (DfES 2007), along with the recognition of the importance of the role of the father and the strong links between the father’s interest in their child’s schooling and their subsequent educational outcome (DfES 2007; Field 2010), children’s centres were charged with actively designing and promoting services for fathers (DfES 2007). Although parenting programmes in general are designed to prepare both mothers and fathers for parenthood, from both my own professional experience and from research carried out on parenting programmes it is evident that it is mostly mothers who attend. It could be argued that it is easier for mothers to attend as the programmes are often delivered in the day whilst the fathers are at work. However even with increasing numbers of mothers going out to work and more fathers becoming the main carer it still appears very few fathers attend parenting programmes. To estab- lish whether a fathers-only group would encourage fathers to engage in an Incredible Years programme, Helfenbaum-Kun and Ortiz (2007) arbi- trarily assigned 39 fathers to either an eight-week programme or to a control group. Although at the start the fathers expressed an interest and attendance on the programme was good, by the end of the course 70% of the registered fathers had attended fewer than half the sessions. The European Union Platform for Investing in Children (European Union Platform 2015) found that, in 2012, the rate of women in work in
2 THE PARENTS 19 Sweden (71.8%) was approaching that of men (75.6%). In fact the propor- tion of mothers with children under the age of six who were in work was even higher at 76.8%. Axberg and Broberg’s (2012) study into whether The Incredible Years programme is transferrable to Swedish parents, with children between the ages of four and eight, supports this high rate as they found that 80% of their mothers were employed. Sweden certainly appears to be leading the way forward to equal gender parenting and offers 16-months of leave for parents that can be used by either the father or mother, two months of which is exclusively for fathers (France-Presse 2015). Although the focus of Axberg and Broberg’s study was the trans- ferability of The Incredible Years programme from American to Swedish parents, I was particularly interested in whether father participation in a parenting programme would be higher in a country where there was such a focus on equal gender parenting. Surprisingly all the participants in this study were mothers even though 63% of the children lived with both their parents. In Australia, Gray et al. (2003) quote 65.5% of all two-parent fami- lies with children under 15 as having both parents working. To give working parents easier access to a parenting programme Sanders et al.’s (2011) study, with the support of a number of organisations in the Bris- bane metropolitan area in Australia, recruited parents to take part in their research through workplace notice boards and letters attached to payslips. From the 152 employees who expressed an interest in taking part in the research 121 working parents with children between the ages of one and 16 met the study’s criteria; each parent was arbitrarily assigned to either a Workplace Triple-P programme or to a control group. Even though the programme was delivered in the workplace, 72.4% of participants were mothers. This cannot be attributed to mothers working fewer hours as the programme was delivered during the working day. This suggests even taking a parenting group into the workplace does not increase father participation. Teenage Mothers and Parenting Programmes One group of parents that children’s centres were encouraged to engage were teenage parents. Compared to older parents, teenage mothers and fathers are more likely to experience a wider range of challenges (DCSF 2008) such as coming from a deprived background, unemployment, own
20 K. SMART mother was a teenage mother, repeated unplanned pregnancies, educa- tional problems, poor health, unstable relationship. To help support teenage parents the UK Government (DfES 2007) asked children’s centres to provide support and advice including support in parenting. Young mothers, or more specifically teenage mothers, have been a strong focus of UK Government policy (DfES 2007; DCSF 2008, 2009) as it is suggested that teenage parents are often from very deprived back- grounds (DCSF 2009; Barlow et al. 2011). Statistics show that numbers of teenage pregnancy are known to be higher in areas of greater socio- economic deprivation, although reduced numbers of teenage pregnancy have been noted in areas with proximity to youth family planning clinics (Diamond et al. 1999). McLeod’s (2001) study of the shifting patterns of teenage pregnancy highlights results from the 1980s and the 1990s showing an increased disparity depending on local deprivation. The Social Exclusion Unit (1999) found that teenagers in socio-economically disad- vantaged areas were less likely to terminate their pregnancy, as they appeared to strongly disapprove of this practice and felt it would stig- matise them in the eyes of others. In contrast, the teenagers from a more affluent region were more likely to have an abortion. This diver- gence of preference between classes is aligned with reported differences between the middle-class girl and her working-class equivalent in their future aspirations (Dawson and Meadows 1995). My earlier research (Smart 2003) investigated the effects of three different educational provisions (home tutoring; school; pupil referral unit [PRU]) for teenage pregnancies and mothers who studied for their GCSEs. The findings from this research suggest the best educational provision was offered at the PRU as this provided knowledge on childcare and an on-site nursery provision for their babies. However a limitation of this research was the small number of teenage mothers included; there were only three case-studies, one for each provision. During my profes- sional experience of talking to teenage mothers and other professionals who worked with them I learnt that in many cases the teenagers’ own experiences of being parented had not been positive. I have observed during visits to PRUs that although there may be no formal parenting programme sessions the teenagers all had to attend lessons on child- care—the intention here was to break the cycle of negative parenting. Additionally parenting skills were learnt by the teenagers as they inter- acted with the nursery staff when they joined their baby in their breaks throughout the day.
