UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

An investigation of the STEP Program Fox, Aerock 1979

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1979_A8 F69.pdf [ 5.01MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0054340.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0054340-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0054340-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0054340-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0054340-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0054340-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0054340-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0054340-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0054340.ris

Full Text

AN INVESTIGATION OF THE STEP PROGRAM  by AEROCK FOX B.A. B i s h o p ' s U n i v e r s i t y , 1 9 7 1  A THESIS SUBMITTED I N P A R T I A L FULFILLMENT THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS  in THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES THE FACULTY OF EDUCATION THE DEPARTMENT OF COUNSELLING PSYCHOLOGY  We a c c e p t t h i s t h e s i s to t h e r e q u i r e d  as c o n f o r m i n g standard  THE UNIVERSITY OF B R I T I S H COLUMBIA April, 1979 (c) A e r o c k F o x ,  1979  In presenting  this  t h e s i s i n p a r t i a l f u l f i l m e n t of the  r e q u i r e m e n t s f o r an advanced degree a t the U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia, I agree t h a t freely  t h e L i b r a r y s h a l l make i t  a v a i l a b l e f o r r e f e r e n c e and s t u d y .  that permission f o r extensive  I further  copying of t h i s t h e s i s f o r  s c h o l a r l y p u r p o s e s may be g r a n t e d by t h e Head o f my ment o r b y h i s r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s . ing or p u b l i c a t i o n of t h i s not  Depart-  I t i s understood that  thesis f o r f i n a n c i a l gain  be a l l o w e d w i t h o u t my w r i t t e n  Department of C o u n s e l l i n g  agree  permission.  Psychology  The U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a 2075 W e s b r o o k P l a c e Vancouver, Canada V6T 1W5  copy-  shall  ABSTRACT  The p u r p o s e o f t h i s s t u d y was tiveness  to investigate  of the S y s t e m a t i c T r a i n i n g  (STEP) p r o g r a m  for Effective  on t h e p a r e n t p a r t i c i p a n t s  This study also  investigated  on t h e p a r e n t p a r t i c i p a n t s '  the e f f e c t s  effec-  Parenting  of a study group. o f t h e STEP p r o g r a m  grade 8 c h i l d .  A c r i t i c a l review of the r e l a t e d that  the  l i t e r a t u r e suggested  p r o g r a m s , s u c h as STEP, do n o t d e m o n s t r a t e s i g n i f i c a n t  statistical change  evidence i n support of the p r o p o s i t i o n  the p a r e n t - c h i l d  relationship,  and t h e c h i l d ' s p e r f o r m a n c e i n I t was  hypothesized that  significant difference  that  they  t h e c h i l d ' s "behaviour  school.  t h e r e w o u l d he no  statistically  between t h e e x p e r i m e n t a l group and t h e  control  g r o u p i n : (1) p a r e n t a l  rearing  a s p e r c e i v e d by t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s ;  as f o u n d e d u p o n i n f e r r e d  attitudes  related  to c h i l d -  (2) f a m i l y  climate  i n t e r a c t i o n by t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s  and  t h e i r g r a d e 8 c h i l d ; (3) p a r e n t - a d o l e s c e n t c o m m u n i c a t i o n a s p e r c e i v e d by the; p a r t i c i p a n t (4)  and t h e i r g r a d e 8 c h i l d ; and  t h e g r a d e 8 c h i l d ' s b e h a v i o u r as i n f e r r e d by t h e  partici-  p a n t and by t h e t e a c h e r . A l l measures  on t h e p o s t t e s t  g r o u p and t h e c o n t r o l The r e s u l t s  between the  g r o u p showed no s i g n i f i c a n t  of the study suggest that  I t i s f e l t that  change.  t h e STEP p r o g r a m  i s n o t a n e f f e c t i v e method i n p r o m o t i n g change child relationship.  experimental  i n the parent-  for significant  changes  t o o c c u r , more s e s s i o n s s h o u l d "be p r o v i d e d t o g i v e t h e participants'  the opportunity to p r a c t i s e the s k i l l s  p r i n c i p l e s presented.  and  I t i s a l s o recommended t h a t t h e STEP  p r o g r a m a s i t e x i s t s , must he m o d i f i e d t o more a p p r o p r i a t e l y meet t h e n e e d s o f p a r e n t s  of adolescents.  Chairman's  Signature  iv  TABLE OF CONTENTS Page L I S T OF TABLES  v i  L I S T OF FIGURES  v i i  ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS  viii  CHAPTER I  II  INTRODUCTION  1  Purpose  3  Statement o f the Problem  4  D e f i n i t i o n o f Terms  5  D a t a Base  7 9  REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE Research Studies  10  Statement of t h e Hypotheses III  26  METHODOLOGY  26  Population Sample and Assignment  of Subjects to  Groups  26  D e s c r i p t i o n of Instruments  28  Research Design  33  Procedures  39  A n a l y s i s o f Data IV  23  RESULTS Data Analysis Summary  42 44 44 5 7  V  CHAPTER V  Page 58  DISCUSSION I n t e r p r e t a t i o n of F i n d i n g s  58  Limitations  65  I m p l i c a t i o n s and S u g g e s t i o n s Further Research  for 67 73  Conclusion REFERENCES  .  77  APPENDIXES A B  Announcement/Registration Notice A d l e r i a n P a r e n t a l Assessment of C h i l d  82  Behaviour  85  Scale  C  A t t i t u d e s Toward C h i l d - R e a r i n g S c a l e  89  D  Family Environment Scale  93  E  Parent-Adolescent Communication Inventory (Form P) Parent-Adolescent Communication Inventory (Form A) Walker Problem Behaviour I d e n t i f i c a t i o n  F G  98 102  Checklist  106  H  Telephone I n t e r v i e w O u t l i n e  109  I  C o n f i d e n t i a l I n f o r m a t i o n Form  J  Thank Y o u / F e e d b a c k L e t t e r  113  K  O u t l i n e of F i r s t S e s s i o n  115  I l l  vi  L I S T OF  TABLES  Table  Page  1  Descriptive Characteristics  2  P r e t e s t Means a n d S t a n d a r d D e v i a t i o n s f o r E x p e r i m e n t a l a n d C o n t r o l P a r e n t s on a l l Measures  37  Means, S t a n d a r d D e v i a t i o n s a n d t - S t a t i s t i c f o r E x p e r i m e n t a l and C o n t r o l P a r e n t s on t h e A t t i t u d e s Toward C h i l d - R e a r i n g S c a l e  45  Means, S t a n d a r d D e v i a t i o n s a n d t - S t a t i s t i c f o r E x p e r i m e n t a l and C o n t r o l P a r e n t s on t h e Family Environment Scale  47  Means, S t a n d a r d D e v i a t i o n s a n d t - S t a t i s t i c f o r E x p e r i m e n t a l and C o n t r o l P a r e n t s on t h e P a r e n t - A d o l e s c e n t C o m m u n i c a t i o n (Form P)  49  Means, S t a n d a r d D e v i a t i o n s a n d t - S t a t i s t i c f o r E x p e r i m e n t a l and C o n t r o l P a r e n t s on t h e Parent-Adolescent Communication Inventory (Form A)  51  Means, S t a n d a r d D e v i a t i o n s a n d t - S t a t i s t i c f o r E x p e r i m e n t a l and C o n t r o l P a r e n t s on t h e A d l e r i a n P a r e n t a l Assessment of C h i l d Behaviour Scale  53  Means, S t a n d a r d D e v i a t i o n s a n d t - S t a t i s t i c f o r E x p e r i m e n t a l and C o n t r o l P a r e n t s on t h e Walker Problem Behaviour I d e n t i f i c a t i o n Checklist '  55  3  4  5  6  7  8  o f t h e S a m p l e ....  35  vii  L I S T OF FIGURES  Figure  Page  1.  P r e t e s t a n d P o s t t e s t Mean Changes o n t h e A t t i t u d e Toward C h i l d - R e a r i n g S c a l e  46  2.  P r e t e s t a n d P o s t t e s t Mean Changes o n t h e Family Environment Scale  48  P r e t e s t a n d P o s t t e s t Mean Changes o n t h e P a r e n t - A d o l e s c e n t Communication Inventory (Form P)  50  P r e t e s t a n d P o s t t e s t Mean Changes o n t h e P a r e n t - A d o l e s c e n t Communication Inventory (Form A)  52  P r e t e s t a n d P o s t t e s t Mean Changes o n t h e A d l e r i a n P a r e n t a l Assessment o f C h i l d Behaviour ,  5^  P r e t e s t a n d P o s t t e s t Mean Changes o n t h e Walker Problem Behaviour I d e n t i f i c a t i o n Checklist  56  3.  4.  5-  6.  ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS  I would l i k e committee, Bill  D r . John F r i e s e n , D r . H a r o l d R a t z l a f f and D r .  Borgen f o r t h e i r encouragement and s u p p o r t .  especially like of  t o e x p r e s s my a p p r e c i a t i o n t o my a d v i s o r y  chairman  I would  t o thank D r . F r i e s e n f o r assuming t h e r o l e  o f my s t u d y .  A v e r y s p e c i a l word o f thanks  s h o u l d a l s o go t o D r . R a t z l a f f f o r h i s a s s i s t a n c e a n d d e d i c a t e d i n t e r e s t i n t h e c o m p u t e r a n a l y s i s o f my d a t a . I am g r a t e f u l t o D r . D e n n i s  H i n k l e , from  Virgina  Polytechnic University, f o r providing assistance i n scoring t h e d a t a and f o r h i s g u i d a n c e  and encouragement i n c a r r y i n g  out t h e study. A very s p e c i a l Alpha Secondary  "thank  y o u " t o my f e l l o w c o u n s e l l o r s a t  S c h o o l who l e s s e n e d my  responsibilities,  a l l o w i n g me c o n s i d e r a b l e f r e e d o m t o c o m p l e t e s p e c i a l thanks  my d e g r e e .  My  t o M r . J a c k Ewen, p r i n c i p a l a t A l p h a , who g a v e  me t h e f l e x i b i l i t y  and time t o devote  to the parent  study  group. I would l i k e participated has  t o thank  i nt h i s study.  a l l t h e p a r e n t s a n d c h i l d r e n who T h e i r c o o p e r a t i o n and i n t e r e s t  s i g n i f i c a n t l y f u r t h e r e d t h e cause Finally,  I would l i k e  of parent  education.  t o e x p r e s s my a p p r e c i a t i o n t o my  p a t i e n t a n d u n d e r s t a n d i n g p a r t n e r , N a t t o l i e , who f u n c t i o n e d as my m o s t a r d e n t s u p p o r t e r a n d c o l l a b o r a t o r .  1  Chapter  I  INTRODUCTION  The  emphasis upon w o r k i n g w i t h  j u s t the recent  c h i l d w i t h i n the  years.  The  school,  a b o u t by w o r k i n g w i t h t h e  importance of changing the  the  child  with  the  I n such an  v i a n t b e h a v i o u r and action.  increase  skills  also  living  forms of  de-  interbe  amount o f p r o f e s s i o n a l  time  treatment  the permanence of the  changes  in  behaviour. U n t i l r e c e n t l y , p a r e n t s seldom r e c e i v e d  systematic  grams i n p r a c t i c a l methods f o r r e a r i n g c h i l d r e n . our  realizing  necessary to reduce  T r a i n i n g t h e p a r e n t as  increase  lives.  environment i n which  more a d a p t i v e  i n terms of the  f o r treatment.  agents should child  c o u n s e l l o r s , are  social  behav-  brought  I t i s assumed t h a t s u c h a n a p p r o a c h s h o u l d  highly efficient required  maintains that  approach, thejparents  taught the  than  become more common i n  significant adult i n their  the  c h i l d are  family rather  be m o s t e f f e c t i v e l y  more s p e c i f i c a l l y  lives.  has  Adlerian viewpoint  i o u r changes i n c h i l d r e n can  E d u c a t o r s , and  the  s o c i e t y not  only provides,  f o r p r o f e s s i o n a l s who t h a t any  one  ety the  tasks  parents are  can  be  but  Ironically  also requires, training  work w i t h c h i l d r e n . a parent.  pro-  I n our  Yet  i t i s assumed  r a p i d l y changing  soci-  o f p a r e n t h o o d have become more d i f f i c u l t .  seeking  relationship with  information  on how  their children.  As  to improve a means o f  their helping  The  2 p a r e n t s meet t h i s parent  task, schools are i n a u g u r a t i n g v a r i o u s  e d u c a t i o n programs.  F a m i l y e d u c a t i o n c e n t e r s , behav-  ioural m o d i f i c a t i o n programs, t r a n s a c t i o n a l a n a l y s i s parent  e f f e c t i v e n e s s t r a i n i n g courses,  f u s i o n o f b o o k s and i n f o r m a t i o n on how their children.  and  groups,  generally a  other m a t e r i a l a l l attempting to to improve parents  relationships  T h i s i n v e s t i g a t o r was  concerned  s t u d y - d i s c u s s i o n group method of p a r e n t i n g i n t e r e s t i n d e v e l o p i n g new  provide with  with  education.  pro-  the  The  parent-child relationships  b e e n r e f l e c t e d w i t h an a r r a y o f a d v i c e n e e d i n g and  i n p u t f r o m o t h e r p a r e n t s who  new  ideas.  D i n k m e y e r and group p r o c e s s  has  clarification  are s t r u g g l i n g to apply  Thus g r o u p s h a v e b e e n f o r m e d t o s t u d y p o i n t s  view of p a r t i c u l a r  grow-  the of  authors. Munro ( 1 9 7 1 ) d i s c u s s t h e v a l u e  of  the  f o r helping parents.  The p a r e n t g r o u p p r o v i d e s a u n i q u e o p p o r t u n i t y f o r a l l i n v o l v e d t o become more aware o f t h e p a r e n t c h i l d r e l a t i o n s h i p and t o e x p e r i e n c e f e e d b a c k r e g a r d i n g the e f f e c t t h a t t h e i r p a r e n t p r a c t i s e s have upon t h e i r c h i l d r e n . This i s derived through feedback from o t h e r p a r e n t s about t h e i r p r o c e d u r e s . The o p p o r t u n i t y f o r m u t u a l t h e r a p e u t i c e f f e c t i s constantly available. A t t h e same t i m e , t h e r e i s the o p p o r t u n i t y to create a s t r o n g interdependence which takes advantage of the u n i v e r s a l problems that confront parents. There i s - a n o p p o r t u n i t y f o r p a r e n t s t o c o n t r i b u t e t o e a c h o t h e r and t o d e v e l o p new a p p r o a c h e s t o p a r e n t - c h i l d r e l a t i o n s h i p s . The c o r r e c t i v e process of feedback from contemporaries has t r e m e n d o u s e f f e c t u p o n t h e g r o u p d y n a m i c s . Parents  t a k i n g p a r t i n a s t u d y - d i s c u s s i o n group  stand  t o i m p r o v e t h e q u a l i t y o f t h e i r home l i f e by b e t t e r u n d e r s t a n d i n g t h e i r c h i l d r e n , l e a r n i n g new  child-training  3  techniques, tionship  and u l t i m a t e l y i m p r o v i n g  ( P o r s , 1977)..  Much o f t h e l i t e r a t u r e models. others  the parent-child rela-  on p a r e n t  education  deals  with  Some i n c l u d e m a n u a l s o r o u t l i n e s o f s t u d y , a n d are loose  i n structure.  ing f o r Effective Parenting  The m o d e l , S y s t e m a t i c  ( D i n k m e y e r a n d McKay,  Train-  1976),  h e r e a f t e r r e f e r r e d t o a s "STEP", was t h e s u b j e c t o f s t u d y this investigator.  I t o f f e r s parents  t o meet t h e c h a l l e n g e s A d l e r i a n theory-based  a practical alternative  of r a i s i n g c h i l d r e n today. program blended w i t h  STEP i s a n  communication  s k i l l s w h i c h f o l l o w t h e b a s i c p r i n c i p l e s o n -human  behaviour  s e t down b y A l f r e d A d l e r a n d p o p u l a r i z e d i n t h e U n i t e d by R u d o l f  Dreikurs.  The p r o g r a m i s d e s i g n e d  trained, or inexperienced  l a y leadership.  a v a r i e t y of m a t e r i a l s designed and  States  f o r professional,  STEP c o n s i s t s o f  t o enhance a n  understanding  a p p l i c a t i o n o f t h e concepts o f t h e program, and t o p r o -  vide f o r i n d i v i d u a l l e a r n i n g s t y l e s through reading, cussing, l i s t e n i n g , practising, The  by  program c o n t a i n s  cassettes,  and v i e w i n g  dis-  visual materials.  a l e a d e r ' s manual, parent's  handbook,  e x e r c i s e s , p o s t e r s , c h a r t s , and s p e c i f i c  assignments f o ra p p l i c a t i o n of the p r i n c i p l e s  taught  task i n each  session.  Purpose T h e r e a r e i n e x c e s s o f t e n STEP p r o g r a m s i n o p e r a t i o n at various schools  i n t h e Lower M a i n l a n d  alone  (as i n d i c a t e d  4 by t h e B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a A s s o c i a t i o n o f A d l e r i a n  Psychology,  1979)i  and more p l a n n e d f o r i m p l e m e n t a t i o n i n t h e 1979-1980  school  year.  At l e a s t four schools  i n the Burnaby S c h o o l  D i s t r i c t have become i n v o l v e d w i t h t h e STEP p r o g r a m the  1978-1979 s c h o o l Although there  during  year. i s an impressive  body o f s u b j e c t i v e  evi-  d e n c e a t t e s t i n g t o t h e s u c c e s s o f t h e STEP p r o g r a m , t h e r e i s less precise  information  on t h e m a g n i t u d e o f p a r e n t a l  and t h e i r e f f e c t s u p o n t h e c h i l d r e n . the p a r e n t and t h e c h i l d  I t was s u s p e c t e d  a r e most l i k e l y  t o change  a b l y w i t h e x p o s u r e t o t h e STEP p r o g r a m b u t more e v i d e n c e was r e q u i r e d  to support or dispute  changes that  favour-  empirical  this  statement.  A n e v a l u a t i o n o f t h e e f f e c t i v e n e s s o f t h e STEP p r o g r a m will  a i d t h e Burnaby and o t h e r  mining the usefulness  school  districts  i n deter-  of the program.  Statement of the Problem Parent education  i s not a recent  l a s t decade, however, t h e r e  phenomenon.  