discussion

  

National Standards for Family-School Partnerships

Chapter 6 explains (SEE ATTACHED FILE) the

National Standards for Family-school partnerships (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site.

, as presented by the National PTA.  Although these standards are written for school-aged children, they are more than applicable to the early childhood classroom, as presented in your text.  

1. Review the suggestions for each of the six standards as well as NAEYC’s

Family Engagement Resource List (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site.

.  
 

Using your assigned grouping below, 

2. Explain the two standards and offer at least three suggestions to incorporate these standards in your preschool program.  

3. Then, explain why these standards should be the basis for all early childhood programs, and how it they will benefit your students and their families.  
 

Your final two statements will reflect the following:

a. [Name of your first assigned standard] is essential for student success because _____________.

b. [Name of your second assigned standard] is essential for student success because _____________.

Below is your assigned standards. BELOW ARE THE STANDARDS THAT HAVE TO BE EXPLAINED

Standard 1- Sharing power. 

Standard 2- Collaborating with community.

   

6.1

Theoretical Models

and Research

The traditional parent involvement model for early care and education programs was a professionally driven parent-education model, with educators using parents to improve the child’s home environment and to implement what educators believed to be good educational and parenting practices. This model was based on the belief that educational and human service professionals knew what was best for the child and family, based on their education and expertise. The parent component of an early care and education program was designed to teach parents good education-related practices and to improve the home environment as a place to develop good behaviors and optimal learning. This practice of parent involvement was also the accepted approach used by professionals working with families of children with developmental delays (Gargiulo & Kilgo, 2005).

To inform our understanding of effective partnerships between programs and families, it is important to examine approaches that have been shown to work. To do so, current research findings on effective family-program partnerships must be explored. Unfortunately, however, research in effective ways to enhance family-program partnerships is quite limited, particularly in early childhood programs.

There are many reasons why there is so little research in this area. Because there is a variety of ways to involve parents in the care and education of their children in a program, there is no agreed-upon definition or measurement of effective parent involvement. For example, are we looking at parents volunteering in the program, supporting their children at home, or effective communication between the home and program (Hill & Taylor, 2004)? Further, we do not know how one kind of involvement may positively influence another and thus have a multiplying, additive effect on children’s development and learning. For example, how might parent involvement in the early childhood center increase the quality of parenting skills practiced in the home?

There is also a lack of agreement regarding who should be the subject of the research. Who should be questioned and given surveys when studying parent involvement: parents, teachers, or administrators? This dilemma is compounded by several factors, including research that indicates teachers tend to evaluate the involvement of African-American and low-income parents more negatively than that of European and higher-income parents (Epstein & Dauber, 1991). Finally, the research available has been conducted largely in elementary schools and not early childhood programs. As presented later in this chapter, this is also a dilemma when examining the various family-program partnership models. From a research perspective, the more different an early care or education program is from a traditional public elementary school, the less valid are these elementary school-based results for family-program collaboration in early care and education settings (Hill & Taylor, 2004).

Policies and Programs That Increase Partnerships Between Families and Early Care and Education Programs

The evidence we do have strongly supports the benefits of policies and programs that increase family-program partnerships. A large body of research has consistently shown that low-income families are less likely to be involved in their children’s early care and education programs than are middle-class families; further, early childhood and school programs in poor neighborhoods are less likely to promote parent involvement than are programs in middle-class neighborhoods (Epstein & Dauber, 1991; Hill & Craft, 2003; Hill & Taylor, 2004). Thus, the children who could most benefit from these partnerships are least likely to receive them. Family-program partnerships for low-income (and often minority) families in low-income communities require much more effort and deliberation than do programs in communities that are more affluent. For example, these programs must:

provide more information to parents about how they and other family members can promote appropriate behaviors and learning achievement in their children.

teach parents and other caregivers specific techniques to use in working effectively with teachers and other program staff, including special education specialists. In Chapter 5, the RERUN process and dialoguing were explained as ways program staff can work effectively with parents (Gonzalez-Mena, 2008); these processes can also be used in helping parents effectively work with staff in early care and education programs.

provide training for new immigrant parents in the policies, protocols, and hidden curriculum of the typical American early care and education program (Bang, 2009). Bang also suggests teaching functional English to parents who wish to learn.

support training for teachers and other staff in cultural, economic, and linguistic issues that often prevent low-income parents from becoming effectively involved in their children’s care and learning in the program (Hill & Taylor, 2004). This training should occur at the college level, when students are learning to become teachers and caregivers, and through in-service training in programs.

Some parents and other adults in the home have very negative feelings from their own school experiences, either in this country or in the country from which they emigrated. Early care and education programs can offset these feelings in a number of ways; volunteering is one such approach. The best kind of volunteering occurs when parents and other significant adults are asked to contribute a project, activity, or lesson to the students. Making a piñata, sharing a favorite childhood song, bringing a family’s favorite book to read, helping youngsters at the workbench, and conducting a cooking project in the classroom are all excellent volunteer activities.

Parents can also be asked to volunteer on the playground, again providing specific expertise rather than just supervising students. This might be showing children how to care for vegetables or harvest the latest crop of tomatoes; demonstrating how to trim, water, and care for the playground’s trees; or helping a child with a physical disability because the parent has experience working with special needs children. Finally, volunteers can help with larger school projects and field trips. One program successfully involved parents in providing woodwork instruction, building a playground for one of the centers, and making puppet stages for each classroom.

Due to a variety of reasons (e.g., busy work schedules, young children who need to be cared for at home, etc.), some parents cannot volunteer in their child’s program. There are things they can do from home, such as helping to set up field trips by phone, making classroom materials, assisting with fundraisers, or developing the schedule for the next parents’ meeting.

Programs can also involve parents and other adults in the home with a variety of social and educational activities at the center. These might include celebrations, festivals, or support groups (e.g., for first-time parents, fathers, or parents of children with ADHD or autism). Educational programs can classes on parenting, appropriate discipline, language learning for parents who do not speak English, budgeting, or job searching.

Simply replicating programs that are effective with middle-class parents in middle-class communities is not sufficient. Research shows that early childhood programs must make a particularly concerted effort in working with families that differ in one or more ways from typical middle-class American families (Epstein & Dauber, 1991; Howard, 2007; Hill & Craft, 2003; Hill & Taylor, 2004).

Theoretical Models

To serve young children well, we need to find ways to work effectively with their families. This requires an ability to understand the ever-increasing diversity of families and to be able to conceptualize and understand positive, dynamic relationships between families and institutions (Christian, 2007). Previously in this book, we examined the first three stages of Erikson’s psychosocial theory, and discussed how the relationship between the family, early care and education program, and community fit within Bronfenbrenner’s ecological systems theory (Bronfenbrenner & Morris, 1998). Further, in examining how children develop and learn, Piaget’s cognitive theory and Vygotsky’s socio-cultural theory were explored, along with Maslow’s hierarchy of needs. To help understand the best ways to work effectively with diverse families and to create constructive family-program partnerships that provide for the developmental and learning needs of each child, several theoretical models will be examined. These models reflect our current understanding of partnerships between the family and early care and education program, a recognition of the tremendous diversity of American families, and an understanding that both families and programs are composed of unique, dynamic systems (Epstein & Dauber, 1991).

Five of these models will be examined: the family systems theory; Project Head Start; the ecological systems approach; Frameworks for School, family and community partnerships; and the PTA’s

National Standards for Family-School Partnerships

. While some of these models were developed for elementary schools, they provide useful ideas for working with programs that serve children and families, age infant to 5 years old.