2 THE PARENTS 21 Poverty and Parenting Parents that came from areas with a low socio-economic status (SES) were also prioritised by local authorities; the first phases of children’s centres were built in these areas to support the local families. Field (2010) summarised in his report on “The Foundation Years: Preventing Poor Children Becoming Poor Adults” by acknowledging that the most impor- tant element in a child’s development is what parents do with their child. Further he recommended supporting services for parents in developing new parenting skills with increased funding for families living in areas of socio-economic deprivation. This additional support and funding enabled local authorities and children’s centres to deliver parenting programme groups. A number of studies have investigated the relationship between poverty and parenting. Simons et al.’s (1992) study, with a participant sample of 451 two-parent families, suggests that the effects of socio-economic disadvantage can have a negative impact on parenting for both mothers and fathers. Although a significant number of children who grow up in socially disadvantaged households receive good care and consequently experience positive developmental outcomes, extreme poverty is often associated with inadequate nutrition and housing leading to develop- mental problems (Goldberg 2000). Wetz (2009) also found that there is a correlation between families experiencing poverty and attachment difficulties. Blanden et al. comment “that family income in the childhood years does make a genuine difference to educational outcomes” (Blanden et al. 2005, p. 3). Gregg and Washbrook (2009) used the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children (ALSPAC) data of 14,000 children born in Avon in the early 1990s to investigate the effects of socio-economic posi- tion on educational attainment. They found that child attainment at age seven was generally lower for children from socio-economically disadvan- taged families and, even if they did well at age seven, their performance was more likely to slip as they progressed through primary school. Chil- dren from poor backgrounds tended to view themselves as academically less able. However Gregg and Washbrook’s findings indicate that it is not simply the family’s economic status that has a direct impact but rather the parental attitudes towards education. Feinstein and Symons (1999) also suggest that parental interest in education is four times more signif- icant than social and economic status in influencing attainment at 16.
22 K. SMART The implication here is that, as far as the child is concerned, it is their parents’ engagement rather than living in poverty that can influence their outcome; but for parents, living in poverty appears to have a profound effect on the attention they give to their child’s education. This was supported by Field’s review which found that: It is family background, parental education, good parenting and the oppor- tunities for learning and development in those crucial years that together matter more to children than money. (Field 2010, p. 5) The significance of specifically mentioning these groups is that they were actively targeted and encouraged to take part in a parenting programme. I factored this in to my research design by incorporating several demographic questions in the pre-programme questionnaire. This enabled me to ensure that I invited parents from each of these targeted groups to take part in the interview phase of my research. Research Design With clear aims for what I wanted to investigate, and a philosophical perspective to back up my approach, I now had to design exactly how I was going to go about performing the research. I recruited a total of 136 parents across 20 courses (Table 2.1) in the south-west of the UK to take part in my study, the majority of which had preschool-aged children (0–4 years). Access to participants was through local authorities, schools, children’s centres and parent programme facilitators. Through my work as both a teacher and local authority advisor I had already developed a number of contacts in each of these areas who were able to assist me in accessing parenting groups. Additionally I was able to use my knowledge of the local authority structure to contact advisors who were also able to help me access the parenting programmes that were included in my research. I employed a mixed methods research approach utilising question- naires, featuring both quantitative and qualitative questions, as well as semi-structured interviews. The use of questionnaires was chosen as one of the main methods of collecting data as it allowed me to recruit a large number of parents. The use of interviews enabled me to probe further, collecting rich data around the parents’ experiences.