has been an upsurge o f i n t e r e s t  w i t h r e s u l t i n g a t t e m p t s t o r e f i n e and e v a l u a t e grams. the  In the  However, t h e e f f e c t s t h a t p a r e n t i n g  various  pro-  programs have  on  f a m i l i e s involved remain uncertain. 1.  The m a i n p u r p o s e o f t h i s s t u d y was t o i n v e s t i g a t e the  e f f e c t i v e n e s s o f t h e STEP p r o g r a m o n t h e  parent p a r t i c i p a n t s of the study group. STEP p r o g r a m h e l p  facilitate  democratic  Does t h e parental  5  a t t i t u d e s and b e h a v i o u r t o w a r d  2.  children?  Does  p a r e n t - c h i l d communication  i n c r e a s e when t h e  ents p a r t i c i p a t e  i n STEP?  Does t h e f a m i l y e n v i r o n -  ment become l e s s  i n c o n g r u e n t when t h e  participate  i n STEP?  A secondary  purpose  was  e f f e c t s of the program. drens*  to determine  par-  parents  the  Specifically,  c l a s s r o o m b e h a v i o u r become l e s s  indirect  does  chil-  negative  d u r i n g and a f t e r t h e p a r e n t s ' p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n STEP?  D e f i n i t i o n o f Terms 1.  Systematic Training f o r E f f e c t i v e Parenting  (STEP):  A t e n s e s s i o n A d l e r i a n p a r e n t study program  taught  i n weekly mat  two-hour meetings.  The  t o p i c s and  for-  o f t h e p r o g r a m a r e ..outlined:. inbthe.STEP'".  l e a d e r ' s manual. 2.  P a r t i c i p a n t s : A parent or parents of a c h i l d t e n d i n g Grade 8 a t A l p h a S e c o n d a r y r e c e i v e d the treatment  who  (STEP p r o g r a m ) f o r a t  e i g h t o f the t e n , two-hour weekly may  School  at-  sessions.  least They  a l s o be r e f e r r e d t o as t h e e x p e r i m e n t a l p a r -  ents . 3.  C o n t r o l P a r e n t s : P a r e n t s who  were t e s t e d o v e r  same iQ-week p e r i o d o f t i m e b e f o r e t h e y  the  attended  6 the 4.  STEP p r o g r a m .  Target Children;  A son or daughter of the p a r t i c -  i p a n t who was a t t e n d i n g ary  School.  They a l s o may "be r e f e r r e d t o a s t h e  experimental 5.  Control  Grade 8 a t A l p h a S e c o n d -  children.  Children:  participating  A son or daughter of the parents  a s c o n t r o l s a n d who was  Grade 8 a t A l p h a Secondary 6.  Adlerian Parental Scale  attending  School.  Assessment of C h i l d  Behaviour  (APACBS): A 3 2 - i t e m , s e v e n p o i n t , L i k e r t -  type scale  designed to assess the parent's  t i o n s o f t h e i r c h i l d ' s "behaviour.  percep-  Increasing  s c o r e s i n d i c a t e a change toward improved "behaviour. 7.  Attitudes  Toward C h i l d R e a r i n g S c a l e  (ATCRS):  4 0 - i t e m a t t i t u d e t e s t on a f i v e p o i n t , scale and  A  Likert-type  d e s i g n e d t o measure i n t e n s i t y o f d e m o c r a t i c  a u t h o r i t a r i a n > a t t i t u d e s s h e l d "by.jparents  .  D e c r e a s i n g s c o r e s i n d i c a t e a c h a n g e t o w a r d more democratic a t t i t u d e s . 8.  Family Environment Scale  (FES): A 90-item  instru-  ment w h e r e t h e r e s p o n d e n t a n s w e r s e i t h e r t r u e o r f a l s e f o r each item. s c a l e was g i v e n  This  family  incongruence  to provide information  o n how  c l o s e l y f a m i l y members a g r e e d o n t h e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s  7 of the f a m i l y ' s s o c i a l m i l i e u . i n d i c a t e a change t o w a r d 9.  Parent-Adolescent  Decreasing  a more c o n g r u e n t  family.  Communication I n v e n t o r y  (Form P and A ) : A 4 0 - i t e m  scores  (PAC)  s c a l e to measure the  de-  gree of p a r e n t - a d o l e s c e n t communication i n f a m i l i e s . I n c r e a s i n g s c o r e s i n d i c a t e a change t o w a r d  more  communication. 10.  Walker Problem  Behaviour  (WPBIC): A 5 0 - i t e m  Identification  Checklist  c h e c k l i s t of the most f r e q u e n t l y  m e n t i o n e d n e g a t i v e "behaviour.  Decreasing  scores  i n d i c a t e a change t o w a r d more a p p r o p r i a t e "behaviour .  Data Base T h i s m u l t i - l e v e l e v a l u a t i o n o f t h e STEP P r o g r a m i n c l u d e d changes i n : 1.  Parental attitudes related  t o c h i l d - r e a r i n g as  c e i v e d by t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s a n d m e a s u r e d by  per-  the  A t t i t u d e s Toward C h i l d - R e a r i n g S c a l e . 2.  F a m i l y c l i m a t e as f o u n d e d u p o n i n f e r r e d by t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s , and  interaction  the t a r g e t c h i l d ,  and  m e a s u r e d by t h e F a m i l y E n v i r o n m e n t S c a l e . 3«  P a r e n t - a d o l e s c e n t c o m m u n i c a t i o n as p e r c e i v e d the p a r t i c i p a n t , Adolescent  and m e a s u r e d by t h e  Communication,Inventory.  Parent-  by  8 4.  P a r e n t - a d o l e s c e n t c o m m u n i c a t i o n as p e r c e i v e d t h e t a r g e t c h i l d and m e a s u r e d by t h e  by  Parent-  Adolescent Communication I n v e n t o r y . 5.  The  target c h i l d ' s behaviour  as i n f e r r e d by  the  p a r t i c i p a n t and m e a s u r e d by t h e A d l e r i a n P a r e n t a l Assessment of C h i l d Behaviour 6.  The  t a r g e t c h i l d ' s behaviour  Scale. a s i n f e r r e d by  t e a c h e r , and m e a s u r e d by t h e W a l k e r Behaviour This thesis erence  first  an  chapters plus a  ref-  appendix.  c h a p t e r p r o v i d e d an i n t r o d u c t i o n t o t h e  o f t h e s t u d y - d i s c u s s i o n g r o u p method o f p a r e n t Chapter  Problem  Checklist.  i s organized into f i v e  s e c t i o n and  The  Identification  the  I I p r o v i d e s an o v e r v i e w  history  education.  of l i t e r a t u r e  which  r e p o r t s the e f f e c t i v e n e s s of v a r i o u s s t u d y - d i s c u s s i o n groups u p o n t h e i r p a r t i c i p a n t s and  t h e i r c h i l d r e n , w i t h Chapter  III  d e s c r i b i n g the r e s e a r c h methodology. Chapter the f i n a l  IV summarizes the r e s u l t s  c h a p t e r i n v o l v e s a d i s c u s s i o n b a s e d on t h e  Titles  o f b o o k s and  STEP p r o g r a m and reference  of the study w h i l e  articles,  findings.  used i n the study of  the w r i t i n g of t h i s  the  t h e s i s , appear i n the  section.  Copies  o f l e t t e r s and m e a s u r e m e n t i n s t r u m e n t s u s e d i n  the s t u d y appear i n the  Appendix.  9 Chapter I I  REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE  The  p o t e n t i a l f o r h e l p i n g p a r e n t s by i n v o l v i n g them i n  g r o u p e x p e r i e n c e s and. p r o v i d i n g them w i t h  child-training  i n f o r m a t i o n , has i n f l u e n c e d b o t h e x p e r t s and i n f o r m e d l a y persons parent  t o develop programs i n e d u c a t i o n . education i s extensive.  The l i t e r a t u r e  Parent E f f e c t i v e n e s s Train-  i n g g r o u p s b a s e d o n G o r d o n ' s work e x i s t i n many (Gordon,  1970).  on  areas  The p h i l o s o p h y o f A l f r e d A d l e r h a s g a i n e d  p o p u l a r i t y through t h e w r i t i n g s o f D r e i k u r s and o t h e r s ( D i n k m e y e r a n d McKay, 1 9 7 3 ;  1964).  Study  g r o u p s have b e e n f o r m e d t o s t u d y A d l e r i a n p a r e n t - c h i l d  books.  D r e i k u r s and S o l t z ,  B e h a v i o u r a l m o d i f i c a t i o n programs and K r u m b o l t z ,  1972;  ( B e c k e r , 1971;  P a t t e r s o n and G u l l i o n ,  a c t i o n a l groups a r e a l s o p r e v a l e n t (James, The  Krumboltz  1968) a n d t r a n s 1974).  l i t e r a t u r e s e l e c t e d f o r r e v i e w was c h o s e n o n t h e  b a s i s o f i t s r e l e v a n c e t o the problem  a t hand: t h e e f f e c t o f  p a r e n t s t u d y - d i s c u s s i o n groups upon t h e i r p a r t i c i p a n t s and t h e i r c h i l d r e n w i t h s p e c i a l emphasis on A d l e r i a n based grams.  Following the review of the l i t e r a t u r e ,  i t was t h e  o p i n i o n o f t h i s r e s e a r c h e r t h a t much human e n e r g y focused i n the f i e l d emerged.  but very l i t t l e  pro-  has been  good r e s e a r c h h a s  10 Research  Studies  According to suffered  1959  Brim  studies  research  design.  p r i o r to I960,  (1959)  Dinkmeyer  through the  setting.  investigations e x p l o r e d the  process  up  ( F o r an the  to E d u c a t i o n f o r C h i l d R e a r i n g (Brim,  The f o l l o w i n g  ance  much o f t h e  from improper r e s e a r c h  sive review of r e l a t e d referred  (1959)»  of family  exten-  reader  1959)  is  )•  took place a f t e r  effects  to  1958.  of A d l e r i a n c h i l d  c o u n s e l l i n g i n an  He f o u n d no s i g n i f i c a n t i m p r o v e m e n t  in  guid-  audience  children's  behaviour. However, experience. the  the mothers  generally f e l t  Some o f t h e m o t h e r s  n e e d f o r some p r i v a t e  satisfied with  i n d i c a t e d that they  felt  T h e r e was no  evidence  t h a t A d l e r i a n c o u n s e l l i n g was e f f e c t i v e w i t h c e r t a i n  specific  areas of c h i l d  adjustment.  t h a t the mothers as m e a s u r e d  ental  by t h e i r  (1963)  attitudes  program.  at  attitudes  significant. changes parental  ability  of t h e i r  empathize w i t h t h e i r to observe  changes  children  in their  chil-  problems.  found s i g n i f i c a n t changes the  indicate  in certain  par-  conclusion of a parent c o u n s e l l i n g  He f o u n d no s i g n i f i c a n t i n t e r a c t i o n b e t w e e n  t e s t and t r e a t m e n t . parental  The e v i d e n c e d i d n o t  could better  dren's perceptions Haley  counselling.  their  pre-  Change i n c h i l d r e n ' s p e r c e p t i o n o f ( f a m i l y c o n t r o l of behaviour)  was  non-  A f o l l o w - u p a s s e s s m e n t r e v e a l e d no s i g n i f i c a n t  i n parental attitudes.  attitude  or c h i l d r e n ' s perceptions  of  11 An e x t e n s i v e  research  project  is  thoroughly  discussed  i n C h a n g i n g P a r e n t a l A t t i t u d e s t h r o u g h Group D i s c u s s i o n (Hereford,  1961).  experience  a t t i t u d i n a l changes  Would p a r e n t s a t t e n d i n g  ent-child relationship?  discussion  i n areas r e l a t e d  The r e s u l t s  groups  to the  showed t h a t t h e  par-  experi-  m e n t a l g r o u p made s i g n i f i c a n t , p o s i t i v e a t t i t u d i n a l  changes  as m e a s u r e d  1963).  "by t h e  Parent  A t t i t u d e Survey (Hereford,  One c o n t r o l g r o u p made up o f p a r e n t s a t t e n d i n g in a series  of lectures  professionals,  on p a r e n t - c h i l d r e l a t i o n s  was u s e d ,  The i n f o r m a t i o n a l component  topic.  the  f o r m a t was n o t  Some g r o u p s p r e f e r r e d  to set  g i v e n "by changes.  designed  topic for  their  clude t h a t the any i m p o r t a n c e , influential  was p r e s e n t e d .  nonprofessional "but t h e  to  the  own d i s c u s s i o n  V a l u a b l e "background m a t e r i a l and c o n t e m p o r a r y  i z a t i o n a l procedure  one  unstructured.  consisted of f i l m s  d i s c u s s i o n and p r o v i d e a g e n e r a l  sessions.  least  revealed s t a t i s t i c a l l y nonsignificant  A l t h o u g h no t e x t  stimulate  at  The i n v e s t i g a t o r s  organcon-  l e a d e r was n o t a f a c t o r  " d i s c u s s i o n m e t h o d " was t h e  of  crucial,  factor.  I n a f o l l o w - u p study o f an e x t e n s i v e p a r e n t c o u n s e l l i n g program,  Shaw a n d T u e l  ance and f a v o r a b l e parental  attitude  ( I 9 6 5 J . h y p o t h e s i z e d t h a t good  response changes.  Attitude Inventory,  would c o r r e l a t e The a u t h o r s u s e d  attend-  positively with the F a m i l y  Life  b u t f o u n d no s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t  correlation. In another and P e t t i t  study u s i n g the  (1966)  d i s c u s s i o n method,  o r g a n i z e d an eieven-week  Robinson  d i s c u s s i o n group  12 made up of parents graders.  ( a l l mothers) of underachieving  Would weekly s e s s i o n s f o c u s i n g on "modern methods"  of t e a c h i n g math and reading, ward t h e i r underachieving no  fourth  change p a r e n t a l a t t i t u d e s t o -  children?  The r e s e a r c h e r s  s i g n i f i c a n t changes i n p a r e n t a l a t t i t u d e s .  found  And although  there were changes i n the academic performance of the c h i l dren, the r e s u l t s were i n c o n c l u s i v e .  I t was suggested t h a t  f a t h e r s "be i n c l u d e d i n f u t u r e programs. Shaw and Rector  (1968)  reported  the r e s u l t s of a t h r e e -  year study t h a t d e a l t i n p a r t w i t h p a r e n t - d i s c u s s i o n f o c u s i n g on problems o f c h i l d development.  Parents of f i r s t  grade, seventh grade, and high s c h o o l students sections.  groups  made up three  Each s e c t i o n had i t s choice to e n r o l l i n a f o u r ,  e i g h t or twelve-week program. trained counsellors.  The s e s s i o n s were l e d by  Although the i n v e s t i g a t o r s r e p o r t a  f a v o r a b l e a t t i t u d e on the p a r t of the parents pated, an absence of data concerning  who p a r t i c i -  changes i n p a r e n t a l  a t t i t u d e s r e l a t e d to program e f f e c t i v e n e s s leaves the r e s u l t s inconclusive. from parents Kamali  The authors r e p o r t s a more f a v o r a b l e a t t e n d i n g the longer  (1969)  recorded  sessions.  the e f f e c t s a course i n v o l v i n g  A d l e r i a n p r i n c i p l e s had on p a r e n t a l a t t i t u d e s . indicated (1)  response  The r e s u l t s  that: females, w i t h the e x c e p t i o n  of mothers, seemed to  be more r e c e p t i v e to suggestions regarding  and new ideas  c h i l d - r e a r i n g than males;  13 (2)  m o t h e r s a p p e a r e d t o "be l e s s married  females without  o p e n t o new i d e a s  children or single  S w e n s o n (1970) s t u d i e d c h a n g e s i n p a r e n t a l  teachers,  c h i l d r e n ' s l e v e l o f a d j u s t m e n t as r a t e d by t h e i r  He c o m p a r e d a n A d l e r i a n p a r e n t lectic  film  variables.  females.  attitudes,  c h i l d r e n ' s a d a p t a t i o n t o s c h o o l a s r a t e d "by t h e i r and  than  parents.  d i s c u s s i o n group w i t h an e c -  d i s c u s s i o n group f o r t h e i r e f f e c t s on t h e above S w e n s o n f o u n d o n l y one s i g n i f i c a n t  change.  T e a c h e r s ' r a t i n g s o f one g r o u p o f p u p i l s i n t h e " m i d d l e of a d a p t a t i o n t o s c h o o l " i n d i c a t e d s i g n i f i c a n c e post a n a l y s i s .  The a u t h o r  p a t i o n i n a parent  concluded  that parental  partici-  r a t i n g s o f c h i l d r e n who  begin the school year w i t h a near average a n d B i e r m a n (1970) a s s e s s e d  b e h a v i o u r a l change i n p a r e n t s personal s k i l l s .  i n the pre to  d i s c u s s i o n g r o u p was a s s o c i a t e d w i t h a  s i g n i f i c a n t gain i n the teacher's  Carkhuff  level  Although  c h a n g e s i n how p a r e n t s  rating. a t t i t u d i n a l and  undergoing t r a i n i n g  t h e r e were s i g n i f i c a n t  i n interpositive  perceived the p a r e n t - c h i l d r e l a t i o n -  s h i p a t home, c h a n g e s i n p a r e n t s '  f u n c t i o n i n g were n o t  significant. Eastlack  (1970) compared t h e r e s p o n s e s o f a  parent  s t u d y g r o u p u s i n g D r e i k u r s a n d S o l t z ' s C h i l d r e n : The Challenge  (1964) a n d a n e x p e r i m e n t a l  Family Education naire.  Center,  g r o u p who a t t e n d e d  a  using a parental practises question-  The c o n c l u s i o n s r e a c h e d  were:  14 (1)  t h e r e was a s i g n i f i c a n t change b e h a v i o u r among p e o p l e a f t e r  (2)  Center;  the major  c a t e g o r i z a t i o n of parental  c o u n s e l l i n g was a u t h o r i t a r i a n ,  counselling,  of p r a c t i c a l  democratic the  Family  practices and  after  l e a r n e d the A d l e r i a n p r i n c i p l e s  parenting.  (1971) e x p l o r e d t h e  effects  of A d l e r i a n  l i n g and c o n s u l t a t i o n w i t h c h i l d r e n , t e a c h e r s ,  counsel-  and p a r e n t s  o n b e h a v i o u r change  i n c h i l d r e n as p e r c e i v e d b y t h e i r  ents and t e a c h e r s .  The c h i l d r e n o f t h e  met i n c o u n s e l l i n g g r o u p s  experimental  once a week, w h i l e the  also received i n d i v i d u a l consultations of classroom discussions.  or viewed  The p a r e n t g r o u p  consisted of a combination of viewing family demonstrations  the p l a c e b o group, sellor  to  the  changes  or study.  counsellor.  i n a l l c h i l d r e n of the  by t h e i r p a r e n t s .  teachers  demonstraexperience  readings.  a c o n t r o l group.  In  T h e r e was m i n i m a l  The s t u d y r e v e a l e d  e x p e r i m e n t a l g r o u p as  The t e a c h e r s r a t e d  as s h o w i n g i m p r o v e m e n t .  