6.2 Family Systems Theory

While families come in all forms, all families also have certain characteristics in common (Christian, 2007). One way to examine these common characteristics is to use the family systems theory. This approach to understanding families is used extensively in family counseling and therapy and is based on the work of Ackerman (1959), Jackson (1965), Minuchin (1974), and Bowen (1978). Family systems theory examines how all family members influence each other in predictable and recurring ways (Van Velsor & Cox, 2000). Families are the primary socialization agent that teaches children how to function in the larger society; families prepare children for expectations of how the world works outside the family and how it will interact with them (Bang, 2009; Ngo, 2006). Family systems theory focuses on the family unit rather than on individual family members. It examines the various roles of individual family members, family dynamics and communication styles, and how the family responds to stress (Christian, 2007). This approach enables teachers and caregivers to examine the family as an organized unit and to explore reasons members behave as they do under specific conditions (Fingerman & Bermann, 2000).

Early childhood teachers, directors, and caregivers can use their understanding of family systems theory to serve families and their children more effectively. To this end, six characteristics of the theory are examined: boundaries, roles, rules, hierarchy, climate, and equilibrium. For each of these characteristics, family behaviors fall along a continuum, with most families somewhere in the middle (Christian, 2007).

Boundaries

The concept of boundaries in a family relates to the extent to which each individual family member operates independently, and how much they operate as a unit or group (Christian, 2007). Within this concept, the continuum runs from disengaged to enmeshed. People in disengaged families value individual autonomy, with each member acting independently. These families are also open to new people, information, and ideas. In enmeshed families, togetherness, belonging, and emotional connectedness—even conformity—are emphasized. Behaviors of individual family members in enmeshed families are viewed as a reflection of the family and not as a characteristic of the individual (Christian, 2007).

Families tend to fall on a continuum regarding these extremes. Neither is good or bad (as we discussed in the previous chapter). Further, a family may change boundaries based on a variety of circumstances—for example, during times of stress, families tend to become more enmeshed. Ideas to help early care and education teachers, caregivers, and directors work appropriately within each family member’s boundaries include the following:

Understand and recognize different parenting styles and family boundaries. More importantly, do not make judgments about parents’ care and involvement with their children based on their styles, or the fact that the family’s boundaries are different from yours.

Avoid stereotypes. Do not make any assumptions about children and parents; learn the specific backgrounds of each child and each family in the program.

Recognize that for some families, everything is a family affair. Thus, when you have a parent conference or a family activity in the program, you may end up with uncles, aunts, cousins, friends, and grandparents (Christian, 2007). You may also have a variety of people dropping off and picking up the child. (Obviously, you must make sure they are legally allowed to do so.)

Balance children’s activities and curricular experiences to incorporate both individual and group identity. Regardless of the family’s style, all children need to have the opportunity to explore their individual uniqueness and to function productively as part of a group.

Respect families’ need for control and involve the whole family when introducing new ideas and materials. Also, as discussed earlier, some family members may have had negative school experiences. Thus, they might transfer these feelings to the teacher or whomever they feel officially represents the school. When a conflict arises between the family and the program, family members may feel frustrated because they cannot seem to find someone to address the problem to their satisfaction. In some families, parents will share information (including what may appear to be confidential) with all family and extended family members.

Roles

In all families, members have specific roles (Fingerman & Bermann, 2000). Roles might be a peacemaker, clown, rescuer, or victim. Each role has certain expectations from others in the family—the responsible person solves conflicts; the victim gets blamed for everything (Christian, 2007). These roles can transfer to work, school, and social settings. A child who is the peacemaker at home brings these skills to the class; however, this may prevent other children from learning appropriate social skills and may limit the child’s risk-taking and other natural childhood behaviors. Obviously, whatever the role a child brings to the early care and education program, it is critically important to expose children to all the kinds of learning they need, including a range of social skills. Ideas for working with family roles include the following (Christian, 2007):

Give children ample opportunity to role play in structured and unstructured situations. Dramatic play enables children both to explore existing roles and to try out new ones.

Observe children carefully. Problems a child experiences in the program may well be the result of the role they perform at home. In this case, the child needs opportunities to be successful in a variety of new and different roles.

Help families recognize their children’s many varied strengths. Send notes home about what the child does well; begin conferences with the things the child excels at in the program and on the playground.

Rules

Rules are the scripts we use to live our lives—laws, standards, traditions, and history. These rules have a powerful impact on our experiences. For example, people who believe life is predictable will plan ahead, while those who believe most things are out of their control tend simply to respond to life as it happens (Fingerman & Bermann, 2000). Some rules are spoken; most are not. Most unspoken rules are embedded within a family’s cultural contexts. Sometimes these cultural rules conflict with the rules and expectations of the program. Rules can also produce conflicts within families—particularly blended families and families in which parents come from different cultural, racial, national, or religious backgrounds.

Sometimes families experiencing conflict need expert counseling. Early care and education programs can refer these parents, but they must not overstep their own skills and professional responsibilities. Specific ideas for working with families around the concept of rules include the following (Christian, 2007):

Distinguish between home rules and program rules. When children challenge you on a program rule, it may be because at home, the rule is different. Let children know that the rules at home and in the program may be different, but that this does not mean those used at home are wrong or bad. In many early childhood programs, teachers actively engage the classroom community in creating rules that everyone can support.

Watch for unspoken rules. These are particularly evident in relationship to gender, power, adults, and authority. While teachers and caregivers need to be aware of possible conflicts between home and program rules, program practices should not necessarily be changed.

Ask families for assistance and input when conflict arises. We have discussed this at length in the last chapter, including using the RERUN approach to solving conflicts. Carefully explain program rules and listen to parents’ concerns.

Hierarchy

Hierarchy is about decision-making and control. In some families, both parents share control, dividing it by their roles; in others, the authority is culturally specific, based on age, gender, or income. The authority may be easy to see, or it may be invisible. Extended families often have untraditional patterns of authority (Morton, 2000). Every time a family composition changes—for example, divorce or remarriage—there can be a shift in the hierarchy, which is confusing to children.

The issue of hierarchy can be addressed by the early care and education program in two ways: (1) collect information from parents and other caregivers at the beginning of the year, and (2) become a keen observer of both children and their families (Christian, 2007). Specific ideas include the following:

Engage in careful and keen observation. Who signs permission forms? Who returns phone calls? What role does the child assume in dramatic play? How do the children respond to male and female teachers (Bang, 2009; Luz, 2010)?

Note the signs when a family’s hierarchy is changing. A child who suddenly seems unsure of her role in the classroom may well be experiencing a shift in roles at home. Teachers and caregivers should be sensitive to the development of hierarchies emerging in the classroom and playground.

Be sensitive to children whose play always seems to involve being the boss or the victim. Change activities so children can try out new and different roles. Work closely with parents and mental health experts if these roles persist.

Climate

Climate describes the nature of the family’s emotional and physical environment. This is described in terms of how warm and supportive, or cold and disorganized, the climate may be. Climate is not determined by income, culture, or education. Is the home a place where the child feels safe, secure, and loved, or scared, angry, and unhappy? Ideas for working with families around the issue of climate include the following:

Provide opportunities to discuss parents’ beliefs about children. This allows staff to support families as they support their children; it also allows families to learn from each other.

Create a classroom climate that is safe, provides positive feedback and clear guidelines, and offers a variety of healthy sensory experiences. Children need to feel that the program is a warm, wonderful, fun place where they want to be.