2 THE PARENTS 23 Table 2.1 Parents recruited per programme Parenting Number of parents Number of courses Age groups of programme children Triple-P 7 2 One parent attended Primary Triple-P and The Incredible 17 4 had at least one Years child that attended 14 primary school. Six PEEP 112 20 parents attended Total 136 Teen Triple-P and had at least one child attending a secondary school Seven parents accessed the baby programme; four attended the preschool programme; six went to a primary programme All parents had at least one child under the age of four I firstly devised a pre-programme questionnaire whose purpose was to record demographic data and to establish parental practices and expec- tations pre-intervention; I will refer to this as “Q-pre” for short. This was then supplemented by a follow-up questionnaire at the end of the programme (“Q-post”) to explore parents’ initial perspectives, having attended the course, regarding what they then did differently and what they thought they had gained from the course. Questions included: “How much time are you able to spend playing with your children?”, “What activities do you share with your children?”, “How do you support your children’s nursery, pre-school or school?”, “How confident are you in each of these areas?”. Additionally I incorporated several qualitative ques- tions to increase the availability of parental subjective views. To provide participants with maximum protection I devised a system where parents could remain anonymous to me whilst also ensuring that the trainers did not see their data. This was a particularly important aspect of my data
24 K. SMART collection design and one that I hope will help future researchers. I will discuss this system in greater detail in Chapter 5. The findings from an analysis of the questionnaire responses were then used to direct a series of post-programme semi-structured interviews with parents (referred to later as “I-post”). I devised an interview schedule based on the questionnaire responses to examine parents’ views on the parenting programme process, how it impacted their behaviour and how this subsequently affected their child. My study explored the longitudinal perspective by revisiting the fami- lies one year after they had completed the programme with a third questionnaire (“Q-year”) to examine the parents’ perceptions of any lasting impact. The one-year-on questionnaire included both quantitative and qualitative questions that were asked on the pre- and post-programme questionnaires to establish whether there had been any lasting parental behaviour changes since attending the programme and whether there had been any longer-term impact on the child. I also carried out one-year- on interviews (“I-year”) with the original interview participants following up on the themes which developed from the post-programme analysis. A visual representation of the overall process is shown in Fig. 2.1. I selected a subset of eight parents (Table 2.2) to take part in inter- views, allowing me to gain a deeper insight into their perspectives. The selection process was based on criteria derived from the information provided on the pre- and post-programme questionnaires and comprised four key factors: • contactability of parents; • parental confidence levels; • representation from all three of the parenting programmes; • representation from both local authority targeted groups (low socio- economic status, teenage parents, fathers) and non-targeted groups. Regarding contactability, the selection criterion was that the parent was happy to be contacted again in connection with my research. Parents had been invited on the questionnaires to provide their contact details if they were happy for me to send subsequent questionnaires directly to them; this was particularly important for the one-year-on questionnaires as it would be expected that the majority of parents would no longer be in contact with the trainers at this time.
Fig. 2.1 Research 2 THE PARENTS 25 timeline Recruit ParƟcipants Q-pre AƩend parenƟng programme Q-post I-post 1 year later… Q-year I-year Research suggests that there is an association between parental confi- dence and parental engagement—the more confident that parents feel regarding their ability to fulfil their parenting role, the more engaged with their child’s education and development they are likely to be (Desforges and Abouchaar 2003; Harris and Goodall 2007). I looked at the pre- programme questionnaire responses to the question “How confident are you in each of these areas?” and employed a selection criterion of low confidence on course entry, defined by the parent reporting a degree of confidence lower than the top two levels. I wanted to focus on parents who were in most need of support and advice; those who might otherwise have been disengaged with their child’s development and education.