The  c h i l d r e n met o n c e a week w i t h a c o u n -  l i s t e n to records  i n t e r a c t i o n w i t h the  group,  counselling  and d i s c u s s i n g t o p i c s from a s s i g n e d  P i a t t u s e d a p l a c e b o g r o u p as w e l l as  par-  teachers  and p a r e n t s met i n s e p a r a t e c o n s u l t a t i o n g r o u p s .  tions  be-  democratic;  the p a r t i c i p a n t s  Piatt  attending  Education  fore  (3)  toward  a l l but  positive rated  two c h i l d r e n  The b e h a v i o u r o f m o s t o f  the  1 c h i l d r e n i n the p l a c e b o and c o n t r o l groups was  r a t e d "by  t e a c h e r s and p a r e n t s as r e m a i n i n g about the same o r d e t e r i orating . Steed  (1971)  s t u d i e d 18 f a m i l i e s who  volunteered f o r  c o u n s e l l i n g a t a Community P a r e n t - T e a c h e r - C o u n s e l l o r i n Arizona.  Center  Steed a s s e s s e d the u s e f u l n e s s of A d l e r i a n F a m i l y  c o u n s e l l i n g i n m o d i f y i n g the f a m i l i e s ' i n t e r a c t i o n a l p r o c e s s . Ten f a m i l i e s p a r t i c i p a t e d i n the c o u n s e l l i n g and e i g h t f a m i l i e s were asked t o w a i t f o r 5 weeks t o b e g i n t h e i r c o u n s e l l i n g and comprised  a " w a i t i n g f o r t r e a t m e n t " c o n t r o l group.  Both groups were p r e t e s t e d and p o s t t e s t e d w i t h a m o d i f i e d form of F a r b e r ' s Index of M a r i t a l I n t e g r a t i o n .  Steed  hypoth-  e s i z e d t h a t e x p e r i m e n t a l f a m i l i e s would show more p o s i t i v e a t t i t u d e s toward themselves,  each o t h e r and t h e i r  children;  and t h a t c h i l d r e n would show more p o s i t i v e a t t i t u d e s themselves, t h e i r p a r e n t s and t h e i r  toward  siblings.  I n s p e c t i o n o f the d a t a i n d i c a t e d t h a t many changes had t a k e n p l a c e i n the c o u n s e l l i n g group but none o f hypotheses  were s t a t i s t i c a l l y s u p p o r t e d .  Steed's  The p r o c e s s of  A d l e r i a n p a r e n t e d u c a t i o n , S t e e d suggested,  sometimes i n -  v o l v e s a p e r i o d o f r e g r e s s i o n b e f o r e p o s i t i v e changes o c c u r . He a l s o suggested  t h a t w h i l e many changes were p o s i t i v e ,  enough r e g r e s s i v e changes o c c u r r e d t o c a n c e l out the p o s i tive variations. Santilli  (1973) compared the r e s u l t s of 14  weekly s e s s i o n s o f two groups of p a r e n t s who  four-hour  r e p o r t e d emotion  a l problems i n v o l v i n g the p a r e n t - c h i l d r e l a t i o n s h i p  groups.  16  The groups were l e d by p r o f e s s i o n a l s . human i n t e r a c t i o n were measured.  S e v e r a l f a c e t s of  Of p a r t i c u l a r i n t e r e s t t o  t h i s s t u d y were the i n t e r p e r s o n a l p r o c e s s measures between p a r e n t and  child.  The r e s u l t s showed a s i g n i f i c a n t i n c r e a s e between p r e t e s t and p o s t t e s t f o r b o t h groups i n empathetic i n g and communicated r e s p e c t .  A l t h o u g h the Sunday group  e x p e r i e n c e d more change, the d i f f e r e n c e was I n a s t u d y t o determine  understand-  not  significant.  the e f f e c t s of an A d l e r i a n p a r -  ent s t u d y group used i n c o m b i n a t i o n w i t h s p e c i a l r e a d i n g i n s t r u c t i o n f o r p u p i l s w i t h s e v e r a l r e a d i n g and problems,  adjustment  Runyan (1973) found t h a t t h e r e were p o s i t i v e  changes i n the e x p e r i m e n t a l group i n p a r e n t a l a t t i t u d e s , and c h i l d r e n ' s b e h a v i o u r as r a t e d by p a r e n t s and t e a c h e r s . The d i f f e r e n c e s were not s i g n i f i c a n t between the e x p e r i m e n t a l and c o n t r o l groups on the p o s t t e s t .  No changes i n l o c u s of  c o n t r o l o f a t h e c h i l d r e n were found.  The a u t h o r  concluded  t h a t l o c u s of c o n t r o l change would r e q u i r e a l o n g e r t r e a t ment p e r i o d . B e r r e t t ( 1 9 7 3 ) s t u d i e d the e f f e c t s of an A d l e r i a n p a r ent s t u d y group on feathers* a t t i t u d e s , c h i l d - r e a r i n g p r a c t i c e s , and p e r c e p t i o n on t h e i r c h i l d r e n ' s b e h a v i o u r . s u b j e c t s i n c l u d e d mothers of b o t h h e a r i n g i m p a i r e d and hearing impaired c h i l d r e n .  The mothers who  The non-  participated i n  the groups o b t a i n e d a s c o r e on the a t t i t u d e assessment w h i c h i n d i c a t e d they e x p r e s s e d a more l i b e r a l a t t i t u d e toward  their  c h i l d r e n t h a n the mothers who-had not y e t e x p e r i e n c e d a group.  ,17  The p a r e n t group mothers a l s o showed changes i n c h i l d - r e a r ing p r a c t i c e s .  The h e a r i n g i m p a i r e d c h i l d r e n o f the mothers  who a t t e n d e d a s t u d y group d i s p l a y e d a lower o c c u r r e n c e o f n e g a t i v e b e h a v i o u r s than t h e c h i l d r e n o f mothers who had n o t y e t a t t e n d e d t h e group.  Concerning the nonhearing impaired  c h i l d r e n , o n l y t h e c h i l d r e n o f t h e mothers who were p r e t e s t ed and t h e n e x p e r i e n c e d t r e a t m e n t , were r a t e d as d i s p l a y i n g a lower o c c u r r e n c e of n e g a t i v e b e h a v i o u r .  The p a r e n t s were  a l s o asked t o i n d i c a t e i f t h e i r c h i l d ' s b e h a v i o u r them.  bothered  The p a r e n t s who p a r t i c i p a t e d i n t h e s t u d y group r e -  p o r t e d fewer o c c u r r e n c e s o f c h i l d r e n ' s bothersome b e h a v i o u r than t h e p a r e n t s o f the c o n t r o l group.  The i n v e s t i g a t o r  concluded t h a t t h e A d l e r i a n t h e o r y o f p a r e n t - c h i l d  relation-  s h i p s , w h i c h emphasizes i n d i v i d u a l r e s p o n s i b i l i t y and democ r a t i c l i v i n g has s i g n i f i c a n t v a l u e i n today's w o r l d . I n t h e W a l t e r and Gilmore  ( 1 9 7 3 )  s t u d y , t w e l v e con-  s e c u t i v e r e f e r r a l s were randomly a s s i g n e d t o e i t h e r a p l a c e b o or ah e x p e r i m e n t a l group.  F a m i l i e s i n t h e e x p e r i m e n t a l group  r e c e i v e d f o u r weeks o f p a r e n t t r a i n i n g .  Parents i n the  placebo group met f o r an e q u a l number o f weekly  meetings  and d i s c u s s e d audio tapes w h i c h t h e y had p r e v i o u s l y made c o n c e r n i n g t h e i r c h i l d r e n ' s problems.  There were n o n s i g n i f -  icant increases i n rates of targeted deviant c h i l d behaviour. However, f o u r p a r e n t s i n d i c a t e d i n t h e i r g l o b a l e v a l u a t i o n s t h a t t h e i r c h i l d had improved.  A comparable a n a l y s i s f o r  the e x p e r i m e n t a l group showed a s i g n i f i c a n t decrease i n r a t e s i n b e h a v i o u r - - t h e g l o b a l r a t e s showed a l l s i x p a r e n t s  18  thought t h e i r c h i l d had improved.  Parents i n "both groups  r a t e d t h e i r c o n f i d e n c e i n the treatment procedures before and a f t e r each s e s s i o n .  T h e i r r a t i n g s showed no  differences  between groups, nor were there changes over time. Laine  (197^0  s t u d i e d the impact  of a D r e i k u r s parent  study group on p a r e n t a l a t t i t u d e s toward t h e i r i n t e r a c t i o n w i t h the s c h o o l .  s c h o o l as w e l l as  The r e s u l t s of h i s study  i n d i c a t e d that p a r e n t a l a t t i t u d e s d i d not change but t h a t t h e i r i n t e n t i o n s toward more p o s i t i v e .  i n t e r a c t i n g w i t h the s c h o o l were  However, the a c t u a l t r a n s l a t i o n of i n t e n t -  ions i n t o behaviour was  not s t u d i e d .  The W i l t z and P a t t e r s o n  (1974)  study showed that  five  weeks of parent t r a i n i n g i n the " s t a n d a r d i z e d program" p r o duced s i g n i f i c a n t decreases i n observed r a t e of d e v i a n t c h i l d behaviour.  On the other hand, the s i x ' w a i t i n g l i s t '  c o n t r o l f a m i l i e s , observed a f t e r a comparable p e r i o d of time, showed no change. I n a study of p a r e n t a l d i s c i p l i n a r i a n a t t i t u d e and p r o t e c t i v e n e s s , Mahoney  (1975)  over-  s t u d i e d the i n f l u e n c e of a  Parent-Teacher E d u c a t i o n Center on p a r e n t and teacher a t t i tudes toward a d u l t - c h i l d r e l a t i o n s , and t h e i r p e r c e p t i o n s and behaviour change i n the c h i l d w i t h whom they were most concerned.  The ten-week treatment s e r i e s c o n s i s t e d of t h r e e  segments: a parent d i s c u s s i o n group,  a family  counselling  demonstration viewed by a l l p a r t i c i p a n t s , and a d i s c u s s i o n group f o r t e a c h e r s .  The instruments were a d m i n i s t e r e d  before and a f t e r treatment.  A n a l y s i s of the pre and  posttest  19 scores of the attitude instrument revealed that the p a r t i c i pants were s i g n i f i c a n t l y less overprotective and less overindulgent.  There were no s i g n i f i c a n t changes i n the accept-  ance and r e j e c t i o n scales.  The participants' perceptions of  c h i l d behaviour also showed s i g n i f i c a n t changes i n s e l f , s o c i a l , school, home and t o t a l adjustment.  The attitude  study was replicated with d i f f e r e n t populations during two subsequent  series.  The f i r s t r e p l i c a t i o n yielded the same  results as the i n i t i a l study.  The second r e p l i c a t i o n showed  s i g n i f i c a n t p o s i t i v e changes i n a l l four attitudes. F  F r a z i e r and Matthes  (1975)  compared Adlerian and be-  havioural approaches used i n parent education programs.  The  purpose of their study was to assess the effects of parent education programs based on the Adlerian and behavioural models r e l a t i v e to each other and a control group.  Results  suggest that parent education programs do have an impact on parente! ideas, but not, apparently on the behaviour of the children of the parents involved. De Laurier  (1975)  investigated the effect of Adlerian  parent study group p a r t i c i p a t i o n on children's reading achievement and classroom behaviour, and on parents' a t t i tudes toward child-reading.  The purpose of the parent study  sessions was to a s s i s t the parents i n learning and use of democratic child-rearing practices as presented i n Rudolf Dreikurs'  (1964)  Children: The Challenge.  It was hypothesized that there would be s i g n i f i c a n t differences i n favor of the study group on the Metropolitan  20 Elementary Reading Test, the Walker Behaviour I d e n t i f i c a t i o n Checklist and the Attitude Toward the Freedom of Children-Scale I I .  Results were such that the hypothesis could not  be accepted.  There were no s i g n i f i c a n t changes i n favor of  the study group.  Children whose parents participated i n the  Adlerian parent study group did not show s i g n i f i c a n t  improve-  ment i n reading achievement or class behaviour, as compared with the control groups.  While verbal reaction of parents  to the Adlerian parent study group program was generally positive, there was no s t a t i s t i c a l evidence of change i n attitudes toward  child-rearing.  i... Nordal (1976)  studied the effects of Adlerian parent  t r a i n i n g on r a t i o n a l self-esteem and child-rearing attitudes, and on the learner self-concept and home and school behaviour of the preschool c h i l d .  Parent t r a i n i n g f o r the mothers  i n the experimental groups was of a five-week duration with one two-hour session weekly.  A l l mothers completed the  Tennessee Self-Concept Scale and noted t h e i r children on the Anderson Behaviour Rating Scale.  The Mother-Child  Relationship Evaluation was completed by a l l mothers. A l l children were rated f o r learner self-concept on the F l o r i d a Kay and f o r behaviour on the Anderson Behaviour Rating Scale by the teacher and t h e i r home v i s i t o r . The findings of this study seemed to indicate that Adlerian parent t r a i n i n g does r e s u l t i n positive changes i n child-rearing attitudes and improves c h i l d behaviour at home.  However, the treatment did not s i g n i f i c a n t l y a l t e r  21  the  l e a r n e r s e l f - c o n c e p t , home behaviour, or s c h o o l behav-  i o u r of the p r e s c h o o l c h i l d . The Goula Study  (1976) attempted to evaluate the  effect  of an A d l e r i a n parent study group w i t h a communication  train-  i n g component and one without a communication  com-  ponent r e l a t i v e group.  training  to each other and to a no treatment c o n t r o l  The A d l e r i a n P a r e n t a l Assessment  S c a l e developed by McKay was  of C h i l d  Behaviour  used to measure the mothers'  p e r c e p t i o n of the behaviour of t h e i r  identified  c h i l d and the  M o t h e r - C h i l d I n t e r a c t i o n E x e r c i s e , developed by Goula and McKay, was  used to measure the number of f a c i l i t a t i n g  nonfacilitating fied  statements made by mothers of t h e i r  and  identi-  child. The r e s u l t s  of the study i n d i c a t e d no s i g n i f i c a n t  dif-  f e r e n c e s among the groups i n the mothers' p e r c e p t i o n of the behaviour of t h e i r i d e n t i f i e d  child.  There were no  signifi-  cant d i f f e r e n c e s among the groups i n the number of mothers' f a c i l i t a t i n g statements made to t h e i r Finally,  t h e r e were no s i g n i f i c a n t  groups i n the number of mothers' made to t h e i r Noble effects  identified  identified  child.  d i f f e r e n c e s among the  nonfacilitating  statements  child.  (1976) attempted to determine the d i f f e r e n t i a l  of two s y s t e m a t i c approaches to e d u c a t i n g p a r e n t s ,  Parent E f f e c t i v e n e s s T r a i n i n g and A d l e r i a n Parent  Groups.  C h i l d - r e a r i n g a t t i t u d e s as measured by the P a r e n t a l A t t i t u d e Research Instrument, were the c r i t e r i o n  variable.  22 R e s u l t s i n d i c a t e d no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e between the two  experimental treatments.  N e i t h e r group of parents chang-  ed s i g n i f i c a n t l y t h e i r awareness of t h e i r c h i l d r e n ' s  emotional  needs, or t h e i r encouragement of p a r e n t - c h i l d  communications,  as measured by the P a r e n t a l A t t i t u d e Research  Instrument.  Fears ( 1 9 ? 6 )  conducted  t i o n of 100 p a r e n t s who i n -Largo, F l o r i d a .  a p r e t e s t and p o s t t e s t e v a l u a -  attended A d l e r i a n parent study groups  She reported t h a t parents see p o s i t i v e  changes i n t h e i r c h i l d r e n ' s behaviour as a r e s u l t of u s i n g A d l e r i a n c h i l d - r e a r i n g p r a c t i c e s i n the home.  Fear f u r t h e r  r e p o r t s a decrease i n the number of s c h o o l c o u n s e l l i n g cases r e f e r r e d d u r i n g the f o l l o w i n g s c h o o l y e a r .  I t was  to assess whether the. parent e d u c a t i o n program was  impossible respons-  i b l e f o r t h i s trend* McKay (1976) s t u d i e d whether parent p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n a STEP group r e s u l t e d i n measurable change i n the mother's r a t i n g s of the behaviour of the c h i l d r e n w i t h whom>they were most concerned,  and changes i n the observed v e r b a l behaviour  of the mothers.  The r e s u l t s i n d i c a t e d t h a t p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n  a STEP group does change the mother's p e r c e p t i o n of her t a r get c h i l d ' s behaviour STEP group viewed  ( i . e . , mothers who  p a r t i c i p a t e d i n the  t h e i r t a r g e t c h i l d ' s behaviour i n a s i g n i -  f i c a n t l y more p o s i t i v e way).  Changes i n the v e r b a l behav-  i o u r of the mothers were not s i g n i f i c a n t .  I t appears  t h i s study i s one of the few which shewed s i g n i f i c a n t i n mother's p e r c e p t i o n s of c h i l d r e n ' s behaviour  as i f changes  resulting  from p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n an A d l e r i a n based parent study  group.  23  There was no assessment o f a c t u a l changes i n c h i l d r e n ' s behaviour.  Only t h e p e r c e p t i o n s  o f the mothers  t h e i r t a r g e t c h i l d were i n v e s t i g a t e d . "be t e s t e d w i t h d i f f e r e n t p o p u l a t i o n s c o u p l e s , and p a r e n t s o f t e e n a g e r s . between p a r e n t s '  perceptions  regarding  The program s h o u l d such as f a t h e r s and  Also, the r e l a t i o n s h i p  of t h e i r c h i l d r e n ' s behaviour  and u n b i a s e d o b s e r v e r s ' r a t i n g s o f t h e c h i l d r e n ' s b e h a v i o u r s h o u l d be i n v e s t i g a t e d .  I n a d d i t i o n , the parents'  c o u l d be observed and r a t e d .  behaviour  I t i s a l s o f e l t t h a t i t would  be v a l u a b l e , t o i n v e s t i g a t e t h e e f f e c t s o f STEP.where p r e and p o s t t e s t i n g were conducted w i t h p a r e n t s who were.not- aware that research  was-being conducted.  