Equilibrium

All families, even those with ongoing difficulties and stress, have a sort of balance, or equilibrium, that tells members what to expect in family dynamics. When there is change in equilibrium, either positive or negative, the balance is upset. This is why change is difficult to maintain (Christian, 2007). Ideas for working with families around equilibrium include the following:

Consider inviting a trained family professional to facilitate a discussion when an event causes a major impact on a member of a family in the program, such as loss of a job or beginning higher education. Provide a safe place for families to discuss the issue and vent their feelings about the change.

Provide as much consistency as possible when there are radical changes in the family (e.g., a divorce, new baby, or a new partner for a parent). When such changes occur, it is not a good time to make major changes in the program or classroom.

Encourage families to plan ways to increase stability and security for children. Bedtime routines and some regular quality parent-child one-on-one time are essential for every child, particularly in a time of confusion and change.

Each family is unique, as is every teacher and caregiver. Both parents and teachers respond to issues and problems differently. However, using the family systems theory not only enables staff to establish relationships with parents and understand family dynamics, but also provides perspectives and ideas when conflicts arise—either with the children in the program, or with their parents or other caregivers. Understanding family systems theory can provide insights into different ways to work effectively with diverse families and changing family dynamics.

6.3 Project Head Start

Project Head Start was created in 1965 as part of President Lyndon Johnson’s Great Society programs. It is one of the few such programs that remain. Head Start developed out of a national advisory panel of experts convened by President John F. Kennedy. The underlying belief of the founders of Head Start was that a high-quality early childhood experience would prepare low-income children to enter school “ready to learn” and to be successful within their local public schools. The framers of Head Start believed that early childhood is a critical time for future school success (Greenberg, 1969). Because the program targeted low-income children, it was believed that it needed to be a comprehensive program including mental, physical, and dental health; parent involvement and training; and nutrition and safety (Greenberg, 1969). Project Head Start also benefited from a cadre of motivated civil rights workers and the willingness of communities across the nation to donate efforts, resources, and direct services (Greenberg, 1969).

The initial Head Start philosophy included a comprehensive approach, including working directly with parents and an emphasis on social competence. This is a view that focuses on a child’s social and emotional development and disposition to learning. While Head Start is a federal program with national standards, the architects of the program insisted that each program must reflect unique local needs. To address these local needs, each program must have a Head Start Policy Council, a local governing group made up of parents and community volunteers. Larger programs also have center and classroom committees. Community commitment is required for each program. Every program is run by a local grantee—school district, city, county government, single-purpose not-for-profit, or large-multipurpose agency. These agencies have to generate 20% of their budgets through local resources (in-kind and direct services).

The architects of Head Start not only believed that parents are the central socialization agent of their young children, but also that low-income parents should be empowered and shown how to provide the care and education their children need to become successful in school (Greenberg, 1969). One of the initial architects of Project Head Start was Urie Bronfenbrenner, the creator of the ecological systems theory discussed throughout this book (Bronfenbrenner & Morris, 1998). Initially, Head Start was designed for children to participate during the year before kindergarten (usually 4 or 5 years old); later, Early Head Start was created, which serves pregnant mothers and young children until they are old enough to enter the regular program.

Head Start’s Approach to Parent Partnerships

Many ideas from Project Head Start’s approach to working with families have found their way into the early childhood literature and have been adopted by other early care and education programs through the country. In Head Start, parents must be directly involved in the governance of their local program. Opportunities for this include membership in classroom and center committees and the program’s policy council. The policy council’s authority includes development and approval of the annual budget and all program plans, as well as approval of the programs’ hiring and firing decisions. Parents of the program are also required to help conduct the official annual program evaluation and to have direct input into the official three-year review (U.S. Health and Human Services, 2006).

Further, volunteering throughout the program is encouraged and needed to balance the budget. Because 20% of the budget must come from the local community, much of this is generated through parents volunteering their time in the program. Depending on the program, this includes bus monitors, classroom volunteers, assisting on field trips, participation in various committees, and other program-related activities, such as building a playground.

Local Head Start programs work with parents to help them with their own education, job training, and job placement. To this end, parents are encouraged to volunteer and be trained within the local program, so that they can eventually become employed. Nationally, 27% of the current Head Start employees were originally Head Start parents (U.S. Health and Human Services, 2006). Some of the top managers in local programs began as Head Start parents.

Creating Community Partnerships

Head Start recognizes that local programs need to work effectively with a variety of community agencies to meet the diverse and complex needs of low-income families (U.S. Health and Human Services, 2006). Not only do local programs provide training, resources, and information to parents about community agencies, but they also are required to develop official partnerships with these agencies. Thus, the administration of the local program must have a written agreement with local school districts served by the program, mental health agencies, medical clinics and hospitals, dentist offices, food banks, employment and training programs, community colleges, drug rehabilitation centers, social services agencies, and so on. This way, the local Head Start program becomes a dynamic hub connecting low-income parents with a variety of community agencies. These agencies inform the local program of their services, provide assistance and information to parents, train staff regarding services, and work closely with the program to improve services and meet the needs of the Head Start parents (HHS, 2006).

Kindergarten Transition

Head Start was originally developed to prepare low-income children to succeed in the local public schools. According to the federal government, a disproportionate percentage of these children are minorities (HHS, 2006). Today, all local Head Start programs are also required to serve children with variety of developmental delays. A smooth, positive transition from the local Head Start program to the local public school kindergarten is critical. Local Head Starts and public schools develop transition plans where parents and other family members meet with teachers to pave the way for a successful transition. A smooth and successful transition is particularly critical for children who have developmental delays. Poor transitions result in anxiety, uncertainty, and a sense of vulnerability (Conn-Powers, Ross-Allen, & Holburn, 1990; DEC Taskforce on Recommended Practices, 1993).

While some Head Start programs are part of the local public school, and therefore transition activities are smooth and easy, many programs are not. Home-based programs function out of parents’ homes (with some organized activities); other programs are run by cities, county governments, community colleges, community agencies, and other community not-for-profit programs. Not-for-profit programs are service organizations that do not make a profit and do not pay taxes. Often, local programs serve more than one local school district.

Parental Input into Plans

In Head Start, parents are expected to have direct and indirect input into their child’s care and education. Direct input involves meeting with teachers at the beginning of the year to plan a child’s educational and behavioral goals. Parents and teachers develop individual plans to work with their children. While these plans focus on classroom activities, they may also include assessments for possible special needs services and ways to address other possible learning and behavioral challenges. Parents, teachers, and community workers also address dental, physical, and mental health needs that the child might have. Indirect input includes parents’ approval of all of the program plans that affect their children. Teachers in local Head Start programs are required to visit each child’s home several times each year. This enables parents to discuss the needs of their children away from the program, where they may feel more at ease. Other members of the extended family might also have some input at these meetings. At this time, teachers and social workers explore additional family needs that the program can help address, or recommend local community agencies to help the family.

The approaches that Head Start families use are codified in specific Head Start Performance Standards. These are federal standards that require all local programs to be directly involved with their families; further, program implementation of these performance standards are reviewed every three years by a federal program evaluation team (U.S. Health and Human Services, 2006). There are many other services that local programs provide for the whole family:

Parenting classes. Examples of parenting classes include teaching effective discipline procedures, information on local kindergarten-entry requirements, advice for new immigrant families on how American schools operate, and information regarding laws on suspected child abuse and neglect.

Referrals for job training/employment. Many Head Start parents are underemployed or unemployed. Local Head Start programs have official agreements with local training and placement services, so they can provide parents with important information. Representatives from community colleges and state, county, and city training and employment programs can visit the local Head Start and make parents aware of their services.