26 K. SMART Table 2.2 Parents selected for interview Pseudonym Relationship to Teenage Low SES? Programme Children child parent? attended 2 Adelajda Mother PEEP 4 Ava Grandmother The Incredible 2 Emily Mother Yes Yes Years 2 Emma Mother Triple-P 2 Isabella Mother Yes PEEP 2 Jacob Father Yes Triple-P 4 Olivia Mother PEEP The 1 Sophia Mother Incredible Years PEEP For this phase of my research it was important that I interviewed parents from each of the parenting programmes. For the Triple-P and The Incredible Years programmes I had fewer participants to select from; for The Incredible Years programme I had only three participants and for the Triple-P programme I had six parents who had completed both the pre- and post-programme questionnaires. Although initially I had interest from several local authorities delivering these programmes, at the point of rolling out the pre-programme questionnaire the withdrawal of Govern- ment funding meant that local authorities had to cancel their planned delivery. However even with this limitation, I was still fortunate enough to be able to recruit parents from all three programmes covered in my study. The final selection factor was based on participants’ responses to the demographic questions from the pre-programme questionnaire to estab- lish whether the parent fell into one of the local authority identified target groups: teenage parents, parents with a low socio-economic status and fathers. Taking these groups into consideration, it was important that I tried to capture the perspectives from both targeted and non-targeted parents to see if there was any evidence to suggest that parents and chil- dren from targeted families were impacted differently to those who were not targeted. Therefore I selected parents who represented each of these target groups in addition to ones who did not fall into any of these categories.
2 THE PARENTS 27 The Parents for Interview Using the selection criteria discussed above, a total of eight parents were invited to take part in the interview phase of my research. Before we look at this in more detail let us get to know the parents a little better. All the names of the parents are pseudonyms; I also provided pseudonyms for the children who were mentioned, by name, by the parents during their interviews. Adelajda and her husband both came from Poland and both had attended university. Adelajda’s husband worked full-time and although she did not work herself she recorded on her questionnaire that they did not have any money worries. They had two daughters who on my first visit to the children’s centre both attended the PEEP group; by the time we had our first interview the eldest daughter had started school. At home the family only spoke Polish, so initially the only time the girls were encouraged to speak English was at the PEEP group. Adrianna was the eldest daughter. Olivia and her husband both left school with five GCSEs. They had four children who Olivia referred to as child one, two, three and four. From the interview it became apparent that Olivia had difficulty with the behaviours of child one and child four; both children exhibited Autistic Spectrum Disorder (ASD) traits. Between the pre-programme question- naire and the interview data, I learnt that child number one was a girl and in the junior years at primary school. Child number two was also a junior but their sex was never referred to. Child three and child four were both boys, one was in an infant class and the other at preschool. Ava was Olivia’s mum. Both Ava and her husband left school before they were sixteen. They are now both retired and often look after their grandchildren, Olivia’s children, after school. Ava was keen to attend The Incredible Years programme to both support her daughter and also to help her in learning strategies to promote more positive behaviours from her grandchildren, in particular the eldest and youngest. Emily and her husband had two sons William and Liam. Both Emily and her husband had a university education; Emily in psychology and child development. Emily’s husband was in full-time employment and they had no money worries at the time of completing the pre- programme questionnaire. William attended primary school and Liam went to nursery.
28 K. SMART Emma was a single teenage mum with two children. Her eldest, Ella, and a younger son, both attended PEEP sessions at their local chil- dren’s centre. Emma did not fill in the section around her qualifications or whether she had any money worries. Both of her children attended nursery whilst Emma was studying for a childcare qualification. Ella was due to start school in the September. Isabella and her husband had two sons. Isabella’s husband was university educated and Isabella joined an Open University programme later. Although her husband worked full-time and Isabella 28 hours a week, they still had money concerns. Their eldest child, at the time of completing the pre-programme questionnaire attended college and the youngest secondary school. Isabella had been concerned about her youngest child’s behaviour since he had been in primary school. Jacob and his wife also had two sons, Ethan and Noah. Both Jacob and his wife had attended university. Jacob worked ten hours a week and his wife, the main wage earner, 20 hours a week. Money was a worry. Even though Jacob’s mother-in-law was a teacher they had decided that they would home educate their children. Ethan who had previously attended PEEP groups was now being home-schooled. Noah still attended PEEP groups. Sophia had attended college and her husband university. They both worked; Sophia two days a week and her husband full-time. Whilst Sophia was at work their son Mason, who was one, went to a childminder. Sophia did not fill in the question regarding whether they were experiencing any money issues. The Interviews Having got to know the parents who took part in the interviews, we now need to look at the interview process. It was essential that I created the right atmosphere where parents would feel comfortable to talk freely and so I ensured that the parents had a say in where they wished the interview to take place. As important as it was that the participant should feel comfortable, it was also essential that I, the researcher, felt safe. I addressed this by suggesting we met in public places such as cafes, schools or children’s centres rather than, for example the parent’s home. I believe giving the parents this choice helped them feel more in control as well as at ease in their environment.