Statement o f t h e Hypotheses S p e c i f i c a l l y , t h i s s t u d y i n v e s t i g a t e d the f o l l o w i n g hypotheses, s t a t e d i n t h e n u l l form: 1.  There w i l l be no s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t ( ©< = .01) d i f f e r e n c e i n t h e mean r a t i n g o f a t t i t u d e s toward c h i l d - r e a r i n g between  subjects  p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n STEP and those n o t p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n t h e program as measured by t h e A t t i t u d e s Toward Child-Rearing 2.  Scale.  There w i l l be no s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t ( ©< = .01) d i f f e r e n c e i n t h e mean r a t i n g o f t h e f a m i l y environment between s u b j e c t s p a r t i c i p a t i n g  i n STEP and those not p a r t i c i p a t i n g  i n the program  as measured by the Family Environment S c a l e  (Moos,  1974(). 3.  There w i l l be no s t a t i s t i c a l l y ( 0 < = .01)  difference  significant  i n the mean r a t i n g o f par-  ent-adolescent communication between participating  i n the program as measured by the  Parent-Adolescent Communication Form P (Bienvenu, 4.  .01)  Inventory,  1967).  There w i l l be no s t a t i s t i c a l l y ( =  subjects  difference  significant  i n the mean r a t i n g o f  p a r e n t - a d o l e s c e n t communication between the t a r g e t c h i l d o f the p a r t i c i p a n t s  of STEP and the t a r g e t  c h i l d o f the c o n t r o l group as measured by t h e Parent-Adolescent Communication Form A (Bienvenu, 5.  1967).  There w i l l be no s t a t i s t i c a l l y (  = .01)  Inventory,  difference  significant  i n the mean r a t i n g o f c h i l d  behaviour between s u b j e c t s p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n STEP and those not p a r t i c i p a t i n g measured by the A d l e r i a n C h i l d Behaviour S c a l e 6.  i n the program as  P a r e n t a l Assessment of  (McKay,  There w i l l be no s t a t i s t i c a l l y ( 0<- = .01)  difference  1976). significant  i n the mean r a t i n g o f  25 child  b e h a v i o u r between t h e t a r g e t c h i l d  participants c o n t r o l group  o f STEP a n d t h e t a r g e t c h i l d as m e a s u r e d b y t h e W a l k e r  Behaviour I d e n t i f i c a t i o n  Checklist  of the of the Problem  (Walker,  1976).  26 Chapter I I I  METHODOLOGY  T h i s chapter w i l l he concerned w i t h the procedures i n volved i n t e s t i n g the hypotheses  f o r t h i s study.  Sampling  procedures, d e s c r i p t i o n of instruments, the r e s e a r c h d e s i g n , r e s e a r c h and treatment procedures, methods of measurement and the a n a l y s i s of data are d i s c u s s e d .  Population The p o p u l a t i o n f o r t h i s study was d e f i n e d as parents of c h i l d r e n who are a t t e n d i n g grade 8 a t a secondary B r i t i s h Columbia  school i n  and who v o l u n t e e r f o r parent e d u c a t i o n p r o -  grams such as STEP.  Sample and Assignment of S u b j e c t s to Groups The  sample f o r the p r e s e n t study c o n s i s t e d of parents  of grade 8 students a t t e n d i n g Alpha Secondary  School who were  w i l l i n g t o p a r t i c i p a t e i n the STEP program. A l e t t e r announcing  the f o r m a t i o n of a STEP group was  sent t o a l l parents of grade 8 students a t t e n d i n g Alpha Secondary  School (Appendix A ) .  Parents were o f f e r e d the  o p t i o n of e n r o l l i n g ihethe STEP group immediately i n g up f o r a group a t a l a t e r  date.  or of s i g n -  27 The  sample c o n s i s t e d of two  equal s i z e d groups;  p e r i m e n t a l group and a c o n t r o l group. group was  comprised  of parents who  The  an  ex-  experimental  p a r t i c i p a t e d i n the  STEP program at t h a t time and the c o n t r o l group were those parents who  v o l u n t e e r e d f o r the program as w e l l but were  un-  able to p a r t i c i p a t e at that time, but would a t the next session.  In order to form two  equal s i z e d groups,  two  par-  ents were a s s i g n e d to the c o n t r o l group through c o u n s e l l o r referral.  These parents had  indicated during a previous  c o u n s e l l o r - p a r e n t i n t e r v i e w t h a t they would be  interested  i n p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n a parent e d u c a t i o n group but had not completed  a response  to the l e t t e r sent to them.  were contacted by telephone and asked pate a t a l a t e r date.  Two  The  parents  i f they would p a r t i c i -  of f o u r parents contacted r e -  sponded f a v o r a b l y and were assigned to the c o n t r o l  group.  Both the experimental group and the c o n t r o l group contained eleven s u b j e c t s each.  A l l e l e v e n i n d i v i d u a l s a s s i g n e d to  the experimental group attended at l e a s t e i g h t of the t e n s e s s i o n s of the STEP program.  Of the e l e v e n i n d i v i d u a l s  assigned to the c o n t r o l group,  a l l e l e v e n p r o v i d e d data t h a t  was  usable.  The p a r t i c i p a t i n g s u b j e c t s were t o l d the  mation they p r o v i d e d would a s s i s t to improve the program and any program o f f e r e d i n the f u t u r e . The parents s e l e c t e d f o r t h i s (1)  study,  r e s i d e d i n the Burnaby S c h o o l D i s t r i c t ,  infor-  existing  28  (2)  had a c h i l d p r e s e n t l y a t t e n d i n g grade Secondary  School about whom they expressed a de-  s i r e to improve t h e i r r e l a t i o n s h i p , (3)  8 a t Alpha  and  attended a t l e a s t e i g h t of the t e n treatment sessions.  D e s c r i p t i o n of  Instruments  The measuring  instruments used i n t h i s study were the  A d l e r i a n P a r e n t a l Assessment of C h i l d Behaviour S c a l e (McKay,  1976), the A t t i t u d e s Toward C h i l d Rearing S c a l e (Croake and Hinkle,  1975)> the Family Environment S c a l e — F o r m R (Moos,  1974), the Parent-Adolescent Communication Inventory (B'ievenu, I 9 6 7 ) , and the Walker Problem Behaviour Checklist  (Walker,  Identification  1967).  These instruments p r o v i d e d measurements of the t a r g e t c h i l d ' s behaviour, the p a r t i c i p a n t s ' c h i l d r e a r i n g p r a c t i c e s , the s o c i a l c l i m a t e of the p a r t i c i p a n t s ' f a m i l i e s , and  the  process of communication between p a r t i c i p a n t and t a r g e t as an element of s o c i a l  child  interaction.  A d l e r i a n P a r e n t a l Assessment of C h i l d Behaviour S c a l e . The A d l e r i a n P a r e n t a l Assessment of C h i l d S c a l e designed by McKay  Behaviour  (1976), assesses p a r e n t s ' p e r -  c e p t i o n s of t h e i r c h i l d ' s behaviour.  I t i s a thirty-two  item, seven p o i n t , L i k e r t - t y p e r a t i n g s c a l e i n t e r v a l ) to t e s t f o r change i n s p e c i f i c  (quasi-  behaviours  29 which are d e a l t w i t h i n STEP. to  r a t e each behaviour  "Never" (Appendix B). i b l e c h i l d behaviours  P a r t i c i p a n t s are asked  on a continuum from "Always" t o Both r e s p o n s i b l e and i r r e s p o n s are r e p r e s e n t e d  r e l i a b i l i t y t e s t of the instrument McKay's r e s e a r c h p r o j e c t (Cronbach, 1951) from  .81 to .89.  (1976).  A  was conducted d u r i n g The Cronbach's a l p h a  t e s t f o r i n t e r n a l c o n s i s t e n c y ranged The Pearson r - t e s t f o r s t a b i l i t y  time y i e l d e d a c o e f f i c i e n t of  L i k e r t - t y p e s c a l e , designed  over  .83.  A t t i t u d e s Toward C h i l d - R e a r i n g S c a l e .  to  i n the items.  The t e s t i s a  by Croake and H i n k l e  (1976),  which a parent must respond by checking one of the  f o l l o w i n g f o r each item:  agree,  s t r o n g l y agree, un-  decided, d i s a g r e e , s t r o n g l y d i s a g r e e  (Appendix C ) .  The  s c a l e was c o n s t r u c t e d u s i n g 86 statements s e l e c t e d from Adlerian literature. m i t t e d to 500  people  These statements were then subrepresenting a cross-section of  p o p u l a t i o n and the f o r t y most v a r i a b l e o b s e r v a t i o n s were s e l e c t e d f o r the f i n a l s c a l e .  The statements were con-  s t r u c t e d to measure the i n t e n s i t y of democratic and a u t h o r i t a r i a n a t t i t u d e s h e l d by p a r e n t s . Concurrent to  v a l i d i t y c o e f f i c i e n t s ranging from  .5^  .86 were determined by c o r r e l a t i n g the s c o r e s on the  A t t i t u d e s Toward C h i l d - R e a r i n g S c a l e with the A t t i t u d e s Toward the Freedom of C h i l d r en (Freeman, claims to measure the same c o n s t r u c t .  1975)>  which  30  Family Environment S c a l e .  The F a m i l y Environment  was designed by Moos ( 1 9 7 ^ ) t e n subscale  and c o n s i s t s of a  Scale  90-item,  instrument where the respondent answers  e i t h e r true or f a l s e to each item  (Appendix D ) .  developed to assess the s o c i a l c l i m a t e  I t was  of f a m i l i e s and  c o u l d be used to compare parent and c h i l d  perceptions.  I t focuses on the measurement and d e s c r i p t i o n of the i n t e r p e r s o n a l r e l a t i o n s h i p s among f a m i l y members, on the d i r e c t i o n s of personal  growth emphasized w i t h i n the  f a m i l y , and on the b a s i c the f a m i l y .  o r g a n i z a t i o n a l s t r u c t u r e of  The Family Environment Scale  the f o l l o w i n g t e n s u b s c a l e s :  consists of  Cohesion, E x p r e s s i v e n e s s ,  C o n f l i c t , Independence, Achievement O r i e n t a t i o n , l e c t u a l Cultural Orientation, Active  Intel-  Recreational  O r i e n t a t i o n , Moral R e l i g i o u s Emphasis, O r g a n i z a t i o n and Control.  The subscales*  internal consistencies,  using  the Kuder-Richardson Formula 2 0 , were a l l i n the a c c e p t able range v a r y i n g from a low of .64 f o r Independence to a high of . 7 9 f o r Moral R e l i g i o u s Emphasis. test-retest r e l i a b i l i t i e s acceptable of  of i n d i v i d u a l scores  The are a l l  from a low of .68 f o r Independence to a h i g h  .86 f o r Cohesiveness.  g i v e n to p r o v i d e  A family  information  incongruence s c a l e i s  on how c l o s e l y members i n  a f a m i l y agree on the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the f a m i l y ' s social milieu.  31 Parent-Adolescent A).  Communication Inventory  The Parent-Adolescent  developed  (Forms P and  Communication Inventory was  by Bienvenu ( 1 9 6 9 ) to measure the degree of  parent-adolescent  communication i n f a m i l i e s .  I t i s not  intended to measure content of communication, but to i d e n t i f y patterns, characteristics,  and s t y l e s of com-  munication.  type of device i n  I t i s a self-inventory  which the s u b j e c t s respond of three p o s s i b i l i t i e s :  to each item by checking one  "usually,"  "seldom" (Appendix E and F().  "sometimes," and  The responses, to the items  are scored from zero to three w i t h a f a v o r a b l e g i v e n the higher s c o r e . "sometimes" response  response  I t should be noted t h a t a  when i n d i c a t i v e  of a f a v o r a b l e a t t i -  tude or answer i s g i v e n a weight of two where-as when s u g g e s t i n g an unfavorable a t t i t u d e one.  g i v e n a weight of  The h i g h e r the t o t a l s c o r e , the h i g h e r the l e v e l  of p a r e n t - a d o l e s c e n t for individuals  communication.  I t i s best  suited  of h i g h s c h o o l age and i t r e l a t e s  to the i n d i v i d u a l and to h i s i n t e r a c t i o n w i t h  solely  other  individuals. Three r e l i a b i l i t y present f o r t y - i t e m  s t u d i e s were conducted  inventory.  The Spearman-Brown f o r -  mula r e v e a l e d a c o e f f i c i e n t of . 8 6 . Rho,  w i t h the  Using the Spearman  a t e s t - r e t e s t study r e v e a l e d a . 7 8 c o r r e l a t i o n co-  efficient.  A second t e s t - r e t e s t r e l i a b i l i t y  showed an r of . 8 8 .  study  32 Walker Problem Behaviour I d e n t i f i c a t i o n .Checklist.  The  Walker Problem Behaviour I d e n t i f i c a t i o n C h e c k l i s t ed by Walker ( 1 9 7 6 ) , c o n s i s t s haviours t h a t  of items t h a t  describe  The  teacher i s regarded  the most q u a l i f i e d r a t e r u s i n g the  checklist  i d e n t i f y i n g c h i l d r e n w i t h behaviour problems. from the  children's  parents, however, can  f o r purposes of comparative The  checklist consists  be  on Ratings  obtained  analysis. of f i f t y of the most f r e -  quently mentioned negative behaviours  (Appendix G),  in  a p o o l of three hundred items from a random sample t h i r t y experienced The by  r e l i a b i l i t y of the  t e s t - r e t e s t method.  The  e f f i c i e n t obtained on the Two  c h e c k l i s t has  been estimated by  split-half reliability c h e c k l i s t was  estimates of the  .98  test-retest  Bull  c o e f f i c i e n t of  (197*0  (1970), .80  sample and  .81  co-  s t a b i l i t y have  showed an o v e r a l l  in  .89  1970.  test-retest  f o r a three week i n t e r v a l .  showed a s t a b i l i t y c o e f f i c i e n t of  the  (Walker,  been o b t a i n e d s i n c e i t s o r i g i n a l p u b l i c a t i o n Walker and  of  teachers.  the Kuder-Richardson s p l i t - h a l f method and  1970).  be-  i n t e r f e r e or a c t i v e l y compete w i t h suc-  c e s s f u l academic performance. as  design-  Bolstad for  one  f o r another sample w i t h i n a four-week  period. The  c h e c k l i s t provides a d e t a i l e d  description  of  behaviour through a f a c t o r i a l p r o f i l e which i n c l u d e s  a c t i n g - o u t , withdrawal, r e l a t i o n s and  Research  distractability,  d i s t u r b e d peer  immaturity.  Design  The r e s e a r c h d e s i g n used i n t h i s study was P o s t t e s t C o n t r o l Group Design  a Pretest-  (Campbell and S t a n l e y , 1 9 6 6 ) .  The treatment group and the c o n t r o l group had an equal number of s u b j e c t s , e l e v e n .  I n t h i s experimental i n v e s t i g a t i o n ,  f o l l o w i n g nonrandomized c o n t r o l group, s i g n was  pretest-posttest  de-  established:  Experimental group  0^  C o n t r o l group  0^  X  0^ 0^  0^ - Dependent v a r i a b l e measures before 0^ - Dependent v a r i a b l e measures a f t e r X  the  - Independent v a r i a b l e  treatment treatment  (treatment)  S i n c e the experimental group and the c o n t r o l group were not a s s i g n e d a t random but v o l u n t e e r e d f o r the STEP program, i t was  not c e r t a i n that both groups were e q u i v a l e n t .  fore, a s t a t i s t i c a l  a n a l y s i s was  verify their statistical In  There-  done on the p r e t e s t s to  equivalence .on the dependent v a r i a b l e  the use of v o l u n t e e r s f o r the experimental  group,  the p o s s i b i l i t y of contamination of p o s t t e s t data due e f f e c t s of s e l e c t i o n and t e s t i n g d i d e x i s t .  to the  That i s , d i d  the v o l u n t e e r experimental group c a r r y some c r i t i c a l ence t h a t would not be r e f l e c t e d i n the p r e t e s t ?  differ-  And c o u l d  3^  t h i s d i f f e r e n c e , r a t h e r than the treatment,  account f o r d i f -  ferences i n the p o s t t e s t ? I t was f e l t t h a t the j e o p a r d i z i n g f a c t o r of s e l e c t i o n and t e s t i n g i s minimized i n g a c o n t r o l group.  by the procedure  used i n e s t a b l i s h -  I n the f i r s t p l a c e , the c o n t r o l group  i t s e l f was made up of v o l u n t e e r s .  And, i t was f e l t t h a t  these p a r e n t s , i n o f f e r i n g t h e i r s e r v i c e s , r e p r e s e n t a nonrandomized sampling  of the p o p u l a t i o n .  Parents were e l i g i b l e to serve i n the c o n t r o l group o n l y i f they were p l a n n i n g to p a r t i c i p a t e i n the next parent t i o n program to be o f f e r e d d u r i n g the f o l l o w i n g F a l l During the i n i t i a l  educa-  semester.  i n t e r v i e w , each member of the c o n t r o l  group expressed a d e s i r e to improve t h e i r r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h t h e i r c h i l d and would be very l i k e l y candidates f o r the f u t u r e parent study group. A l s o , i t was f e l t that the f a c t o r s of m a t u r a t i o n and r e g r e s s i o n d i d not r e p r e s e n t a t h r e a t to the i n t e r n a l i d i t y of the study.  val-  M a t u r a t i o n i s not l i k e l y a problem due  to the use of a c o n t r o l group.  I t s h o u l d be noted t h a t the  experimental and the c o n t r o l group were q u i t e s i m i l a r  (Table  1) and these s i m i l a r i t i e s are f u r t h e r confirmed by the s c o r e s on the p r e t e s t (Table 2 ) . . N e i t h e r the c o n t r o l nor the experimental group had extreme scores on any of the p r e t e s t s . Thus, r e g r e s s i o n was not l i k e l y to be a major t h r e a t to the internal validity  either.  