Classes on family budgeting. Budgeting is difficult for many families, including low-income families. Experts in budgeting (from either the local program or a local community agency) provide ideas to help Head Start families with this important practice. These experts also provide ideas to families about ways to save money, such as using food banks and WIC programs, buying in bulk, and buying from community gardens.

Classes and referrals for drug and alcohol abuse. Local Head Start programs have direct connections with local mental health centers, substance abuse clinics, and other community programs dedicated to addressing drug and alcohol issues. Because Head Start is for low-income families, the programs they work with are sensitive to cost and other barriers that can affect low-income families.

Classes to learn English. Many Head Start families are new immigrants who speak a variety of languages other than English. Parents are very interested in learning English so that they can function effectively within American society and support their children as they progress through school. Local programs work closely with community colleges, language associations, and community groups to find people able and willing to teach English to non-English speaking parents.

Training and referrals for domestic violence and other family issues. Similar to the discussion under alcohol and drug abuse, local Head Start programs have contact with agencies and programs that address domestic violence and other family issues. They can refer parents to these agencies or bring someone to the center from the program to provide classes.

Classes/activities on Head Start-kindergarten transition. Kindergarten transition is something all Head Start parents are interested in learning about, and local Head Start programs have developed effective programs to address this issue. Many Head Start programs serve more than one school district, so programs must be developed for each district being served. Good program practices include parents visiting the local kindergarten, talking to the child’s prospective teacher, and listening to information from the district’s kindergarten coordinator.

Advice/support for families with children with specific developmental delays. Classes to help parents work effectively with children with autism, learning disabilities, ADHD, and other disabilities might be provided for parents of children who have disabilities. Additionally, classes could be provided on the transition of children with disabilities into the local public schools. This is a very different challenge for these families than it is for families of children without disabilities. Specialists from the local public schools who work with children with disabilities usually provide these classes.

Training in nutrition and low-cost food preparation. Childhood obesity is a national epidemic; childhood obesity is particularly high in low-income families and immigrant families. Thus, it is important that local programs provide parents with information and advice regarding the negative effects of childhood obesity and ways to buy and prepare healthy foods for their family.

Classes on discipline. Effective ways to discipline children is a very popular topic for Head Start parent classes.

Weight loss classes, advice, and referrals. This class might address obesity issues for children or dieting for parents. Obesity is an issue for many adults in the United States, especially low-income adults, for a variety of reasons. These classes can cover diet, exercise, and lifestyle information.

6.4 Ecological Systems Theory Approach

Focusing on the mesosystem, the second basic structure of Bronfenbrenner’s ecological systems theory, enables us to examine family-program relationships. The mesosystem consists of linkages between two or more of the child’s microsystems, such as the child’s family and early care and education program, or the family and various community agencies (Bronfenbrenner & Morris, 1998). According to Bronfenbrenner (1979), the nature of the influence of the mesosystem on the child depends on the number and quality of these relationships. Thus, if there are few linkages between the home and the early care and education program, in terms of values, experiences, objectives, and behavioral style, then there will be little positive effect on the child’s development and learning. The more numerous the qualitative links between the child’s microsystems, the more positive an influence they have on the child’s socialization.

If a mother or other caregiver has a positive relationship with the child’s teacher, is welcome and feels important when she enters her child’s early care program, believes the program’s social worker truly cares about the welfare of her child and family, and knows that when the special education teacher phones about her child, she is genuinely concerned, then the child’s development and learning will be positively affected. On the other hand, if the mother simply drops off and picks up her child at the program, with no other interactions or involvement, then there is little positive impact (Bronfenbrenner, 1979).

There are many ways to examine the qualitative and quantitative links between the family and the early care and education program. Two of these are ways the program supports basic family functions, and the various components of quality early care and education programs.

Basic Family Functions

What are the basic family functions all families perform, and how can early care and education programs enhance these functions? As we have discussed throughout this book, there are a vast variety of family structures—for example, two parents, single parents, step-parents, teen parents, grandparents (see Spotlight:

Including Grandparents

), and foster and adoptive parents. None of these structures is necessarily good or bad, healthy or unhealthy. However, all healthy families perform basic family functions—how the family cares for its members. These basic family functions for young children include the following:

Providing material necessities. This includes shelter, food, and clothing.

Providing adequate medical and dental care. This includes making sure children receive immunizations according to the prescribed schedule.

Supporting learning. Learning is a central task for children; families need to support the ever-more complex and challenging learning that all children must achieve.

Providing opportunities for success. As children venture into the vast social and practical world, they often become frustrated and disappointed; they may also lose confidence and self-esteem (Harter, 2006b). A central function of the family is to provide children with opportunities for success and feelings of importance and value.

Supporting peer relationships. People are social beings, and children have to learn appropriate and proactive social skills. The main way they do this is by developing important and healthy peer relationships (Harter, 2006b). Parents and other caregivers need to help and support their children in this important task.

Harmony and stability. To develop into secure emotional adults, children need a home base of harmony, warmth, acceptance, and support.

Socialization. In all societies, the family is the central agent that makes sure children learn society’s values, beliefs, knowledge, and skills. Further, the family is the central socializing agent for children to know their own culture’s values, beliefs, expectations, and traditions (Harter, 2006b).

The early care and education program is more effective when it can help families in as many of these functional areas as possible, and when the relationships between the family and the program are positive. Thus, a program might provide job referrals to parents and other family members, assist them in finding affordable medical care and dental care, refer parents to community food banks and food programs, and teach parenting skills. Or an employee-based program might develop ways that parents can come to the program during the lunch hour to eat together and allow children to visit their parents on the job. While the learning-related functions are the most obvious examples of this approach, programs can positively influence many of these areas.

SPOTLIGHT:

Including Grandparents

More than 2.5 million grandparents are raising their grandchildren in the United States. Other grandparents assist their own children in raising their grandchildren in some direct way. Reasons grandparents become the primary caregivers in the lives of their grandchildren can include drug and alcohol abuse by parents, divorce, mental and physical illness, child abuse/neglect, jail, and death. Some of these arrangements are temporary, while parents complete their education or a military assignment, recover from an illness, or serve a short jail time.

The challenges are unique and often overwhelming. Children may have major health or mental health conditions, while some grandparents are in declining health, lack resources, or are unaware of available resources in the community. However, some are also still young with their own children at home; others are still caring for their own aging parents. Many must continue to hold jobs to provide for their grandchildren.

Sometimes raising grandchildren isolates grandparents from their peers in the community. Further, the very situations that caused the grandparents to have to take on the primary role of parenting may have created severe physical or psychological problems for the children (e.g., abuse, drugs, or crime).

Early care and education programs are in a good position to help grandparents who are parenting for the second time. While the suggestions here focus on working with grandparents, many are also effective in working with other adults who help raise young children in the home. Here are some suggestions for early care and education programs:

Listen empathetically to grandparents. Introduce them to others in similar situations; suggest community meetings about common concerns.

Encourage grandparents to avail themselves of community resources. Introduce them to food banks and immunization clinics (for example, for annual flu shots).

Because issues around custody and guardianship can be common, provide information about where to obtain quality, low-cost legal advice.

Gather information about community organizations and resources for children with special needs.

Early care and education programs should provide special workshops for grandparents. Further, they can respond to grandparents in their program with the following approaches:

Using the word family instead of parents in communications

Providing printed materials to families that use large, black type and clear, white backgrounds

Asking grandparents how they would like you to answer sensitive questions from other children, such as, “Where is Kyle’s mother?”

Looking for ways to include grandparents in the classroom and program. Grandparents may initially feel out of place among young, energetic parents.

Being sensitive to comfort needs. Provide adult chairs for classroom visits and meetings. Provide volunteer opportunities for adults who might have arthritis and other physical limitations.