2 THE PARENTS 29 The interviews were digitally recorded, transcribed and then anal- ysed using a thematic approach based on Braun and Clarke’s (2006) model. Prior to commencing the analysis, I created a provisional start list of thematic codes; the interviews were then analysed to extract further themes, moving from a deductive to an inductive paradigm. Using a commercially available qualitative data management software package, I was able to go through each transcript in turn creating descriptive codes, or nodes, each corresponding to a short section of the transcript. This analysis drew upon a mixture of semantic coding, capturing the surface meaning of the data, and latent coding capturing deeper assumptions and interpretations. In all, 388 nodes were created from three hours 49 minutes of post-programme interview recordings with the parents. The next phase of analysing the data was to group together the nodes representing common areas. Some I was able to place into groupings that I had already identified (deductive) from my professional experience and the literature review, whilst others were generated solely from the data (inductive). As a tactile, visual learner I found that I was more comfortable with the data printed out on individual strips of paper, each representing one of the nodes from the transcript analysis, and laid out on a large table— rather than attempting to manipulate the data within the constraints of a computer screen. This was a time-consuming exercise, however by having the nodes on paper it enabled me to move them around easily and search for groupings and commonalities, see Fig. 2.2. It also allowed me to become fully immersed in the data, gaining more familiarity with it. It is important to note that the number of occurrences of a topic does not alone make it a theme; rather it is about whether the topic has captured something important that is related to the research ques- tion (Braun and Clarke 2006). Braun (2015) posits that it comes back to the judgement of the researcher, me, to what determines a theme. I chose to identify the themes that were important to the parents and that addressed my research questions through a more subjective and personal approach. Once the nodes had formed groups, then consideration was given to the relationships between these groupings and the identification of appropriate labels or titles for these clusters. As related groups became increasingly clustered together so their identifying labels began to crys- tallise into themes. To ensure that I did not miss any potentially important themes it was necessary to spend time away from the data and then revisit
30 K. SMART Fig. 2.2 Initial groupings of nodes it with fresh eyes to ensure I had not lost sight of the research questions (Braun and Clarke 2006). It was also necessary to revisit the source of the data to make sure that I did not take any element of data out of context. Repeated hierarchical phases of this grouping procedure eventually resulted in a final set of themes being created from the parents’ inter- view data. A visual representation of the overall analysis process is shown in Fig. 2.3. Summary This research study was carefully designed to ensure it included parents’ views from all the targeted categories associated with parenting programmes: fathers, teenage mothers, low socio-economic status. It was also important to capture the perspectives of parents who did not fall into one of these categories and so my selection criteria allowed for this.