Summarizing, the c o n t r o l group v o l u n t e e r s who i n d i c a t e d an i n t e r e s t i n parent education, r e p r e s e n t e d a nonrandomized  35 TABLE 1 DESCRIPTIVE CHARACTERISTICS  Characteristic  OF THE SAMPLE  Experimentals  Controls  7 4 5 4  7 4 5 4  33-56 44.6 13-15 13-9  32-57  1-6 3.0  1-6 3.0  Numbers i n Sample Mothers Fathers Boys Girls Age; Range, mothers and f a t h e r s Mean, mothers and f a t h e r s Range, g i r l s Mean, g i r l s Family  and boys and boys  44.5 13-14  13.3  Size:  Range Mean Education:  11.8  years  11.2  years  M a r i t a l Status Married Divorced Separated Widowed  10 1 0 0  8 1 1 1  5 4 2  8 3 0  Religion: Protestant Catholic Buddist  36 TABLE 1  (continued)  DESCRIPTIVE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE SAMPLE  Characteristic  Experimentals  Controls  Country of O r i g i n : Canada  8  10  Germany  1  1  China  1  0  Japan  1  0  Housewives  4  3  Secretaries  2  2  Sales  1  2  1  1  3  3  Oldest  1  0  Youngest  7 1  8  Adopted Parent  1  2  Real Parent  8  7  Occupations:  Positions  Management  Position  Other Target C h i l d : P o s i t i o n i n the Family  Third  0  TABLE 2 PRETEST MEANS AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS FOR EXPERIMENTAL AND CONTROL PARENTS ON ALL MEASURES  Test  Experimental  Control  A t t i t u d e s Toward C h i l d Rearing S c a l e Mean  88.64  S.D.  11.97  100.64  6.31  T-Value  2.94  Probability  0.01  Family Environment S c a l e Mean  18.64  19.73  S.D.  4.70  4.86  T-Value Probability  0 . 5 * + 0.60  Parent-Adolescent Communication'.Inventory .. (Form P) Mean S.D.  99.27 3.98  101.91 10.18  T-Value  0.80  Probability  0.44  Parent-Adolescent Communicat i o n Inventory (Form A) Mean  92.45  S.D.  14.02  93.91 16.29  T-Value  0.22  Probability  0.83  38 TABLE 2 (continued) PRETEST MEANS AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS FOR EXPERIMENTAL AND CONTROL PARENTS ON ALL MEASURES  Test  Experimental  Control  A d l e r i a n P a r e n t a l Assessment of C h i l d Behaviour Scale Mean  162.73  166.81  S.D.  16.46  9.10  T-Value  0.72  Probability  0.48  Walker Problem Behaviour Identification Checklist  T  Mean  7.36  4.18  S.D.  4.43  ^.53  T-Value  1.66  Probability  0.11  39 sample t h a t was c l o s e l y r e l a t e d to the experimental T h e r e f o r e , i t was f e l t  t h a t contamination of p o s t t e s t  r e s u l t s a t t r i b u t a b l e to the e f f e c t s o f s e l e c t i o n , treatment  group.  pretest-  i n t e r a c t i o n , m a t u r a t i o n and r e g r e s s i o n were not  s i g n i f i c a n t f a c t o r s , and d i d not pose a t h r e a t to the i n t e r n a l v a l i d i t y of the study.  Procedures Pretest.  Each member of the c o n t r o l group and the exper-  i m e n t a l group was contacted by telephone by the i n v e s t i g a t o r , approximately two weeks p r i o r to the beginning of the STEP program.  An o u t l i n e of the i n t e r v i e w i s  p r o v i d e d i n Appendix H.  Each s u b j e c t was asked to com-  p l e t e the APACBS, ATCRS, FES, PAC, and a c o n f i d e n t i a l i n f o r m a t i o n form  (Appendix  I).  General  instructions  f o r completing the instruments were g i v e n a t that  time.  The package of instruments were d e l i v e r e d p e r s o n a l l y by the i n v e s t i g a t o r one week p r i o r to the STEP program and a l l were completed  by the s u b j e c t s and r e t u r n e d a t the  time of the f i r s t s e s s i o n of STEP. The grade 8 c h i l d r e n of the c o n t r o l and the e x p e r i mental group were assembled  i n one l a r g e meeting i n  s c h o o l d u r i n g the week p r i o r to the b e g i n n i n g of STEP. They were a d m i n i s t e r e d the FES and the PAC a t that The  time.  instruments were d e s c r i b e d f o r the purpose of  p r o v i d i n g i n p u t of g e n e r a l parent concerns  i n t o the  Coe x i s t i n g program of STEP and f o r any f u t u r e programs. I t was s t a t e d that the c o u n s e l l i n g department was gathe r i n g data to provide  parent programs which would r e f l e c t  the p a r t i c u l a r needs of parents l i v i n g i n the attendance area of Alpha Secondary School and t h a t the i n f o r m a t i o n the parents provided  the department would g r e a t l y a s s i s t  the design and content of f u t u r e parent programs. should  It  he noted that none of the i n f o r m a t i o n from the  data c o l l e c t i o n was a p p l i e d to t h i s STEP program and t h a t the STEP manual was s t r i c t l y f o l l o w e d .  Individuals  were assured of c o n f i d e n t i a l i t y and anonymity through the assignment of matched numbers on a l l s e t s of t e s t s . Each teacher  of the t a r g e t and c o n t r o l c h i l d r e n  completed the WPBIC, d u r i n g program.  I n s t r u c t i o n s were g i v e n  teachers  i n d i v i d u a l l y to the  by the i n v e s t i g a t o r on how to complete the  checklist. tions.  the week p r i o r to the STEP  A l l teachers  were g i v e n the same i n s t r u c -  I t was made c l e a r that the c h i l d r e n were not to  be aware t h a t t h e i r behaviour was being Posttest.  D u r i n g the week f o l l o w i n g the l a s t  s e s s i o n , the s u b j e c t s were p o s t t e s t e d ments a c c o r d i n g test.  observed. treatment  u s i n g the i n s t r u -  to the procedure o u t l i n e d f o r the p r e -  Upon completion of p o s t t e s t procedures, the  i n v e s t i g a t o r provided  p r e t e s t and p o s t t e s t feedback on •  an i n d i v i d u a l b a s i s to those p a r t i c i p a t i n g s u b j e c t s r e questing  i t . A l e t t e r thanking each p a r t i c i p a n t and  o f f e r i n g feedback was sent a t t h i s time (Appendix J ) .  Treatment.  P a r t i c i p a t i n g i n the  ten-weekly sessions  in  l e s s o n format for  and the  involved specific  v a r i o u s kinds of m a t e r i a l s ,  and s e q u e n c e ,  a l l ten sessions investigator  and a l e a d e r .  was a t r a i n e d of the  a r o u n d one o r more t o p i c s . each  Session  topics  a s e t '.  The  leader  study group  leader  study.  E a c h s e s s i o n o f t h e STEP p r o g r a m was  of  Each  length.  The t r e a t m e n t p r o c e d u r e s each s e s s i o n ,  involved  o f a STEP p a r e n t s t u d y g r o u p .  s e s s i o n was two h o u r s  for  STEP p r o g r a m  The f o l l o w i n g  organized are  the  topics  session. 1 - General information,  organization,  parent  concerns Session  2 - U n d e r s t a n d i n g b e h a v i o u r and m i s b e h a v i o u r  Session  3 - How c h i l d r e n u s e parent/the  emotions  to  involve a  ".good" p a r e n t  Session  k -  Encouragement  Session  5 - Communication: L i s t e n i n g  Session  6 - Communication: E x p l o r i n g a l t e r n a t i v e s expressing r e s p o n s i b i l i t y  Session  7 - Developing r e s p o n s i b i l i t y  Session  8 - D e c i s i o n making . f o r  parents  and  42 Session  9 - The f a m i l y meeting  S e s s i o n 10 - Developing confidence and  using'your  potential An o u t l i n e of the f i r s t  s e s s i o n can he found i n Appendix  K. The and  treatment procedure  concepts  gram -was  s t r i c t l y f o l l o w e d the  as d e s c r i b e d i n the STEP manual.  supplemented by the use  The  topics pro-  of the p u b l i c a t i o n ,  B a s i c s of Adult-Teen R e l a t i o n s h i p s (Dinkmeyer, 1 9 7 6 ) . T h i s pamphlet was  suggested  as supplementary  reading  o u t s i d e of the r e g u l a r l y scheduled STEP s e s s i o n s . a d e t a i l e d d i s c u s s i o n of the treatment procedure  For the  reader i s r e f e r r e d to the l e a d e r ' s manual (Dinkmeyer and McKay,  1976).  A n a l y s i s of Data The APACBS, FES, The ATCRS was  PAC,  completed  and the WPBIC were scored  manually.  on m e c h a n i c a l l y s c o r a b l e answer sheets  and sent to the d e s i g n e r of the instrument  (Croake,  1 9 7 6 ) and  r e s u l t s r e t u r n e d to be i n c l u d e d w i t h the r e s t of the d a t a . A l l r e s u l t s were m e c h a n i c a l l y punched onto computer c a r d s . Means and standard d e v i a t i o n s were determined  f o r the e x p e r i -  mental and c o n t r o l group f o r each dependent v a r i a b l e , p r e t e s t and p o s t t e s t .  both  An a p p r o p r i a t e t - t e s t of s i g n i f i c a n c e  was c a l c u l a t e d between mean p r e t e s t and p o s t t e s t scores f o r both groups.  The .01 l e v e l of s i g n i f i c a n c e , r a t h e r than .05,  was chosen due to the l a c k of randomization i n s e l e c t i o n of subjects  and the repeated use of t - t e s t s - o n s e v e r a l indepen-  dent measures i n v o l v i n g the same s u b j e c t s . creased  T h i s a l s o de-  the p r o b a b i l i t y of a Type I e r r o r ( i . e . , r e j e c t i n g a  true n u l l h y p o t h e s i s ) . t h i s context,  The consequences of such an e r r o r , i n  are not c r i t i c a l but c e r t a i n l y most important.  44 Chapter  IV  RESULTS This  r e s e a r c h study s e t out to determine  the e f f e c t i v e -  ness of the STEP program on the parent p a r t i c i p a n t s study group and on t h e i r c h i l d r e n ' s hypotheses  stated  behaviour.  of the  The n u l l  t h a t a f t e r p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n the STEP p r o -  gram, no s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t differences in p o s t t e s t  results  between the experimental and c o n t r o l groups would e x i s t f o r : (1)  p a r t i c i p a n t s ' a t t i t u d e s toward c h i l d - r e a r i n g ,  (2)  participants' family  (3)  p a r e n t - a d o l e s c e n t communication as p e r c e i v e d by  environment,  the p a r t i c i p a n t s , (4)  p a r e n t - a d o l e s c e n t communication as p e r c e i v e d by the t a r g e t c h i l d ,  (5)  the t a r g e t  c h i l d ' s behaviour  as i n f e r r e d by the  participant, (6)  the t a r g e t  c h i l d ' s behaviour  as i n f e r r e d by the  teacher. Unless d i f f e r e n c e s  s i g n i f i c a n t a t the  were found, the n u l l hypotheses Data  .01 confidence l e v e l  would be c o n s i d e r e d t e n a b l e .  Analysis Tables 3 "to 8 summarize the p r e t e s t  and changes i n standard d e v i a t i o n t r o l groups.  An independent  and p o s t t e s t means,  f o r both experimental and  t - t e s t was  c a l c u l a t e d between the  experimental and c o n t r o l groups on the p o s t t e s t . cal analysis  con-  The  of the data obtained f o r each hypothesis  statistifollows:  45 Hypothesis  1  There w i l l "be no s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e i n the mean r a t i n g of a t t i t u d e s toward c h i l d - r e a r i n g between s u b j e c t s p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n STEP and those not p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n the program, as measured by the A t t i t u d e s Toward C h i l d - R e a r i n g S c a l e (ATCRS). The r e s u l t s were as f o l l o w s : t e s t mean of 78.18  The STEP group had a post-  while the c o n t r o l group had a p o s t t e s t  mean of 95-82 (Table 3 ) .  Table 3 Means, Standard D e v i a t i o n s , and t - S t a t i s t i c s f o r Experimental and C o n t r o l Parents on the A t t i t u d e s Toward C h i l d - R e a r i n g S c a l e (ATCRS)  Pretest Group Experimental (N=ll) Control (N=ll)  M  Posttest S .D .  88.64  11.97  100.64  6.31  M  S .D.  78.18  22.18  95.82  11.29  Independent t-test  t=2.9^  t=2.35  Probability  p=0.01  p=o.03  46 The p r e t e s t - p o s t t e s t means are more g r a p h i c a l l y i n F i g u r e 1.  illustrated  Based on the t - s t a t i s t i c as shown i n Table 3,  there i s no s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e between the experimental group and the c o n t r o l group on the p o s t t e s t . The r e s u l t s are not s i g n i f i c a n t a t the .01 l e v e l and thus Hypothesis  1 i s accepted.  10510095Mean Scores  908580-  Pre Note:  F i g u r e 1.  Post  D e c r e a s i n g scores i n d i c a t e a change toward more democratic a t t i t u d e s  P r e t e s t and P o s t t e s t Mean Changes on the A t t i t u d e Toward C h i l d - R e a r i n g S c a l e (ATCRS)  ^7 Hypothesis  2  There w i l l be no s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e i n the mean r a t i n g of the f a m i l y e n v i r o n ment between s u b j e c t s p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n STEP and those not p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n the program as measured by the Family Environment S c a l e (FES). The r e s u l t s r e l a t e d to the second hypothesis are d i s p l a y ed i n Table 4 and F i g u r e 2.  The STEP group had a p o s t t e s t  mean of 16.55> w h i l e the c o n t r o l group had a p o s t t e s t mean  of 18.64.  Table 4 Means, Standard D e v i a t i o n s , and t - S t a t i s t i c s f o r Experimental and C o n t r o l Parents on the Family Environment S c a l e (FES)  Posttest  Pretest M  S .D.  M  S.D.  Experimental (N=ll)  18.64  4.70  16.55  C84  Control . (N=ll)  19-73  4.86  18.64  8.21  Group  Independent t-test  Probability  t=0.5k  t=0.73  p=0.6o  p=0.48  48 Based on the t - s t a t i s t i c , as i n d i c a t e d i n Table 4 ,  there i s  no s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t difference between the e x p e r i mental group and the c o n t r o l group on the p o s t t e s t . r e s u l t s are not s i g n i f i c a n t a t the . 0 1 l e v e l .  The  Hypothesis  2 i s accepted.  2019-  18Mean Scores 17-  1615-  Pre Note:  Figure 2 .  Post  D e c r e a s i n g scores i n d i c a t e a change toward a more congruent f a m i l y  P r e t e s t and P o s t t e s t Mean Changes on the F a m i l y Environment S c a l e (FES)  49 Hypothesis 3 There w i l l be no s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e i n the mean r a t i n g o f p a r e n t - a d o l e s c e n t communication between s u b j e c t s p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n S T E P and those not p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n the program as measured by the Parent-Adolescent Communicat i o n Inventory, Form Po(PACT"i The  r e s u l t s were as f o l l o w s :  t e s t mean of mean of  103•27,  101.18  (Table  The STEP group had a p o s t -  while the c o n t r o l  group had a p o s t t e s t  5).  Table 5 Means, Standard D e v i a t i o n s , and t - S t a t i s t i c s f o r Experimental and C o n t r o l Parents on the Parent-Adolescent Communication Inventory, Form P (PAC)  Posttest  Pretest Group  Experimental (N=ll) Control (N=ll)  M  99.27 101.91  S .D .  M  S ,D.  3.98  103.27  9.81  101.18  9-89  10.18  Independent t-test  t=0.80  t=o.50  Probability  p=0.44  p=0.62  50 The p r e t e s t - p o s t t e s t means are g r a p h i c a l l y i l l u s t r a t e d i n Based on the t - s t a t i s t i c as shown i n Table 5,  F i g u r e 3«  there i s no s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e between the experimental group and the c o n t r o l group on the p o s t t e s t . The r e s u l t s are not s i g n i f i c a n t a t the .01 l e v e l and Hypothesis  3 i s accepted.  104103-  Mean Scores  10210110099-  -* Experimental A Control  Pre Note:  F i g u r e 3-  Post  I n c r e a s i n g scores i n d i c a t e a change toward more communication  P r e t e s t and P o s t t e s t Mean Changes on the ParentAdolescent Communication Inventory, Form P (PAC)  51 Hypothesis  4  There w i l l he no s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e i n the mean r a t i n g of p a r e n t - a d o l e s c e n t communication between the t a r g e t c h i l d of the p a r t i c i p a n t s of STEP and the t a r g e t c h i l d of the c o n t r o l group as measured by the Parent-Adolescent Communication Inventory, Form A (PAC). The r e s u l t s r e l a t e d to the f o u r t h hypothesis a r e d i s p l a y ed i n Table 6 and F i g u r e 4 . mean of 8 9 . 3 6 ,  The STEP group had a p o s t t e s t  while the c o n t r o l group had a p o s t t e s t mean  of 96.18.  Table 6 Means, Standard D e v i a t i o n s , and t - S t a t i s t i c s f o r Experimental and C o n t r o l Target C h i l d r e n on the Parent-Adolescent Communication Inventory, Form A (PAC)  Pretest Group  M  Posttest S .D .  M  S .D.  Experimental (N=ll)  92.45  14.02  89.36  12.78  Control (N=ll)  93.91  16.29  96.18  12.98  Independent t-test  t=0.22  t=1.24  Probability  p=0.83  p=0.23  52 Based on the t - s t a t i s t i c as i n d i c a t e d i n Table 6, there i s no s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e between the e x p e r i mental group and the c o n t r o l group on the p o s t t e s t . r e s u l t s are not s i g n i f i c a n t a t the .01 l e v e l ,  The  thus  Hypothesis 4 i s accepted.  96-  .959493Mean Scores  92919089-  Pre ' Note:  Figure 4 .  Post  I n c r e a s i n g scores i n d i c a t e a change toward more communication  P r e t e s t and P o s t t e s t Mean Changes on the ParentAdolescent Communication Inventory, Form P (PAC)  53 Hypothesis 5 There w i l l he no s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e i n the mean r a t i n g o f c h i l d behaviour between s u b j e c t s p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n STEP and those not p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n the program as measured by the A d l e r i a n P a r e n t a l Assessment of C h i l d Behaviour S c a l e (APACBS). The  r e s u l t s were as f o l l o w s :  t e s t mean of mean of  170.45,  The  STEP group had a p o s t -  while the c o n t r o l group had a p o s t t e s t  165.36 (Table 7).  