Including grandparent props in dramatic play, images in books, curricular materials, puzzles, or miniature people. Provide a variety of assistive devices in the dramatic play area, such as walkers and canes.

Reading and discussing books that deal with all kinds of grandparent families, including grandparents as the primary caregivers in the home, along with grandparents with different racial and ethnic backgrounds. Create a book library for families that covers a diversity of topics, including grandparents.

(Birckmayer, Cohen, Jensen, & Variano, 2005)

However, no program can provide families with all of their functional needs; rather, the program needs to become a hub for information, referrals, advice, support, communication, and understanding.

Quality Early Care and Education

In Chapter 10, we will address in detail characteristics of quality early care and education programs, discuss research on quality programs, and examine several methods used to evaluate and accredit programs. Here, we will describe several characteristics of early care and education programs that increase the likelihood of quality interconnections between the program and the home. According to the Early Care Research Network, factors that contribute to quality early care and education programs for young children are the following:

Adequate attention to each individual child. A small adult-child ratio, along with continuity of care, is critical. Continuity of care involves the caregiver moving with young children as they progress from one group to another, for example, from infancy through age 3.

Encouragement of language and sensory motor development. Infants and young children need ample language stimulation within natural social contexts and many opportunities to manipulate concrete materials and to play with toys.

Attention to health and safety. Cleanliness routines (hand washing), accident prevention (for example, child-proofing the house or center), and safe areas to explore and play are essential.

Professional caregivers. Caregivers and teachers have experience and degrees/certificates in early childhood education, turnover is low, and morale is high—necessitating adequate salaries, benefits, and ongoing training.

Warm and responsive caregivers. Providers engage the children in active play, problem solving, and social and emotional development (NICHD Early Care Research Network, 2005).

Additional characteristics, based on our understanding of the mesosystem, include responsive, respectful, and collaborative relationships with parents and other caregivers; culturally responsive care and education; and frequent communication between the program and the family.

On the opposite end, these are some of the characteristics that lead to less than optimal care and education of young children (Fragin, 2000; NICHD, 2005; Whitebook, Howes, & Phillips, 1989):

Inadequate credentials and training of teachers and caregivers

High staff turnover, from 25% to 50% turnover per year.

Poor pay and benefits. As a field, early care and education teachers and caregivers in the United States are poorly paid, with few if any benefits. Quality care and continuity of care are significantly related to worker compensation (Neugebauer, 2004; NICHD, 2005; Whitebook, Howes, & Phillips, 1989).

Programs that do not provide adequate pay and benefits for teachers and caregivers are less likely to attract and keep teachers and caregivers with proper training and experience, and are less able to provide the quality relationships between staff and families needed to create and maintain effective program-family partnerships.

On the opposite end, these are some of the characteristics that lead to less than optimal care and education of young children (Fragin, 2000; NICHD, 2005; Whitebook, Howes, & Phillips, 1989):

6.5 Frameworks for School, Family, and Community Partnerships

Several researchers and experts have looked at the way families and early care and education programs should work together and developed frameworks to help assist local programs in this critically important endeavor. With this in mind, we will examine the frameworks of Douglass Powell and Joyce Epstein. Powell (1998) proposed some specific ideas to guide early care and education programs in working with families. These suggestions are for all programs, whether public school based, religious, Head Start-Early Head Start, campus child care, private community, or family/home care.

Early care and education programs must serve whole families, and not just children. Policies, procedures, and practices must consider how they affect the family and how they include the entire family. Parents and staff should have confidence in and respect for each other. Parents, grandparents, or other adults need to know that teachers and caregivers are skilled, knowledgeable, and caring, and thus they need opportunities to get to know the staff. Teachers and caregivers need training to be able to include the families’ cultural perspectives and to appreciate and include the families’ strengths. When communicating with the family, programs need to create individualized approaches. Further, there should be opportunities for parents and staff to develop shared goals for each child, based on parents’ ideas and wishes and teachers’ knowledge of child development and the program’s curriculum. To facilitate communication and collaboration, teachers and caregivers need to be available when parents and other family members are most visible in the program.

Programs need to view parents—and other important adults in the home—as individuals. Family involvement increases when parents are seen as whole people with unique needs and interests that are both similar to that of other parents and also unique (see Spotlight: Including Grandparents). Thus, programs must make sure to view parents of similar ethnic, racial, religious, linguistic, and cultural backgrounds as having unique interests, needs, and concerns for their children. Critical to involving family members in the program is finding ways to help parents see the importance of their involvement to their child’s security, happiness, and academic success. While early childhood educators and researchers are well aware of the critical importance of family involvement in the development and learning of their children, many parents are not. Some are even told that they are the problem and not the solution (Gargiulo & Kilgo, 2005). All parents need reassurance, encouragement, and support in their efforts to work with their children’s early care and education programs.

Education preparation programs (in colleges) should emphasize teaching students about collaborating with parents, using current research on effective approaches and field-tested models as the basis for their training. These programs need to provide a focus on ways to develop the skills teachers and caregivers need to work collaboratively with parents and other caregivers, and to appreciate diverse family backgrounds, especially for families that differ racially, economically, linguistically, and culturally from the teacher (Powell, 1998).

To be able to develop effective partnerships with families, early childhood educators and caregivers need to explore each family’s cultural background. This requires understanding each family member’s roles, traditions, and practices and realizing that different levels of family participation in the early childhood program may be due to cultural backgrounds rather than the parent’s desire or effort (Arndt & McGuire-Schwartz, 2008). Also, in some cultures, parents believe teachers should be respected and revered, and thus the idea of an equal partnership is particularly difficult for them to comprehend (Bang, 2009; Luz, 2010; Ngo, 2006).

Some new immigrant parents need specific help in working with early care and education programs. They need to learn about the culture of American institutions and programs, which are often very different from those they are familiar with and those they attended as children. This includes everything from specific program policies, to knowing whom to contact at the program for different kinds of information (Bang, 2009). Many of these new immigrant parents also need and want to learn English. However, typical academic English classes taught at community colleges or community centers can be ineffective; what these parents want and need is functional instruction that teaches typical words and phrases used by teachers, caregivers, and directors in their children’s early childhood program (Bang, 2009).

Joyce Epstein’s Framework

Epstein (2001) focused on issues of effective program-home partnerships for many years. She is the director of the Center on School, Family, and Community Partnerships, and the National Network of Partnership Schools (NNPS), at Johns Hopkins University. In 2001, Epstein wrote a handbook called School, Family, and Community Partnerships. In this book, she lists six types of program-home partnerships. Like Bronfenbrenner, she believes there are overlapping spheres of influence on the lives of children, and that the program, family, and community are all interconnected. When partners recognize their shared interests in and responsibilities for children, they work together to create better programs and opportunities for students (Couchenour & Chrisman, 2004). In describing her framework for school, family, and community partnership, Epstein uses specific terms for each partner (see Think About It: Vocabulary for Program-Family Partnerships).

According to Epstein, these partnerships should work together to help prepare children for successful school readiness in math, literacy, social competence, and other important areas (Epstein, 2007). Epstein’s framework to guide the development of programs that support families and students was designed for K-12 school programs; however, the framework can be adapted for early care and education programs that serve children, from infants to age 5 years old (Epstein, 2007). The six kinds of program involvement that she recommends are as follows:

Parenting. Offer families assistance with parenting skills, in understanding child development and approaches to discipline, and in ways the family can support the child’s overall growth and development. Further, early care and education directors should provide opportunities to help teachers and caregivers understand the diverse nature of the families they serve. Family involvement must be inclusive of a large variety of different kinds of parents and caregivers.