2 THE PARENTS 31 Transcript DescripƟve nodes Groups of common nodes iterate & refine Clusters of groups iterate & refine Key themes developed Fig. 2.3 Analysis process from transcript to themes This book presents the findings from my research in terms of the themes that developed from the rigorous qualitative analysis of the inter- view transcripts. I will illustrate these themes making use of quotations from parents’ questionnaires, as completed by all 136 participants, and interviews with the sub-sample of eight parents. All names used are pseudonyms. Although I won’t be discussing it further in this book, it is impor- tant to mention that data was also collected from parenting programme trainers. This ensured a degree of triangulation and promoted trust- worthiness in the data. I had no personal vested interest in parenting programmes, and by giving the data time and care to allow the themes to develop, I ensured that it was the parents’ views and opinions that emerged rather than mine. Over the next five chapters we will be hearing more from Adelajda, Ava, Emily, Emma, Isabella, Jacob, Olivia and Sophia, as well as other questionnaire parents, as I explore each of the five themes that developed from the parents’ data. I will make extensive use of quotations taken from both the parents’ questionnaires and interviews in order that their voices can really be heard:
32 K. SMART • Chapter 3 The importance of learning and using parenting strategies. • Chapter 4 The value of spending quality time with their child. • Chapter 5 How children benefit from opportunities that promote their development. • Chapter 6 The significance of the family working together. • Chapter 7 The importance of the right environment to share parenting experiences with other parents. References Axberg, U., & Broberg, A. G. (2012). Evaluation of “the incredible years” in Sweden: The transferability of an American parent-training program to Sweden. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 53, 224–232. Barlow, J., Smailagic, N., Bennett, C., Huband, N., Jones, H., & Coren, E. (2011). Individual and group based parenting programmes for improving psychosocial outcomes for teenage parents and their children (Review). Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. Blanden, J., Gregg, P., & Machin, S. (2005). Intergenerational mobility in Europe and North America. Report supported by the Sutton Trust, Centre for Economic Performance, London School of Economics. London: Centre for Economic Performance, London School of Economics. Braun, V. (2015, July 16). Doing thematic analysis doing and communicating qualitative research. London: Kingston University. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualita- tive Research in Psychology, 3, 77–101. Dawson, N., & Meadows, S. (1995). The education of pregnant schoolgirls and schoolgirl mothers (Bristol Papers in Education). University of Bristol, Bristol. DCSF. (2008). Families in Britain: An evidence paper. Nottingham: Department for Children Schools and Families Publications. DCSF. (2009). Getting maternity services right for pregnant teenagers and young fathers. Nottingham: Department for Children Schools and Families Publications. Desforges, C., & Abouchaar, A. (2003). The impact of parental involvement, parental support and family education on pupil achievement and adjustment: A review of literature. Nottingham: DfES Publications. DfES. (2007). Every parent matters. Nottingham: Department for Education and Skills Publications. Diamond, I., Clements, S., Stone, N., & Ingham, R. (1999). Spatial varia- tion in teenage conceptions in south and west England. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series A (Statistics in Society), 162, 273–289.
2 THE PARENTS 33 European Union Platform. (2015). Sweden: Successful reconciliation of work and family life [Online]. Available: http://europa.eu/epic/countries/sweden/ index_en.htm. Accessed 28th July 2016. Feinstein, L., & Symons, J. (1999). Attainment in secondary school. Oxford Economic Papers, 51, 300–321. Field, F. (2010). The Foundation Years: Preventing poor children becoming poor adults: The report of the Independent Review on Poverty and Life Chances. London: Cabinet Office. France-Presse, A. (2015, May 28). Swedish fathers to get third month of paid paternity leave. The Guardian. Gray, M., Qu, L., Renda, J., & De Vaus, D. (2003). Changes in the labour force status of lone and couple Australian mothers, 1983–2002. Melbourne: Australian Institute of Family Studies. Gregg, P., & Washbrook, E. (2009). The socio-economic gradient in child outcomes: The role of attitudes, behaviours and beliefs: The primary school years. Bristol: University of Bristol. Goldberg, S. (2000). Attachment and development. London: Arnold. Harris, A., & Goodall, J. (2007). Engaging parents in raising achievement: Do parents know they matter?: A research project commissioned by the Specialist Schools and Academies Trust. Warwick: University of Warwick. Helfenbaum-Kun, E. D., & Ortiz, C. (2007). Parent-training groups for fathers of head start children: A pilot study of their feasibility and impact on child behavior and intra-familial relationships. Child & Family Behavior Therapy, 29, 47–64. McLeod, A. (2001). Changing patterns of teenage pregnancy: Population based study of small areas. BMJ, 323, 199–203. Sanders, M. R., Stallman, H. M., & McHale, M. (2011). Workplace Triple P: A controlled evaluation of a parenting intervention for working parents. Journal of Family Psychology, 25(4), 581–590. Simons, R. L., Lorenz, F. O., Conger, R. D., & Wu, C. I. (1992). Support from spouse as mediator and moderator of the disruptive influence of economic strain on parenting. Child Development, 63, 1282–1301. Smart, C. (2003). The effects of educational provisions on teenage pregnancies (Master of Education). University of Bristol, Bristol. Social Exclusion Unit. (1999). Teenage pregnancy: Report. London: Stationery Office. Wetz, J. (2009). Urban village schools: Putting relationships at the heart of secondary school organisation and design. London: Calouste Gulbenkian Foun- dation.