Table 7 Means, Standard D e v i a t i o n s , and t - S t a t i s t i c s f o r Experimental and C o n t r o l Parents on the A d l e r i a n P a r e n t a l Assessment of C h i l d Behaviour S c a l e (APACBS)  Pretest Group  Posttest  M  S.D.  M  S.D.  162.73  16.46  170.45  11.86  166.82  9.10  165.36  8.32  Experimental (N=ll) Control (N=ll)  Independent t-test Probability  t=0.72  t=1.17  p=0.48  p=0.26  5*+ The  p r e t e s t - p o s t t e s t means are g r a p h i c a l l y i l l u s t r a t e d i n  F i g u r e 5«  Based on the t - s t a t i s t i c as shown i n Table  7,  there i s no s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e between the experimental group and the c o n t r o l group on the p o s t t e s t . The  r e s u l t s are not s i g n i f i c a n t a t the .01  l e v e l and thus  Hypothesis 5 i s accepted.  180-  175Mean Scores  170165160155 •* Experimental A Control Pre Note:  Figure  5«  Post  I n c r e a s i n g scores i n d i c a t e a change toward improved behaviour  P r e t e s t and P o s t t e s t Mean Changes on the A d l e r i a n P a r e n t a l Assessment of C h i l d Behaviour S c a l e (APACBS)  55  Hypothesis 6 There w i l l he no s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e i n the mean r a t i n g of c h i l d behaviour between the t a r g e t c h i l d of the p a r t i c i p a n t s of STEP and the t a r g e t c h i l d of the c o n t r o l group as measured by the Walker Problem Behaviour I d e n t i f i c a t i o n C h e c k l i s t (WPBIC)~ The  r e s u l t s r e l a t e d to t h i s l a s t h y p o t h e s i s are  ed i n Table 8 and mean of 7-91>  Figure  while the  6.  The  STEP group had  c o n t r o l group had  display-  a posttest  a posttest  of  5.64.  Table 8 Means, Standard D e v i a t i o n s , and t - S t a t i s t i c s f o r Experimental and C o n t r o l Target C h i l d r e n on the Walker Problem Behaviour I d e n t i f i c a t i o n C h e c k l i s t (WPBIC)  Posttest  Pretest Group  M  S .D.  M  S .D.  Experimental (N=ll)  7-36  4.43  7.91  4.57  Control (N=ll)  4.18  4.53  5.64  7.21  Independent t-test  t=1.66  t=0.88  Probability  p=0.11  p=0.40  Based no  on t h e t - s t a t i s t i c ,  statistically  m e n t a l group  as i n d i c a t e d  significant difference  and t h e c o n t r o l g r o u p  r e s u l t s are not s i g n i f i c a n t a t the  i n Table 8,  there i s  between the  experi-  on t h e p o s t t e s t . .01  level,  thus  The Hypothesis  6 i s accepted.  87Mean Scores  654-  Pre i-  F i g u r e 6.  Post  N o t e : D e c r e a s i n g s c o r e s i n d i c a t e a change t o w a r d more a p p r o p r i a t e b e h a v i o u r  Pretest Problem  and P o s t t e s t Mean Changes on t h e W a l k e r B e h a v i o u r I d e n t i f i c a t i o n C h e c k l i s t (WPBIC)  57 Summary Experimental and c o n t r o l group parents r e p o r t e d  their  a t t i t u d e s toward c h i l d - r e a r i n g by means of the A t t i t u d e s Toward C h i l d - R e a r i n g  Scale.  Both groups r e p o r t e d  get c h i l d ' s behaviour by means of the A d l e r i a n Assessment of C h i l d Behaviour S c a l e . behaviour was a l s o r e p o r t e d  their tar-  Parental  The t a r g e t  children's  by t h e i r grade 8 teacher by  means of the Walker Problem I d e n t i f i c a t i o n C h e c k l i s t .  Experi-  mental and c o n t r o l group parents and t h e i r t a r g e t c h i l d r e n reported  t h e i r f a m i l y environment by means of the Family  Environment S c a l e  and t h e i r parent-adolescent  by means of Parent-Adolescent Communication A l l measures  communication Inventory.  showed no s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t  change  between the STEP group and the c o n t r o l group on the p o s t t e s t at the <X  = .01 l e v e l .  58 Chapter V  DISCUSSION  This study i n v e s t i g a t e d  the e f f e c t s of the STEP program  on the parent p a r t i c i p a n t s of the study group. also  investigated  This  research  the i n d i r e c t e f f e c t s the STEP program had  on the parent p a r t i c i p a n t s ' grade 8 c h i l d . When c o n s i d e r i n g  the problem, t h i s i n v e s t i g a t o r  chose to  measure changes i n : (1)  parental  a t t i t u d e s r e l a t e d to c h i l d - r e a r i n g as  p e r c e i v e d by the p a r t i c i p a n t s , (2)  family  climate  as founded upon i n f e r r e d i n t e r -  a c t i o n by the p a r t i c i p a n t s (3)  child,  p a r e n t - a d o l e s c e n t communication as p e r c e i v e d by the  (4)  and the t a r g e t  p a r t i c i p a n t and the t a r g e t  child,  the t a r g e t c h i l d ' s behaviour as i n f e r r e d by the p a r t i c i p a n t and by the t e a c h e r .  Interpretation  of F i n d i n g s  Hypothesis 1: The data summarized hypothesis t h a t  states:  i n Table 3 supports the r e s e a r c h  59 There w i l l he no s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e i n the mean r a t i n g of a t t i t u d e s toward c h i l d - r e a r i n g between s u b j e c t s p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n STEP and those not p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n the program, as measured by the A t t i t u d e s Toward C h i l d Rearing S c a l e . S i n c e the changes r e p o r t e d by the treatment statistically  s i g n i f i c a n t at the  .01  n u l l hypothesis of no d i f f e r e n c e was  group were not  confidence l e v e l ,  the  accepted.  These f i n d i n g s are i n accord w i t h those of Swenson ( 1 9 7 0 ) , Steed BieLaurier  (1971).  ( 1 9 7 5 ) who  Runyan ( 1 9 7 3 ) .  Laine  (1974),  r e p o r t e d no s t a t i s t i c a l  change i n p a r e n t a l a t t i t u d e s concerning the  and  evidence  of  parent-child  r e l a t i o n s h i p a f t e r p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n an A d l e r i a n parent group.  The  i n t e n t i o n was  study  to measure the e f f e c t s of the STEP  program on the p a r t i c i p a n t s a t t i t u d e s toward c h i l d - r e a r i n g . If  the g o a l of parent study groups i s to improve the parent-  c h i l d r e l a t i o n s h i p , then a change of parent a t t i t u d e s be seen as an i n t e r v e n i n g  variable.  There was  can  a drop i n  mean scores ( i n d i c a t i n g a change toward more democratic tudes) between the pre and post t e s t i n g of the group.  The  the p o s t t e s t  experimental  d i f f e r e n c e between the means on the p r e t e s t of the experimental group was  atti-  and  more than twice  the d i f f e r e n c e between the means on the p r e t e s t and the p o s t t e s t of the c o n t r o l group (Table 3 ) • noted t h a t there was  However i t should be  a s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e between the  experimental group and the c o n t r o l group on p a r e n t a l a t t i tudes before the treatment  (t=2.94;  p=0.01).  The r e s u l t s i n d i c a t e that p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n a STEP group  6 0  does not s i g n i f i c a n t l y change the p a r t i c i p a n t s toward c h i l d - r e a r i n g .  attitudes  This study g i v e s support to the n o t i o n  t h a t a t t i t u d e s are d i f f i c u l t to change. Hypothesis  2:  The data summarized i n Table 4 supports the r e s e a r c h hypothesis t h a t s t a t e s : There w i l l be no s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e i n the mean r a t i n g of the f a m i l y e n v i r o n ment between s u b j e c t s p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n STEP and those not p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n the program as measured by the Family Environment S c a l e . S i n c e the changes r e p o r t e d by the treatment s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t a t the n u l l hypothesis was The  .01  group were not  confidence l e v e l ,  the  accepted.  i n t e n t i o n was  to measure the e f f e c t of the STEP pro-  gram on the f a m i l y environment of the p a r t i c i p a n t s .  Changes  i n the f a m i l y environment were r e p o r t e d as i n f e r r e d  inter-  a c t i o n by the p a r t i c i p a n t s and t h e i r t a r g e t c h i l d .  A Family  Incongruence Score i s d e r i v e d to help one  conclude:  How  c l o s e l y do the p a r t i c i p a n t s and the t a r g e t c h i l d i n a f a m i l y agree on the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the f a m i l y ' s s o c i a l m i l i e u ? The  lower the Family Incongruence Score the more  congruent  the f a m i l y . Both the experimental and c o n t r o l group showed scores between pre and post t e s t i n g t h i s improvement may a second  (Figure 2 ) .  decreased  However,  have been generated by t a k i n g the  test  time.  I t i s i n t e r e s t i n g to note t h a t the normative  sample  61  1974),  (Moos,  yielded  and the p o s t t e s t  a Family Incongruence Score of  Family Incongruence Scores of the  mental and c o n t r o l The r e s u l t s  groups were 16.55  indicate  and 18.64  16.74  experi-  respectively.  that p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n a STEP group  does not s i g n i f i c a n t l y change the i n f e r r e d  interaction  of  the f a m i l y environment. Hypothesis  3-  The data summarized i n Table 5 supports the r e s e a r c h hypothesis that  states:  There w i l l be no s t a t i s t i c a l l y . . s i g n i f i c a n t ••difference i n the mean r a t i n g of p a r e n t - a d o l e s c e n t communication between s u b j e c t s p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n STEP and those not p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n the program as measured by the Parent-Adolescent Communication Inventory, Form P. Since the changes r e p o r t e d by the treatment statistically  s i g n i f i c a n t a t the  n u l l hypothesis of no d i f f e r e n c e These f i n d i n g s  group were not  .01  confidence l e v e l ,  was  accepted.  seem c o n s i s t e n t  w i t h Goula  (1976)  the  and  i  Nobel  (1976)  who  r e p o r t e d no evidence of change i n p a r e n t -  c h i l d communication a f t e r p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n an A d l e r i a n  parent  study group. STEP attempts  to educate parents i n more e f f e c t i v e  methods of communication. F r a z i e r and Matthes brought  Dinkmeyer and McKay  (1975)  and  suggest t h a t when parents are  together f o r d i s c u s s i o n  and t r a i n i n g i n communication  s k i l l s more e f f e c t i v e r e l a t i o n s h i p s achieved.  (1975)  w i t h i n the f a m i l y can be  The intention was to measure the effect of the STEP pro gram on parent-adolescent communication as perceived hy the participant.  The mean scores between pre and posttests f o r  the control group decreased s l i g h t l y while the mean scores between the pre and posttests of the experimental group i n creased much more than the control group decreased (Figure 3 This suggests that the experimental group indicates a change toward more communication than the control group. However, the results indicate that p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n a STEP group does not s i g n i f i c a n t l y  change the participants  perceptions of parent-adolescent communication. Hypothesis 4: The data summarized i n Table 6 supports the research hypothesis that states: There w i l l be no s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t d i f ference i n the mean rating of parent-adolescent communication between the target c h i l d of the participants of STEP and the target c h i l d of the control group as measured by the Parent-AdolesSent Communication Inventory, Form A. Since the changes reported by the treatment group were not s t a t i s t i c a l l y significant  at the .01 confidence l e v e l , the  n u l l hypothesis was accepted. The intention was to: measurertheceffeet of the STEP pro gram on parent-adolescent communication as perceived by the target c h i l d of each participant.  The mean scores between  pre and posttest on the control group increased s l i g h t l y while the experimental group mean scores decreased pre and posttest.  between  This might be explained as Steed (1971)  63 suggested, that the process of Adlerian parent education sometimes involves a period of regression before p o s i t i v e changes occur.  More s i g n i f i c a n t l y , the target children of  the participants of STEP may i n i t i a l l y react towards t h e i r parents who are interacting with them i n a new and d i f f e r e n t way. Nevertheless, the results indicate that p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n a STEP group does not s i g n i f i c a n t l y change the target child's perceptions of parent-adolescent communication. Hypothesis 5The data summarized i n Table 7 supporis the research hypothesis that states: There w i l l be no s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t d i f ference i n the mean rating of c h i l d behaviour between subjects p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n STEP and those not p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n the program as measured by the Adlerian Parental Assessment of Child Behaviour Scale. Since the changes recorded f o r the treatment group were not s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t at the . 0 1  confidence l e v e l , the  n u l l hypothesis of no difference was accepted. The intention was to measure the effects of the STEP program on the participants' perceptions of t h e i r target child's behaviour.  When parents are experimenting with new  attitudes and perceptions — i f parents report changes i n c h i l d behaviour, they are also reporting changes i n the parentchild relationship.  The mean scores between pre and post-  testing f o r the control group showed a s l i g h t decrease, while the mean scores f o r the experimental group increased  64 i n d i c a t i n g a more p o s i t i v e change toward  improved  behaviour.  The r e s u l t s i n d i c a t e that p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n a STEP group does not s i g n i f i c a n t l y change the p a r t i c i p a n t s ' p e r c e p t i o n s of t h e i r t a r g e t c h i l d ' s behaviour.  The v a l i d i t y of the data  obtained from the study of mother's p e r c e p t i o n s i s s t r e n g t h ened by the h i g h r e l i a b i l i t y of the APACBS. These r e s u l t s support the recommendations of Goula Piatt  (1971),  (1976),  and o t h e r s , t h a t p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n an A d l e r i a n  study group does not s i g n i f i c a n t l y improve the p a r e n t s ' perc e p t i o n s of c h i l d behaviour.  In f a c t , P i a t t found t h a t the  behaviour of most of the c h i l d r e n i n h i s A d l e r i a n group were r a t e d by t e a c h e r s and parents as remaining about the same or deteriorating. Hypothesis  6:  The data summarized i n Table 8 supports the r e s e a r c h hypothesis t h a t  states:  There w i l l be no s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e i n the mean r a t i n g of c h i l d behaviour between the t a r g e t c h i l d of the p a r t i c i p a n t s of STEP and the t a r g e t c h i l d of the c o n t r o l group as measured by the Walker Problem Behaviour Identification Checklist. S i n c e the changes r e p o r t e d by the treatment group are not s i g n i f i c a n t a t the  .01  confidence l e v e l ,  the n u l l hypothesis  of no s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e was  accepted.  These f i n d i n g s are i n agreement w i t h those of P i a t t ( 1 9 7 1 ) , DeLaurier ( 1 9 7 5 ) .  and Nordal  (1976) who  r e p o r t e d no  s i g n i f i c a n t improvement i n c l a s s behaviour of c h i l d r e n whose parents p a r t i c i p a t e d i n an A d l e r i a n parent study  group.  65 The  i n t e n t i o n was  to measure the e f f e c t of the STEP  program on the t a r g e t c h i l d ' s behaviour i n c l a s s . hoped that the  It is  c h i l d r e n of these parents w i l l p e r c e i v e  be-  h a v i o u r a l changes i n the parent and w i l l a l t e r t h e i r behaviour.  I t i s assumed t h a t changes i n the p a r e n t - c h i l d r e l a - -  t i o n s h i p w i l l accompany the changes. group and pre and  the c o n t r o l group had  Both the  target  i n c r e a s e d mean scores  child between  post t e s t i n g ( i n d i c a t i n g a change toward more i n -  appropriate  behaviour, F i g u r e  might be generated by the  6).  This increase  t e s t i t s e l f or the  c o u l d be i n d i c a t i n g a negative  As Steed  the process of A d l e r i a n parent education  haps i t would be v a l u a b l e  1  target c h i l d r e n  r e a c t i o n to t h e i r parents'  ways of i n t e r a c t i n g w i t h them.  a p e r i o d of r e g r e s s i o n before  i n score  (1971)  new  suggests,  sometimes i n v o l v e s  p o s i t i v e changes occur.  to measure changes i n the  Per-  target  c h i l d r e n ' s behaviour at l e a s t s i x months a f t e r the t r e a t ment.  