Communicating. Keep families up to date on program-related issues and students’ progress and other issues (for example, discipline, the need to assess a child for possible special needs services, and so on), through effective program-to-home and home-to-program communications. There are a variety of ways to do this, but a critical issue is to make sure that information is provided in the family’s home language.

Volunteering. To support children in early care and education, and to improve family attendance at the program and program-related activities, programs need to improve outreach and staff training and adapt their schedules to involve families as volunteers. Programs must be creative in finding ways to involve members of families with a variety of schedules and a history of resistance.

Learning at home. Programs should offer suggestions and techniques to involve families in a vast array of different learning activities at home, from structuring quality play opportunities and visiting community educational resources, to reading to children and helping them learn basic math concepts with manipulatives and household items.

Decision making. Include families as participants in program decisions, governance, and advocacy, through parent organizations, policy councils, classroom and center committees, parent advisory boards, and curriculum-related activities. Opportunities for governance depend on the kind of early care and education programs a family uses.

Collaborating with the community. Coordinate community resources for families, children, and the program with businesses, local agencies, and other groups. Also, the early care and education program should provide direct services to the community, such as entertaining seniors at a senior center, planting flowers to beautify an area of the neighborhood, and growing vegetables and giving them to the homeless.

6.6 National Parent Teacher Association’s National Standards

In 1997, the National PTA used Epstein’s six components of parent involvement to create the National Standards for Parent/Family Involvement Programs. In 2007, the National PTA changed the name to National Standards for Family-School Partnerships and adjusted some of the six items. The changes shift the focus from what schools should do to involve parents, to what parents, schools, and communities can do together to support student success (PTA, 2011). Because the National PTA is an organization for public K-12 schools, these standards are written for school-age children and their families. The National Standards for Family-School Partnerships are listed in Spotlight: National Standards for Family-School Partnerships. However, these standards can be adapted for early care and education programs working with infants and preschool children (PTA, 2011). These standards are (1) welcoming all families into the school community, (2) communicating effectively, (3) supporting student success, (4) speaking up for every child, (5) sharing power, and (6) collaborating with community (

www.pta.org

, 2011).

SPOTLIGHT:
National Standards for Family-School Partnerships

1. Welcoming All Families into the Early Care and Education Program’s Community

Families are active participants in the life of the early care and education community, and feel welcomed, valued, and connected to each other, to program staff, and to what children are learning and doing in the program and in class. There are two goals under this standard:

Create a welcoming climate in the early care and education program. When families walk into the program, even if it is home-based child care, they should feel that it is a place where they belong. Are there opportunities for families to develop personal relationships with the director, teachers, and other staff? Is the atmosphere family-friendly for everyone, including people of different ethnic and racial backgrounds, parents who do not speak English, grandparents and fathers? Are there many ways to volunteer in the program?

Building a respectful, inclusive early care and education community. All the program policies and rules should reflect, respect, and value the diversity of the families in the community the program serves. Do caregivers and teachers value the contributions of all families, and work together to address barriers to involvement? Are adaptations made for parents who have little money and who work during the school day?

2. Communicating Effectively

Families and early care and education staff engage in regular, meaningful communications about the care and education of each student. For this standard, there is only one goal: sharing information between early care and education programs and the family. All families should feel they are informed on important issues and events, and that it is easy to communicate with the director, teachers, and other staff. One approach to achieve this is the following (Harvard Research Project, 2006/2007):

Accommodate parents’ English skills as needed

Communicate with all families, including those who do not attend meetings and conferences and those who do not respond to requests

Encourage parents’ input and ideas

Offer opportunities to volunteer in the program and on field trips

Assign home-learning opportunities that require parent-student interactions

Make sure all parent committees reflect the program’s diversity

3. Supporting the Development and Learning of Children

Families and early care and education teachers and caregivers continuously collaborate to support children’s healthy development and learning, both at home and in the early care or education program, and have regular opportunities to strengthen their knowledge, skills, and abilities to do so effectively. For this standard, the two goals are the following:

Sharing information about children’s development and learning. Families need to be kept fully informed about how well their children are doing in the program.

Supporting development and learning by engaging families. Families should have opportunities to learn how to be active participants in their children’s healthy development and learning at home and in the program. Are families invited to come and observe in the program? What do teachers, caregivers, and directors do to help parents learn ways to support and encourage development and learning at home? What about connecting families with all sorts of development and learning opportunities outside the early care and education program?

4. Speaking Up for Every Child

Families are empowered to be advocates for their own and other children, to make sure that all children are treated fairly, and to have access to activities, interactions, relationships, and challenges that will support their optimal growth, development, and learning. For this standard there are two goals:

Parents and other family members need to understand how the early care and education program works. Clearly, this differs depending on whether the program is a religious program, a public-school preschool program, Head Start, or Early Head Start. Parents need to know the policies, chain of authority, and state and federal rules that apply to them and their child. Do they know their rights? Do they know whom to contact to resolve issues and answer questions? Are they aware of special programs, such as special education or parenting classes? If they have a child with developmental delays, do they know their rights?

Early care and education program staff need to know how to support and empower families to maximize their children’s growth and learning in the program. Are parents offered training and resources on how to monitor and support their children’s progress? Do they know the choices available for their child, including special education, gifted programs, and other early care and education programs (e.g., state-funded preschools and programs for children with developmental delays)? This is particularly important for families with children under age 5, because the early childhood field is extremely diverse, quite complex, and different from state to state and community to community (Neugebauer, 2008). Finally, does the early childhood program support parent groups and community agencies that assist all families?

5. Sharing Power

Families and early care and education program teachers and caregivers are equal partners in decisions that affect children and families, and together they inform, influence, and create policies, practices, and activities. There are two goals for this standard:

Strengthen the family’s voice in shared decision making. Families must be involved in the early care and education program’s decisions and community decisions that affect their child. Do they sit at the table and have a vote? What structures exist to discuss issues of importance to parents, such as who is eligible for specific programs, how children are placed in different classrooms, and how teacher selection is made? Are parents with concerns shunned and ostracized by the program? Finally, are parents nurtured to become leaders in the program and in the community?

Building families’ social and political connections. Programs should provide opportunities for parents to connect with each other around issues of concern, as well as connect with local policy-makers—politicians, community leaders, early childhood advocates, support groups, public officials, and church and business leaders.

6. Collaborating with Community

There is one goal for this standard, and it is that parents and program leaders need to work closely together with neighborhood associations, government agencies, businesses, and colleges to strengthen the early care and education program that the child attends and to make resources available to parents, teachers, and staff to build a family-friendly community. What program-community linkages have been created? How are they maintained? Have community partnerships been organized to support the early care and education program? What are the plans to make the program a hub of community life, especially for all the families it serves? How do these community partnerships support children’s development and learning?

The National PTA has developed a series of steps to implement these standards and a framework to evaluate the success of this process. These documents can be found on the National PTA website (www.pta.org).

6.7 The Challenge of Partnerships with Families

Creating effective partnerships between programs and families is particularly challenging with families that differ from traditional, middle-class American families (Epstein & Dauber, 1991; Howard, 2007). The diversity of families requires programs to explore a variety of ways to engage these families (Hill & Taylor, 2004). This diversity includes gay and lesbian parents, low-income families, families whose parents do not speak English as their first language, multiracial families and transracially adoptive families (families who adopt children of a different race or ethnicity from the parents), single-parent families, and blended families (Arndt & McGuire-Swartz, 2004). Of course, these diversities can interact with each other to create all sorts of combinations (e.g., a teen parent who does not speak English, or a gay parent with a transracially adopted child). One form of diversity that has not been addressed stems from the generational culture of parents, which illustrates Bronfenbrenner’s last domain: the chronosystem. These generational differences influence the way parents and other significant caregivers think about gender roles, lifestyles, culture, and future outlook (Rutherford, 2005). As with all ways of categorizing people, these are broad generalizations with obvious variability.