CHAPTER 3 The Importance of Learning and Using Parenting Strategies Abstract This chapter examines the first theme that developed from my research: “the importance of learning and using parenting strate- gies”. It examines the difference between parents who attended the PEEP programme and those who attended The Incredible Years and Triple-P programmes. Parents reported positive changes, especially the effective adoption of parenting and behaviour management strategies, along with increased parental confidence. Keywords Parenting strategies · Bronfenbrenner · Triple-P · The Incredible Years · PEEP · Parental confidence This chapter discusses how the parents valued the parenting strategies that they had learnt and the impact it had on their parenting and their relationship with the child. This is the first of five chapters each of which will share one of the key findings that developed from my research. This chapter will look at the theme the importance of learning and using parenting strategies . This is not my thesis and I don’t want to put off the reader with an extensive literature review; however it is important to provide a basic grounding of what previous research had already been carried out and what it found. So to help gain a better understanding of the importance © The Author(s), under exclusive license to 35 Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020 K. Smart, Parenting Programmes: What the Parents Say, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-59502-9_3
36 K. SMART of the findings from the parents’ data and put it into context, this chapter will start by focusing on the literature around parenting and the key factors that affect it, including parenting skills, parental confidence and the theory of what is considered by many, such as Field and Desforges and Abouchaar, to constitute “good parenting”. I will then go on to introduce more fully the three parenting programmes that my research included. The chapter will then focus on the first key theme from the parents’ data that I will be discussing: The importance of learning and using parenting strategies . This theme addressed my second research question What are the views of parents regarding the changes that parents have made as a result of attending a parenting programme? The purpose of this question was to establish an understanding of any behavioural changes that parents may have made, when interacting with their child, associated with knowledge and skills that they had acquired from attending a group-based programme. Theory of Good Parenting To help us better understand what “good parenting” may look like first we need to understand what a child needs to flourish and grow. To define what constitutes “good parenting” is somewhat problematic as there is no single definition; however there are a number of factors that might generally expect to be included. These include providing the basic needs of a child: love, warmth, food, shelter, physical safety and emotional secu- rity. Additionally good parenting includes nurturing and encouraging the child’s developmental and learning needs: physical, social, emotional and cognitive (Field 2010). A child should expect the “provision of a secure and stable environment, intellectual stimulation, parent–child discussion, good models of constructive social and educational values and high aspi- rations relating to personal fulfilment and good citizenship” (Desforges and Abouchaar 2003, p. 4). I would also add to these the factor of consistency and continuity of parenting, the use of positive praise, the sharing of quality parent/child activities and interactions appropriate to the child’s age, creating a stimulating home learning environment, and clear, consistent use of boundaries. However it needs to be recognised and acknowledged that there are cultural differences in what is considered good parenting. A number of major child development theories have contributed to our understanding of what a child needs to develop. Given that my research
Search
Read the Text Version
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 19
- 20
- 21
- 22
- 23
- 24
- 25
- 26
- 27
- 28
- 29
- 30
- 31
- 32
- 33
- 34
- 35
- 36
- 37
- 38
- 39
- 40
- 41
- 42
- 43
- 44
- 45
- 46
- 47
- 48
- 49
- 50
- 51
- 52
- 53
- 54
- 55
- 56
- 57
- 58
- 59
- 60
- 61
- 62
- 63
- 64
- 65
- 66
- 67
- 68
- 69
- 70
- 71
- 72
- 73
- 74
- 75
- 76
- 77
- 78
- 79
- 80
- 81
- 82
- 83
- 84
- 85
- 86
- 87
- 88
- 89
- 90
- 91
- 92
- 93
- 94
- 95
- 96
- 97
- 98
- 99
- 100
- 101
- 102
- 103
- 104
- 105
- 106
- 107
- 108
- 109
- 110
- 111
- 112
- 113
- 114
- 115
- 116
- 117
- 118
- 119
- 120
- 121
- 122
- 123
- 124
- 125
- 126
- 127
- 128
- 129
- 130
- 131
- 132
- 133
- 134
- 135
- 136
- 137
- 138
- 139
- 140
- 141
- 142
- 143
- 144
- 145
- 146
- 147
- 148
- 149
- 150
- 151
- 152