Or perhaps, as Runyan ( 1 9 7 3 )  would r e q u i r e a longer The  treatment  concluded, t h a t change  period.  r e s u l t s i n d i c a t e that p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n a STEP group  does not s i g n i f i c a n t l y change the c l a s s behaviour of p a r t i c i p a n t s ' t a r g e t c h i l d as i n f e r r e d by t h e i r  the  teacher.  Limitations This i n v e s t i g a t o r notes the f o l l o w i n g l i m i t a t i o n s of this  study:  66  1.  The p o p u l a t i o n was r e s t r i c t e d middle-socioeconomic s t r a t a  to parents from the  of Burnaby, B r i t i s h  Columbia who were r e q u i r e d to have a c h i l d a t t e n d i n g grade 8 a t Alpha Secondary S c h o o l .  The c h i l -  dren of these parents ranged from 13 to 15 y e a r s i n age. 2.  The sample was comprised of v o l u n t e e r s who r e s i d e d i n Burnaby and could a t t e n d the group on the desi g n a t e d time and day.  3.  The sample-. (n=ll) was s m a l l but adequate the  necessary s t a t i s t i c a l procedures.  to perform  I t may not  have been t r u l y r e p r e s e n t a t i v e of the p o p u l a t i o n . 4.  Most of the v o l u n t e e r s were mothers.  No a s s e s s -  ment was made o f the impact of STEP on f a t h e r s , single 5.  p a r e n t s , or c o u p l e s .  There i s a low l e v e l of e x t e r n a l v a l i d i t y and thus limited the  generalizability  due to the r e s t r i c t i o n of  sample of parents to volunteers from one s c h o o l  only. 6.  A v i o l a t i o n i n r a n d o m i z a t i o n i s a p o s s i b i l i t y due to the procedure used i n a s s i g n i n g some members to the  7.  c o n t r o l group.  Most r e s u l t s self-report  Thus g e n e r a l i z a b i l i t y  (Hypothesis 1-5) instruments.  i s reduced.  were obtained through  Thus p e r c e i v e d and  67  i n f e r r e d f a m i l y i n t e r a c t i o n s may ured and  perhaps not  have been meas-  the a c t u a l f a m i l y i n t e r a c t i o n .  Changes i n parent a t t i t u d e s , f a m i l y and  p a r e n t - c h i l d communication were probably  reported 8.  The  environment not  by unbiased o b s e r v e r s .  research  c h i l d only,  i n v e s t i g a t e d changes i n the  target  other c h i l d r e n of the f a m i l y were  ex-  cluded . 9.  Some of the s u b j e c t s  i n the  c o n t r o l group may  read p a r e n t - c h i l d m a t e r i a l s ,  received  have  counselling,  attended l e c t u r e s on c h i l d t r a i n i n g t e c h n i q u e s , e t c . , during 10.  the  treatment  period.  Perhaps the instruments chosen i n t h i s study were not  s e n s i t i v e enough to measure changes due  to  the  treatment. 11.  P o s s i b l y other v a r i a b l e s could have been measured, which might have shown s i g n i f i c a n t changes as result  Implications The  and  the  of'treatment.  Suggestions f o r F u r t h e r  Research  A d l e r i a n viewpoint, as s t a t e d p r e v i o u s l y  i n Chapter  I, maintains t h a t behaviour changes i n c h i l d r e n can be most e f f e c t i v e l y brought about by working w i t h the s i g n i f i c a n t adult,in their lives.  Further,  behaviour toward c h i l d r e n i s  68 the product of a d u l t p e r c e p t i o n s of the c h i l d r e n and the uation.  A d u l t p e r c e p t i o n and behaviour,  i n f l u e n c e the c h i l d ' s behaviour  sit-  c o r r e c t or i n c o r r e c t ,  i n the d i r e c t i o n of the  ad-  u l t ' s expectations. The r e s u l t s of t h i s study pose some i n t e r e s t i n g quest i o n s r e g a r d i n g the v a l i d i t y of these statements. of STEP suggest,  The  authors  from t h e i r r e s e a r c h , s i g n i f i c a n t changes i n  mothers' p e r c e p t i o n s of c h i l d r e n ' s behaviour r e s u l t i n g  from  p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n an A d l e r i a n - b a s e d parent study group (Dinkmeyer and McKay, 1976).  They are one of the few A d l e r i a n  parent group s t u d i e s which r e p o r t s i g n i f i c a n t changes. the f o l l o w i n g questions are asked:  Thus  Is the STEP A d l e r i a n pro-  gram more e f f e c t i v e than other A d l e r i a n parent study group programs?  What changes can be measured and are these changes  significant? The present r e s e a r c h i s the only study b e s i d e s Dinkmeyer's and McKay's, to the best of t h i s i n v e s t i g a t o r ' s knowledge, t h a t has attempted  to measure the e f f e c t s of the STEP program.  This study, as w e l l as o t h e r s , i n v o l v e d a comparison of the e f f e c t s of an A d l e r i a n - b a s e d parent study group to an equiva l e n t c o n t r o l group and used a pre to post assessment which showed no s i g n i f i c a n t changes i n p a r t i c i p a n t s p e r c e p t i o n s of t h e i r c h i l d r e n ' s behaviour.  No s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s i n  p a r e n t a l a t t i t u d e s , f a m i l y environment, p a r e n t - c h i l d communication and teacher p e r c e p t i o n s of c h i l d behaviour were reported.  The r e s u l t s of t h i s r e s e a r c h seem, to i n d i c a t e  that perhaps STEP i s not as v a l i d a program i n terms of  69 h e l p i n g parents r e l a t e more p o s i t i v e l y w i t h t h e i r  children  as Dinkmeyer's and McKay's r e s e a r c h seems to suggest. I t should be noted t h a t t h i s i n v e s t i g a t o r had r e c e i v e d p o s i t i v e feedback  from p a r t i c i p a n t s of the STEP group and  from o t h e r parents i n t e r e s t e d i n the s t u d y / d i s c u s s i o n method of parent e d u c a t i o n .  A p o s i t i v e aspect of the STEP group  that parents experienced a f e e l i n g of r e l i e f when they  was  dis-  covered other people had problems s i m i l a r to t h e i r own.  In  such an atmosphere, mutual support and understanding among group members was  experienced.  Members a l s o r e p o r t e d f e e l -  ing more c o n f i d e n t i n t h e i r r o l e as p a r e n t s , and that c h i l dren, behaved more r e s p o n s i b l y and c o o p e r a t i v e l y . a h i g h degree  There  of i n t e r a c t i o n among group members.  was  Parents  seemed eager to share experiences and o f f e r e d a wide range of views r e g a r d i n g the i n f o r m a t i o n i n the t e x t . I t i s t h i s researcher's o p i n i o n t h a t the parent became conscious of, and their children. the parent may  evaluated h i s or her r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h Regardless of other aspects of the program,  undergo change due to a s e l f - e v a l u a t i o n and  concentrated self-improvement parent-child relationship. (1971) who  approach  to enhancing  the  T h i s view i s supported by Steed  suggests t h a t , r e g a r d l e s s of any measured out-  comes, the s t u d y / d i s c u s s i o n method may  make i t s g r e a t e s t  c o n t r i b u t i o n i n making the parent more aware of the p a r e n t child  relationship. The  i n f o r m a t i o n a l component of the group process seems  to p l a y an important r o l e .  Being a b l e to c l a r i f y and  relate  70 s t r u c t u r e d m a t e r i a l through s h a r i n g and d i s c u s s i o n may courage parents to t r y new children.  methods of d e a l i n g w i t h  en-  their  I n t h i s r e s e a r c h e r ' s experience, parents  freely  e x p r e s s i n g t h e i r b e l i e f s and p r a c t i c e s r e l a t e d to c h i l d r e a r i n g become an e x t e n s i v e , c r e a t i v e and sometimes humorous experience.  The STEP program p r o v i d e d an o p p o r t u n i t y to  b u i l d a new  c o o p e r a t i v e p a r t n e r s h i p between parents  and  educators. Parents expressed a common complaint t h a t t e n group s e s s i o n s was  insufficient.  Both parent p a r t i c i p a n t s and  this  i n v e s t i g a t o r f e e l t h a t the STEP program, as i t p r e s e n t l y exists,  packs too much m a t e r i a l i n t o too s h o r t a p e r i o d of  time.  Chapters  ample.  IV and V on communication o f f e r " a good  It is felt  t h a t parents never d i d e f f e c t i v e l y  the communication s k i l l s  o u t l i n e d i n these c h a p t e r s .  ex-  learn It is  recommended t h a t the STEP program i n c r e a s e the number of s e s s i o n s to a minimum of twelve. The ary  tapes were more a p p r o p r i a t e f o r parents of element-  school c h i l d r e n .  be adapted to  Thus, i t i s recommended t h a t the  tapes  to cover the range of s i t u a t i o n s more p e r t i n e n t  parents of a d o l e s c e n t s . The i n v e s t i g a t o r recommends the reader remember the  s m a l l n ( 1 1 ) when c o n s i d e r i n g the r e s u l t s .  A study  l a r g e r numbers of s u b j e c t s would be i n o r d e r .  involving  The program  should be t e s t e d w i t h d i f f e r e n t p o p u l a t i o n s such as couples, m i n o r i t y groups or parents of p r e s c h o o l e r s .  I t would be  i n t e r e s t i n g to explore the e f f e c t s of the parent  procedures  71 on v a r i o u s age groups of younger c h i l d r e n . I t i s s t r o n g l y suggested  t h a t the s c h o o l s encourage  spouses to a t t e n d the s e s s i o n s t o g e t h e r . u s i n g a team approach when a p p l y i n g new  I t seems t h a t i n parenting p r i n c i p l e s  and techniques g i v e s support and confidence to both p a r e n t s . STEP could be t e s t e d f o r use i n study groups f o r t e a c h e r s as w e l l as i n h i g h s c h o o l p r e p a r a t i o n f o r parenthood The  classes.  e f f e c t s of STEP on a l l c h i l d r e n i n the f a m i l y needs  to be i n v e s t i g a t e d . behaviour,  In a d d i t i o n to measuring the c h i l d r e n ' s  the p a r e n t s ' behaviour  c o u l d be observed  Parents' r e s u l t s were obtained through s e l f - r e p o r t  and r a t e d . instru-  ments and the chance of b i a s r a t i n g i s extremely h i g h w i t h t h i s procedure.  An unbiased o b s e r v e r s ' r a t i n g s of p a r e n t a l  behaviour and f a m i l y environment c o u l d be  investigated.  A major q u e s t i o n r a i s e d by t h i s i n v e s t i g a t o r i s whether s i g n i f i c a n t changes i n the•treatment  group might be shown  p o s s i b l y s i x months toaa year f o l l o w i n g p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n the STEP program? veyed  That i s , i f the experimental group were s u r -  once a g a i n s i x months l a t e r , what changes, i n c h i l d  behaviour, p a r e n t - a d o l e s c e n t communication, f a m i l y atmosphere, and p a r e n t a l a t t i t u d e s would be r e p o r t e d by the parent, teacher and c h i l d .  I t must be remembered t h a t changes i n  c h i l d r e n ' s behaviour are not l i k e l y to occur immediately  fol-  lowing t h e i r parents p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n any parent study group. Even i f the parent a t t i t u d e s are changed, the p o s i t i v e upon t h e i r c h i l d r e n may  effects  not be e v i d e n t u n t i l sometime a f t e r .  A f o l l o w - u p study needs to be conducted  s e v e r a l months a f t e r  72 the c o n c l u s i o n of the treatment to determine any time.  I t i s hoped t h a t a follow-up  changes over  to t h i s study  can he  car-  r i e d out i n the f u t u r e . I t should a g a i n he noted t h a t the normative data i s pres e n t l y being c o l l e c t e d by the authors ATCRS.  of the APACBS and  I t i s suggested t h a t before a s i m i l a r study  cated, the r e s e a r c h e r s be able to u t i l i z e standard  the  is replistatistical  i n f o r m a t i o n r e l a t e d to the APACBS and ATCRS. Another m o d i f i c a t i o n would i n c l u d e a r e p l i c a t i o n of present  the  study w i t h the use of a novice r a t h e r than an e x p e r i -  enced c o u n s e l l o r .  It is felt  t h a t when an expert  i s present  i n the d i s c u s s i o n group, group members assume l e s s r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r t h e i r own to  t r a i n i n g and  show them- the way.  In t h i s study,  the l e a d e r as expert and made c l e a r . process was  I t was  depend more on the  expert  the d i s t i n c t i o n between  the l e a d e r as f a c i l i t a t o r had  to be  emphasized t h a t f a c i l i t a t i n g the group  the l e a d e r s prime f u n c t i o n i n the group.  i n v e s t i g a t i o n of the e f f e c t s of a STEP group l e d by of v a r y i n g s k i l l l e v e l s could be  An leaders  undertaken.  F i n a l l y , more r e s e a r c h on parent  education  i s needed.  Obon (1976) s t a t e s t h a t great s t r i d e s have been made i n the l a s t decade, but t h a t new  r e s e a r c h i s c o n s t a n t l y needed.  T h i s r e s e a r c h e r f e e l s t h a t whenever p o s s i b l e the use  of a  c o g n i t i v e c r i t e r i a w i l l allow more d i r e c t and meaningful conc l u s i o n s to be drawn.  73  Conclusion The purpose of t h i s s t u d y was to i n v e s t i g a t e  whether  p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n a STEP group would r e s u l t i n s i g n i f i c a n t changes i n , (1)  parental  a t t i t u d e s r e l a t e d t o c h i l d - r e a r i n g as  p e r c e i v e d by the p a r t i c i p a n t s the A t t i t u d e s (2)  family  and measured  by  Toward C h i l d - R e a r i n g S c a l e ,  c l i m a t e as founded upon i n f e r r e d i n t e r -  a c t i o n by the p a r t i c i p a n t s , and the  target  c h i l d and measured by t h e F a m i l y Environment Scale, (3)  p a r e n t - a d o l e s c e n t communication as p e r c e i v e d by the p a r t i c i p a n t s , and measured by the P a r e n t A d o l e s c e n t Communication I n v e n t o r y ,  (4)  p a r e n t - a d o l e s c e n t communication as p e r c e i v e d by the  target  c h i l d and measured by the P a r e n t -  A d o l e s c e n t Communication I n v e n t o r y , (5)  the t a r g e t  c h i l d ' s b e h a v i o u r as i n f e r r e d by the  p a r t i c i p a n t and measured by t h e A d l e r i a n  Parental  Assessment of C h i l d B e h a v i o u r S c a l e , (6)  the t a r g e t  c h i l d ' s b e h a v i o u r as i n f e r r e d by the  t e a c h e r and measured by the W a l k e r Problem I d e n t i fication  Checklist.  The unteered g r o u p was  s u b j e c t s w e r e p a r e n t s o f g r a d e 8 s t u d e n t s who to p a r t i c i p a t e comprised  were unable  i n t h e STEP p r o g r a m .  o f p a r e n t s who  control  v o l u n t e e r e d as w e l l ,  but  t o p a r t i c i p a t e a t the time of the program.  P r e t e s t - P o s t t e s t C o n t r o l Group D e s i g n was search.  The  vol-  A t - t e s t was  calculated  used i n t h i s  The re-  on mean p r e t e s t s c o r e s  b e t w e e n t h e STEP g r o u p and t h e c o n t r o l g r o u p and p o s t t e s t s c o r e s b e t w e e n t h e STEP g r o u p and The  results  the c o n t r o l  group.  i n d i c a t e t h a t a f t e r p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n STEP,  p a r e n t s r e p o r t e d no s i g n i f i c a n t c h a n g e s i n t h e i r  attitudes,  f a m i l y c l i m a t e , p a r e n t - a d o l e s c e n t c o m m u n i c a t i o n and target c h i l d ' s behaviour. no  significant  The  target children also reported  c h a n g e s i n t h e i r f a m i l y c l i m a t e and  adolescent communication. g e t c h i l d r e n r e p o r t e d no c h i l d ' s behaviour  their  Finally,  parent-  the t e a c h e r s of the  tar-  s i g n i f i c a n t changes i n the t a r g e t  i n class a f t e r t h e i r parents  participated  i n STEP. The  results  of t h i s study suggest  t h a t "the .STEP  p r o g r a m i s n o t a n e f f e c t i v e method i n p r o m o t i n g the p a r e n t - c h i l d r e l a t i o n s h i p . was  t o o s m a l l and may  the p o p u l a t i o n . s t u d y may  change i n  Perhaps the s m a l l n of  11  n o t have been t r u l y r e p r e s e n t a t i v e of  Furthermore,  the i n s t r u m e n t s chosen i n the  not have been s e n s i t i v e  due  to the treatment.  use  o f STEP w i t h p a r e n t s  enough t o measure changes  A l t h o u g h McKay  (1976)  recommends  of a d o l e s c e n t s , i t i s t h i s  investi-  g a t o r s o p i n i o n t h a t STEP i s more a p p r o p r i a t e l y d e s i g n e d meet t h e n e e d s o f p a r e n t s o f c h i l d r e n a t t h e  the  elementary  to  75  school l e v e l .  I t i s also this  investigators opinion  STEP i s a w e l l p l a n n e d a n d c l e a r l y p r e s e n t e d challenges  of parenting.  such an understanding  approach to the  Group s e s s i o n s a r e p r e s e n t e d  i n a s t i m u l a t i n g and  nonthreatening  STEP i s a m e a n i n g f u l c o n t r i b u t i o n t o i n c r e a s e d  standing  in  a n d l o g i c a l manner t h a t i n s i g h t s a n d  information are acquired way.  that  of the importance of parent  education  under-  i n the school  setting. I t i s recommended t h a t t h e r e he a s y s t e m a t i c of the content  f o r m a t o f STEP t o more a p p r o p r i a t e l y meet t h e  interests of r e a l l i f e As  s i t u a t i o n s of parents  of adolescents.  