According to Rutherford (2005), the younger end of the Baby Boomers (now in their 40s) might be first-time parents or grandparents. They tend to be workaholics who value success and are career oriented. They often over-commit and need to be reminded to keep their focus on outcomes. The Gen Xers, born between 1965 and 1982, value relationships over organizations; personal touch and immediate feedback are critical, and they seek a balance between their personal and professional lives. Millennials, who were born in the mid-1980s, appreciate time spent with family and personal involvement and tend to have a generally positive outlook. Their preferred mode of communication is email and other forms of technology (Howe & Strauss, 2000).

All families, regardless of their diversity, are embedded within cultures. Thus, teachers and caregivers must understand how culture influences families. It is also important for these teachers and providers to develop their cross-cultural communication skills.

Cross-Cultural Communication Skills

During the early years, children are developing a strong sense of their identity, including their cultural identity (Lally, 1995). Child-rearing practices, beliefs, goals, and values are tied to culture. When children are raised at home, cared for by relatives, or a part of a program that reflects the same cultural values as that of the family, the child’s cultural identity develops in a normal, healthy manner. However, when children are cared for by people from different cultural backgrounds, conflict, confusion, and cultural discontinuity can arise (Lally, 1995).

Each of us exists within a variety of cultural contexts (HHS, 2010). We view the world from the perspective of these contexts (Bowman, 1994). The challenge is to understand that when we interact with someone from a different cultural context, we may feel uncomfortable; we may judge them from our own cultural perspective; and we may not understand why they behave the way they do (Hall, 1983). Thus, it is critical that teachers, caregivers, and directors are sensitive to the different cultural perspectives of the families they work with, and to conflicts and misunderstandings that might arise due to cultural differences. However, it is crucial that we do not try to learn about cultures as static behaviors and attributes practiced by everyone who belongs within a traditional racial, ethnic, language, or national group.

Six Areas of Nonverbal Communication

The following are six areas of nonverbal communication that can result in miscommunication and misunderstanding. These cultural differences can be seen in both adults and children.

Personal space. We all grow up with a comfort zone regarding physical proximity while communicating with others—what is commonly called personal space. Once someone comes too close to us, we may feel uncomfortable. Most mainstream Americans prefer a space of about one arm’s length. People from some countries and cultures are more comfortable being much closer to a person while they are communicating.

Smiling. Smiles are used differently in different cultures. For example, Americans tend to see smiling as a way to communicate friendship, comfort, and acceptance; they smile all the time. Russians and other Europeans view smiling as a much more authentic behavior, something to be performed when they are truly happy; anything else is fake (Gonzalez-Mena, 2008). However, many Vietnamese smile as a way to communicate to teachers and others in authority that they are good, obedient students who accept the teacher’s authority unequivocally (Binh, 1975).

Eye contact. In some cultures, it is important to look people in the eye directly when talking to them. People from cultures where this is the norm become upset when the other person looks away, thinking they are dishonest. However, in some Asian cultures, looking into someone’s eyes is considered a lack of respect (Root, Ho, & Sue, 1986). Similarly, some Native Americans view staring and prolonged eye contact to be extremely disrespectful (Matheson, 1986). People in other cultures believe that eye contact is critical when an adult disciplines a child.

Touch. Anyone who has travelled to Central or South America knows that people from these cultures greet each other with a hug and kiss on the cheek. In other cultures, touch is a way of establishing and maintaining power—those in power can touch others, but not vice versa. What is appropriate in one culture can be viewed as harmful or even sexual in another one.

Silence. In some cultures, people are uncomfortable with silence. Teachers even have the term wait time, which is a deliberate pause after a question has been asked, to allow students relaxed time to process the question and formulate an answer. Other cultures, however, do not need extra time after a person has spoken, because they naturally leave time as an indication of having listened to the speaker. In some cultures, people are apt not to answer questions about themselves, as this is viewed as bragging (Alderete-Baker, 1998).

Concepts of time. People in highly industrialized societies have learned to follow the clock and plan ahead using precise time calculations. Many view carefully following time as essential to the smooth operation of the workplace, and as respect for the time of others (Lefley & Pedersen, 1986). Others, of course, not only are always late, but seem to see doing anything strictly on time as unimportant: What is done is what is important, not when it is done.

Related to time is how people communicate facts and information. In some cultures, a person is expected to engage in “happy talk” before getting to the point; in others, it is critical to get to the point immediately. And in some cultures, it is impolite to say exactly what you mean; the other person needs to figure it out (Hall, 1983).

Family Strengths and Challenges

All families have unique strengths and challenges. To engage families in program participation, program staff members need to find ways to work with families around these strengths and challenges. For example, one study found that lesbian and gay parents, like all other parents, want their children to be nurtured and stimulated to learn, while also wanting environments that support diversity (Clay, 2007). These parents appreciate teachers who have experience working with gay and lesbian families. Similarly, we know that multiracial families and transracially adoptive families, while wanting the same general care and support for their children as other families, also expect program policies, teachers, and activities to be sensitive to important multiracial issues, including images in curricular materials and the filling out of federal racial forms (Wardle & Cruz-Janzen, 2004).

When examining ways to become culturally competent and work effectively with families of diverse backgrounds, teachers and caregivers need to examine their own backgrounds, cultures, education, attitudes, and experiences. How comfortable are they working with diverse families and children with special needs? What biases do they have that interfere with working effectively with all families and children (Arndt & McGuire-Schwartz, 2008)? Once they have explored their own racial and cultural identities and worldview, teachers and caregivers need to explore each family’s cultural backgrounds. Some teachers find this easy to do; for others, they enjoy working with children but may lack confidence working effectively with adults.

Getting Parents Involved

Programs can engage in a variety of activities to develop positive relationships with families at the beginning of the year, or when they first enroll their children, and continue throughout the year (Hamre & Pianta, 2005). Some activities that can be completed before the school year starts include the following (Kersey & Masterson, 2009):

Send a personalized card to every child, saying, “See you at school. You will make lots of friends and have fun” (p. 44).

Have an open house for children and families. Let the families explore the room, playground, and rest of the center. Help connect families who have common backgrounds, interests, and issues. Make sure the open house is at a time when all families can attend.

Soon after the beginning of the school year, hold a Welcome Families meeting at a convenient time for all parents. Use this meeting to solicit ideas from parents about activities and goals for their children. Provide questionnaires (in all appropriate languages) to learn about children’s interests, strengths, pets, and hobbies. Also, solicit volunteers by letting parents know all the possible ways they can volunteer. In the meeting, provide time for parents to connect and get to know each other. Let parents know about you—your personality, what you like to do, and so on.

Many children enter a program while the school year is in progress. With these families, make sure they fill out the same questionnaire (in their language), help them make connections with other parents, and give them a relaxed tour of the facility.

Once parents have become involved with the programs, they need to be continually engaged and included throughout the year. Additional activities that can be used to achieve this include the following (Kersey & Masterson, 2009):

Send home Great Moments certificates. Attach a photo of the child to the certificate, along with highlighting something the child has done or made—helped another child, used a new word, completed a task, etc. Make sure all children receive a certificate (send out about 3 to 5 a day).

Provide parents a time they can call you to talk about their child, when it is convenient for them. If a translator is needed, include him or her in the planning.

Send email communications, reporting positive experiences of each child.

Record the positive things a child does on a 3×5 card in a notebook, or in a personal journal for each child. These can then be shared with a parent at parent-teacher conferences, during informal interactions between teachers and parents, or at the end of the school year.

Send home weekend project packs with activities parents can do with their children. Keep them simple, and make sure both the instructions and the activity are provided in the language spoken by the adults in the home.

Create a class newsletter or webpage on the program’s website to engage students in communicating with their families. Include students’ writing, art, photos, and other material.

Specific Challenges in Working with Diverse Families

Because most best practices come out of our dominant cultural beliefs, and because many early care and education teachers also come from the dominant culture, special attention must be devoted to families and children who are different. However, regardless of diversity, studies indicate that all families have common goals for their children (Henderson & Mapp, 2002). All families want their children to do well academically and they want their children to have a successful school experience. Finally, one of the goals of many parents is for the children to learn appropriate social skills and to avoid risky behaviors as they grow up and develop (Henderson & Mapp, 2002).

Research has continually documented that impoverished and minority families are less likely to be involved in their child’s early care and education programs than are white and wealthier families. Further, early childhood programs in impoverished communities are less likely to provide active parent collaboration than are programs in middle-class and wealthy communities (Boyd-Zaharias & Pate-Bain, 2009; Hill & Taylor, 2004). It is important to note that this lack of involvement is usually not due to the motivation and concern of these parents, but to a variety of factors that cause barriers to partnerships. Because parents in low-income and minority communities are often affected both by the memory of their own negative school experiences and by negative feelings regarding their own abilities as parents and providers, effective partnerships in high-risk programs need to be radically different from those that work in more advantaged programs and communities (Hill & Taylor, 2004). Negative experiences affect parents when their children begin to attend a program, while memories of positive school experiences are likely to enhance involvement. Further, poverty has a direct, negative effect on the involvement of families in the care and education of their children (Howard, 2007; Hill & Taylor, 2004).

Teachers and caregivers often believe that parents who volunteer in their child’s early care and education program value education more than parents who do not. Further, teachers and caregivers tend to think more highly of the involvement of parents whose children are doing well (academically and behaviorally) in the program (Hill & Craft, 2003). We also know that early care and education program polices directly influence parents’ involvement (Epstein & Dauber, 1991) and that parents will respond positively to a variety of ways to support their children in early care and education programs (La Paro, Kraft-Sayre, & Pianta, 2003).

Three Specific Activities to Use with Low-income Families

Like all families, low-income families have incredible variety: new immigrant families; newly divorced; single mothers; struggling two-parent families; minority families; and teen parents trying to finish their high school education. Three specific kinds of activities that have been effective with low-income families include building respectful relationships, engaging families in supporting learning at home, and creating cultural memoirs (Allen, 2008).

Building Respectful Relationships

Programs need to learn about and incorporate family funds of knowledge—what families know and pass on to their children. This approach challenges the deficit model of low-income families. Through home visits and using families as a resource for projects, activities, and curricular ideas, teachers build on family funds of knowledge, which develops trust and a healthy partnership between the program and the family. Teachers also learn about all the knowledge and skills students bring to the program and meet together on a regular basis to determine ways these family funds of knowledge can be incorporated into the curriculum and other meaningful learning experiences for children (Allen, 2008).

To build positive relationships, teachers and caregivers need to learn specific information about each of their families. This is best achieved through home visits and open communication. Further, teachers and other caregivers cannot assume they know a family simply because they come from the same racial or ethnic group, or because they have somehow learned some information about a certain racial and cultural group. The dynamic cultural contexts to which our families belong are much more complex than simply belonging to large racial, ethnic, religious, or linguistic groups.

Engaging Families in Supporting Learning at Home

Another approach that works is program-home reading journals. To connect with the family, teachers design journals that children take home with them. These journals are exchanged throughout the year, two or three times a week. The spiral-bound notebooks are sent home with carefully chosen children’s books from the library. Parents read the books to their children (and some children may read these books to their parents), talk to their children about the books’ content, and then write together in the journal. Teachers then respond to each parent’s journal entries. This approach establishes a deep relationship between parents and teachers, which supports emergent readers and writers in the home, without parents or other family members even coming to the program (Allen, 2008).

Creating Cultural Memoirs

We have discussed throughout this book the issue of cultural richness and differences. One idea to help families embrace their identity is to create cultural memoirs. These are records that answer the question “Who am I as a cultural being, and what are the influences in my life that have made me who I am?” Parents, other important family members, and teachers can engage in this activity. Memoirs are created through the following activities:

Reading and discussing examples of cultural memoirs. These are stories that are built around deeply contextualized information of time and place. Television biopics, radio broadcasts of historical and cultural biographies, and magazine bios are short and accessible examples. There are also longer books, films, and TV programs that focus on the lives of people embedded within place and time.

Gathering photographs and other cultural artifacts. These can answer the question “What are my cultural influences in terms of race, class, gender, ethnicity, geography, nationality, language, and religion?” Look at old photos, digital files, newspaper clippings, family and personal diaries, or photo albums.

Sharing cultural memoirs. Develop a form to present your multicultural self and to enable parents to do the same: a photo essay, picture book, scrapbook, poem, or slideshow presentation. In some programs, parents are invited to share their memoirs with other parents and with staff. This activity not only legitimizes the rich cultural contexts of each parent and family, but it also enables staff to learn about a variety of cultural contexts and to respect and trust families and children who are different from them. It also provides a wonderful way for teachers and other caregivers to explore and share their own rich cultural backgrounds.

6.8 Working with Fathers

Historically, early care and education programs have viewed parent communication and involvement as mother communication and involvement; fathers were often ignored. Even when fathers attempted to become involved—or were forced to because they became single parents—they experienced considerable frustrations. Some fathers still report that staff members use them simply as a link to their wives or girlfriends and show a decided preference for communicating with the child’s mother (Cunningham & Dorsey, 2004; Fagan, 1996). A father can be a biological father, foster/adoptive father, a father in a blended family, grandfather in a family where grandparents are raising the children, or any significant male in an extended family.

Like mothers, fathers can be engaged, loving and exhibit effective parenting skills, while others have poor parenting skills and may be too authoritarian (Baumrind, 1971; Wright, 1998). There are a variety of barriers that make it difficult for fathers to become involved in the care and education of their children. One particular challenge is that many early childhood/special education specialists are simply more comfortable communicating with mothers. While many women now work full time, the image of the mother as the child’s caregiver and the primary contact with the early care and education program still persists (Coltrane, 2004; Cunningham & Dorsey, 2004).

Today, there is increased awareness of the importance of father involvement in the lives of children. Married fathers spend more time with their children than they did in the past (Coltrane, 2004), more fathers are becoming primary caregivers while their wives work outside the home, and even with regular jobs outside the home, many fathers are likely to care for their children when their wives work (U.S. Census Bureau, 2008). Fathers who have good parenting skills and are actively involved with their children help reduce gender stereotypes and foster greater cognitive skills, self-control, and empathy in both preschoolers and adolescents (Coltrane, 2004). School-age children whose fathers participate in program activities are more likely to receive high grades and participate in extracurricular activities (U.S. Department of Education, 1997). Further, children whose fathers are directly involved in their early care and education programs are less likely to be expelled or suspended, or to engage in violent and antisocial behaviors, and are more likely to do better in academic activities (Horn, 1998). When fathers become involved in their children’s early childhood programs, they are also likely to become involved in their school programs.