t h e p r o g r a m e x i s t s , STEP seems more a p p l i c a b l e t o  of c h i l d r e n a t the elementary s c h o o l age. and  altering  parents  The c a r i c a t u r e s  p r o b l e m s i t u a t i o n s n e e d t o be p r e s e n t e d  i n a more m a t u r e  f a s h i o n to b e t t e r r e t a i n the i n t e r e s t s of the p a r t i c i p a n t s . Specifically,  t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s n e e d t o be p r o v i d e d  m a t e r i a l w h i c h r e l a t e s more t o t h e i r p r e s e n t home.  with  situation at  I t i s a l s o s u g g e s t e d t h a t t h e v o i c e s o f young c h i l d r e n  on t h e t a p e s be r e p l a c e d w i t h v o i c e s o f a d o l e s c e n t s  and t h a t  t h e p r o b l e m s i t u a t i o n s be more i n l i n e w i t h t h e i n t e r e s t s o f parents  of adolescents.  Generally,  opinion, that the p r i n c i p l e s seem v e r y a p p r o p r i a t e but  there  i ti s this investigators  or concepts presented  i n STEP  f o r use a t t h e e l e m e n t a r y s c h o o l  i s a need f o r a t h o r o u g h r e - e x a m i n a t i o n  level  o f STEP  to provide  a p r o g r a m w h i c h w o u l d more s u i t a b l y meet t h e n e e d s  of parents  of adolescents.  I t i s a l s o recommended t h a t t h e  s u g g e s t e d t e n g r o u p s e s s i o n s be i n c r e a s e d t o a minimum o f  76 t w e l v e so  t h a t p a r t i c i p a n t s may  presented i n the program. as w e l l as w i v e s a t t e n d  b e t t e r grasp the p r i n c i p l e s  I t i s suggested t h a t the  the  sessions  together  husbands  whenever pos-  sible . Other recommendations r e l a t e d to f u t u r e r e s e a r c h STEP w e r e :  to devise  studies  c i p a n t c h a n g e p r o d u c e d by  the  of  to determine the form of t r e a t m e n t and  parti-  to a s c e r t a i n  the  l o n g t e r m i m p a c t o f t h e p r o g r a m on p a r t i c u l a r b e h a v i o u r s  and  a t t i t u d e s on p a r t i c u l a r t y p e s o f p a r t i c i p a n t s ; t o  devise  s t u d i e s w i t h a l a r g e r sample s i z e , d i f f e r e n t p o p u l a t i o n s r a n d o m i z e d c o m p a r i s o n g r o u p s ; t o i m p r o v e and  refine  and  the  approaches t o the measurement of changes i n p a r e n t a l  behav-  i o u r and  use  f a m i l y e n v i r o n m e n t as  an u n b i a s e d o b s e r v e r ; c h i l d r e n i n the leaders  to s u r v e y the  f a m i l y ; and  of d i f f e r e n t s k i l l  t h a t more r e s e a r c h  suggested through the  e f f e c t s o f STEP on a l l  t o examine the levels.  i n parent education  q u a l i t y of f a m i l y  use  Finally,  o b j e c t i v e of c o n s t r u c t i n g e d u c a t i o n a l improving the  of  life.  o f STEP  i t was  indicated  i s needed w i t h programs aimed  by  the at  77 REFERENCES  A g a t i , G.J. and I o v i n o , J.W. Implementation of a parent c o u n s e l l i n g program. School C o u n s e l l o r , November, 1 9 7 4 , 22(2),  126-129.  A l d e r , A. The I n d i v i d u a l Psychology of A l f r e d A l d e r . H.L. & R.R. Ansbache (eds). New York: B a s i c Books, 1 9 5 6 . Aldous, J . and Dahl, H. I n t e r n a t i o n a l B i b l i o g r a p h y of Research i n Marriage and the F a m i l y 1 9 6 5 - 1 9 7 2 . Minneapolis: U n i v e r s i t y of Minnesota Press, 197k, V o l . I I . Aldous, J . and H i l l , R. I n t e r n a t i o n a l B i b l i o g r a p h y of Research i n Marriage and the F a m i l y 1 9 0 0 - 1 9 6 4 . Minneapolis: U n i v e r s i t y of Minnesota P r e s s , I 9 6 7 , V o l . I~! Auerback, A.B. Parents Learn Through D i s c u s s i o n : P r i n c i p l e s and P r a c t i c e s of Parent Group E d u c a t i o n . New York: John Wilus and Sons, Inc., 1 9 6 8 . B e r r e t t , R.D. A d l e r i a n mother study groups: An e v a l u a t i o n . J o u r n a l of I n d i v i d u a l Psychology, 1 9 7 5 , 21, 1 7 9 - 1 8 2 . Bienvenu, M.J. "Parent-Adolescent Communication and S e l f Esteem." J o u r n a l of Home Economics, 1 9 7 0 , 6 2 , 3 4 4 - 3 4 5 . Bienvenu, M.J. Parent-Adolescent Communication Inventory. Form A and Form P. Saluda, N.C.: Family L i f e P u b l i c a tions, 1969. Brim, 0 . E d u c a t i o n f o r C h i l d Reading. Saze Foundation, 1 9 5 9 .  New  York:  Runnell  Campbell, D.T. and S t a n l e y , J.C. E x p e r i m e n t a l and Quasi E x p e r i m e n t a l Designs f o r Research. Chicago: Rand McNally, 1966. Carkhuff, R.R. and -Bierman, R. T r a i n i n g as p r e f e r r e d mode of treatment of parents of e m o t i o n a l l y d i s t u r b e d c h i l d r e n . J o u r n a l of C o u n s e l l i n g Psychology, 1 9 7 0 , 17_, 1 5 7 - 1 6 1 . C h r i s t e n s e n , O.C. Family education: A model f o r c o n s u l t a tion. Elementary School Guidance and C o u n s e l l i n g . 1 9 7 2 , 2(2),  121-129.  Croake, J.W. and H i n k l e , D.E. A t t i t u d e s Toward C h i l d Reari n g S c a l e . Unpublished t e x t , V i r g i n a P o l y t e c h n i c I n s t i t u t e and S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y , 1 9 7 6 .  78 C u l l e n , J.S. The e f f e c t i v e n e s s of parent d i s c u s s i o n groups: A follow-up study. Mental Hygiene, 1968, $2, 590-599DeLaurer, A.M. An i n v e s t i g a t i o n of the e f f e c t of A d l e r i a n parent study groups upon c h i l d r e n ' s r e a d i n g achievement. D o c t o r a l d i s s e r t a t i o n , U n i v e r s i t y of Oregon, 1975D i s s e r t a t i o n Abstracts International , 1976, 4254A. Dinkmeyer, D. The B a s i c s of Adult-Teen R e l a t i o n s h i p s . Springs, F l o r i a : CMTI Press, 1 9 7 6 .  Coral  Dinkmeyer, D. A study of A d l e r i a n c h i l d guidance c o u n s e l l i n g as measured by c h i l d and mother responses to problem i n v e n t o r i e s . Doctoral d i s s e r t a t i o n , Michigan State University, 1958. Dissertation Abstracts International, 1959, i£, 3 2 0 8 - 3 2 1 0 . Dinkmeyer, D. and McKay, G. Leading e f f e c t i v e parent study groups. Elementary S c h o o l Guidance and C o u n s e l l i n g , 1974,  9(2),  108-115.  Dinkmeyer, D. and McKay, G. R a i s i n g a Responsible C h i l d . New York: Simon and Hehurter, 1973Dinkmeyer,DD.aandMMcKay, G. Systematic T r a i n i n g f o r E f f e c t i v e P a r e n t i n g . C i r c l e Pines, Minn.: American Guidance S e r v i c e , M.C, 1975Dinkmeyer, D. and Munro, J.- Group C o u n s e l l i n g : Theory Practise. Itasca, 111.: F.E. Peacock, 1971• D r e i k u r s , R. The Challenge of Parenthood. Meredith P r e s s , 1 9 5 8 . D r e i k u r s , R. and S o l t z , V. Children: York: Hawthorn Books IncTj 1 9 6 4 .  New  and  York:  The C h a l l e n g e .  New  E a s t l a c k , K. The Wesley Family E d u c a t i o n Center. A study i n behaviour and a t t i t u d e changes. Paper submitted a t the U n i v e r s i t y of M i n n i s o t a , January 1 2 , 1970. F e a r s , S.L.  A d l e r i a n parent study groups.  Counsellor, 1 9 7 6 , 2^3, 320-330.  The  School  F r a z i e r , F. and Matthes, W. Parent education: A comparison of A d l e r i a n and b e h a v i o u r a l approaches. Elementary School Guidance and C o u n s e l l i n g , 1 9 7 5 , 1 0 ( 1 ) , 3 1 - 3 8 . Freeman, C.S. A d l e r i a n mother study groups: E f f e c t s on a t t i t u d e s and behaviour. J o u r n a l of M a l i r i d u a l Psychology,  May 1975, 2 1 ( 1 ) ,  37-50.  79  G l a s s , G.V. and S t a n l e y , J.C. S t a t i s t i c a l Methods i n Educat i o n and Psychology. P r e n t i c e - H a l l Inc., 1970. Gordon, T. Parent E f f e c t i v e n e s s T r a i n i n g . H. Wyden Inc., 1970.  New  York:  Peter  Goula, J.R. The e f f e c t of A d l e r i a n parent study groups w i t h and without communication t r a i n i n g on the behaviour of parents and c h i l d r e n . D o c t o r a l d i s s e r t a t i o n , U n i v e r s i t y of A r i z o n a , 1 9 7 6 . D i s s e r t a t i o n Abstracts International, 1977, 21> 1985A-198SA : -  Haley, J . Research on Family P a t t e r n s : An Instrument Measurement. Family Process, 1 9 6 4 , J3, 4 1 - 6 5 . Haley, T.F. M u l t i p l e c o u n s e l l i n g w i t h mother i n a p u b l i c secondary s c h o o l . D o c t o r a l d i s s e r t a t i o n , U n i v e r s i t y of Oregon, 1 9 6 3 . D i s s e r t a t i o n Abstracts I n t e r n a t i o n a l , 1963, 24, 3 4 2 2 - 3 4 2 3 . Hays, W.L. Statistics. Winston, 1 9 6 3 . Hereford, G.F. Discussion.  196T  New  York:  H o l t , Rinehart  and  Changing P a r e n t a l A t t i t u d e s Through Group A u s t i n , Texas: U n i v e r s i t y of Texas P r e s s ,  H i l l m a n , B.W. The p a r e n t - t e a c h e r e d u c a t i o n c e n t e r : A supplement to elementary s c h o o l c o u n s e l l i n g . Elementary School Guidance and C o u n s e l l i n g , December I 9 6 8 , 2.(2), 111-117. Hillman, B.W. and McKay, G. The A d l e r i a n P a r e n t a l A s s e s s ment of C h i l d Behaviour S c a l e . Unpublished measuring instrument. The U n i v e r s i t y of A r i z o n a , 1 9 7 6 . H i l l m a n , B.W. and Perry, T. The parent teacher education c e n t e r : An e v a l u a t i o n of a program f o r improving family r e l a t i o n s . J o u r n a l of Family C o u n s e l l i n g , 1 9 7 5 , 2, 1 1 - 1 6 . Kamali, R.M. The e f f e c t i v e n e s s of c o u n s e l l i n g i n a community parent teacher education c e n t e r . The Family C o o r d i n a t o r , October 1 9 6 9 , 401-402. Krumboltz, J . and Krumboltz, H. Changing C h i l d r e n ' s Behavi o u r . Englewood C l i f f s , N.J.: P r e n t i c e - H a l l , 1972. Laine, C.R. A study of the impact of the D r e i k u r s parent study group method on p a r e n t a l a t t i t u d e s toward and behavi o u r a l i n t e r a c t i o n w i t h the s c h o o l . D o c t o r a l d i s s e r t a t i o n , U n i v e r s i t y of P i t t s b u r g h , 1 9 7 3 . D i s s e r t a t i o n Abstracts I n t e r n a t i o n a l , 1974, ^ 4 , 6 3 8 6 A .  80 Mahoney, K.F. The e f f e c t of A d l e r i a n groups on the authori a r i a n c h i l d - r e a r i n g p r a c t i c e s of p a r e n t s . Doctoral d i s s e r t a t i o n , U n i v e r s i t y of Wyoming, 1974. Dissertation A b s t r a c t s I n t e r n a t i o n a l , 1975, 2 5 , 4 l 6 l A . McDonough, J . J . J r . Approaches to A d l e r i a n f a m i l y e d u c a t i o n research. J o u r n a l of I n d i v i d u a l Psychology, 1976, 31, 224-231. Moos, R. Family Environment Scale P r e l i m i n a r y Manual. PaikxAlto.ygCglif.•: P s y c h o l o g i s t s Press, 1974. Nobel, R.D. An e v a l u a t i o n of parent e f f e c t i v e n e s s t r a i n i n g and A d l e r i a n parent groups: Changing c h i l d r e a r i n g a t t i t u d e s . D o c t o r a l d i s s e r t a t i o n , Indiana U n i v e r s i t y , 1976. D i s s e r t a t i o n A b s t r a c t s I n t e r n a t i o n a l , 1977, 37,  4869A.  Nordal, K.C. The e f f e c t s of A d l e r i a n parent t r a i n i n g and c h i l d c o u n s e l l i n g on l e a r n e r s e l f - c o n c e p t and behaviour of p r e s c h o o l c h i l d r e n . D o c t o r a l d i s s e r t a t i o n , U n i v e r s i t y of M i s s i s s i p p i , 1976. D i s s e r t a t i o n Abstracts International, 1977, 2Z> 1468A-1469A. Obon, P.H. Treating Relationships. Graphic Pub., l o . Inc., 1976. Peterson, B.  l o r , 1969,  Parent e f f e c t i v e n e s s  16(5).  Lake M i l l s , Iowa: training.  School Counsel-  P i a t t , J.M. E f f i c i e n c y of the A d l e r i a n model i n elementary school counselling. Elementary School Guidance and C o u n s e l l i n g , December 1971, 6 ( 2 ) , 86-91. P l e s s , I.B. and S a t t e r w h i t e , i n g and i t s a p p l i c a t i o n .  1973, 1, 613-621.  B. A measure of f a m i l y f u n c t i o n S o c i a l Science and Medicine,  Robinson, H.B. and P e t t i l , M.L. the R e l a t i o n s h i p .  A Study Designed to Improve  Runyan, A.J. Parent e d u c a t i o n w i t h f a m i l i e s of c h i l d r e n w i t h extreme reading problems. D o c t o r a l d i s s e r t a t i o n , U n i v e r s i t y of Oregon, 1972. D i s s e r t a t i o n Abstracts I n t e r n a t i o n a l , 1973, 22» 5499A-5500A. S a n t i l l i , M. The E f f e c t s of Parent Communication T r a i n i n g on C h i l d Behaviour. Shaw, M.C. The f e a s i b i l i t y of parent group c o u n s e l l i n g elementary s c h o o l s . Elementary School Guidance and C o u n s e l l i n g , 1969, 4 ( 1 ) , 43-53-  in  81 Shaw, M.C. and T u e l , J.D. A f o c u s f o r p u b l i c s c h o o l guidance programs: A model and p r o p o s a l . P e r s o n n e l and Guidance J o u r n a l , 1966,  45,  824-830.  S o l t z , V. Study Group Leaders Manual. A d l e r I n s t i t u t e , 1967.  Chicago:  Alfred  S t e e d , S.P. The I n f l u e n c e of F a m i l i a l A d j u s t m e n t . Doctoral d i s s e r t a t i o n , U n i v e r s i t y of A r i z o n a , 1971. Dissertation Abstracts International, 1971• Swenson, S.S. Changing expressed p a r e n t a l a t t i t u d e s toward c h i l d - r e a r i n g p r a c t i c e s and i t s e f f e c t on s c h o o l a d a p t a t i o n and l e v e l of adjustment r e c e i v e d by p a r e n t s . D o c t o r a l d i s s e r t a t i o n , Boston U n i v e r s i t y , 1970. Dissertat i o n A b s t r a c t s I n t e r n a t i o n a l , 1970, ^1, 2 1 1 8 A - 2 1 1 9 A . Tendall, J . Middle/Junior high school counsellors' corner. E l e m e n t a r y S c h o o l Guidance and C o u n s e l l i n g , December 1974, 2 ( 2 ) , 159-164. W a l k e r , H.M. Walker Problem B e h a v i o u r I d e n t i f i c a t i o n Checklist. Los A n g e l e s , C a l i f . : Western . P s y c h o l o g i c a l Services, 1976. Weiss, C.H. E v a l u a t i n g A c t i o n Programs: A c t i o n and E d u c a t i o n . B o s t o n , Mass.: 1972.  Readings i n S o c i a l A l l y n and Bacon,  W i n t e r , W.D. and F e r r e i n e a , A . J . Research i n Family I n t e r a c t i o n : Readings and Commentary. P a l o A l t o , C a l i f . : S c i e n c e and B e h a v i o u r Books, I969• Zuckerman, L. E f f e c t s of l e a r n i n g i n A d l e r i a n p a r e n t s t u d y groups u s i n g l e c t u r e - d i s c u s s i o n and l e c t u r e - d i s c u s s i o n with s e l f - i n s t r u c t i o n a l material. Doctoral d i s s e r t a t i o n , West V i r g i n i a U n i v e r s i t y , 1978. Dissertation Abstracts I n t e r n a t i o n a l , 1978, 39, 1354A.  APPENDIX  A  ANNOUNCEMENT/REGISTRATION NOTICE  83 January 24-th, 19 7 8  Dear Parent(s): We are happy to announce that the Counselling Department at Alpha Secondary School w i l l he o f f e r i n g a parent study group program f o r parents of Grade 8 students enrolled at our school. What are parent study groups? Parent study groups offer a program i n which 10-15 parents meet p e r i o d i a l l y (once a week f o r two hours i s usual) f o r nine to ten weeks and partake i n a self-help approach to the challenge of parenthood. Who  attends?  Parents l i k e you. Parents interested i n learning new, p r a c t i c a l steps concerning the problems of c h i l d - r a i s i n g ( p a r t i c u l a r l y those r e l a t i n g to children i n their early teens), parents interested i n promoting more harmony and cooperation i n everyday l i v i n g , parents w i l l i n g to lend mutual support to others, parents wanting to understand their children better and have fun while learning. Although i t i s not necessary, both parents are encouraged to attend. How much does i t cost? Participants pay only f o r the texts. A parentis handbook which contains readings and exercises i n p r i n c i p l e s of democratic parent-child relations ( $3«50) and a booklet e n t i t l e d "The Basics of Adult-Teen Relationships','" D. Dinkmeyer ($1.00) w i l l be used. What do the participants do? The participants of the parent study group w i l l be responsible f o r attending the meetings, reading assignments, discussing subject matter r e l a t i n g r e a l l i f e experiences as they f e e l i t applies to the text. The group i s the c o l l e c tive expert. Learning more effective ways of r e l a t i n g to your c h i l dren takes courage, practise, and patience .... the courage to be open to, and accept, new ideas and attitudes .... practise i n applying the p r i n c i p l e s and techniques at home  84 -  2 -  January  2 4 , 1978  w i t h your f a m i l y .... p a t i e n c e f o r the time i t takes t o d i s courage your c h i l d r e n ' s o n c e - e f f e c t i v e misbehaviour p a t t e r n s In our modern s o c i e t y we have come to expect " i n s t a n t " r e s u l t s , " i n s t a n t " success, " i n s t a n t " e v e r y t h i n g ! But anyt h i n g of r e a l value takes time. Take the v e r y f i r s t step now! Please f i l l out the bottom h a l f of t h i s l e t t e r and r e t u r n i t to one of the c o u n s e l l o r s . Thank you. I f you wish f u r t h e r i n f o r m a t i o n , p l e a s e c a l l me. Yours s i n c e r e l y ,  AF/vh  Aerock Fox, C o u n s e l l o r .  PARENT STUDY GROUP ALPHA SECONDARY SCHOOL Check one! I am d e f i n i t e l y i n t e r e s t e d i n p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n a parent study group beginning February 2 8 , 1 9 7 8 , 7 : 0 0 - 9 : 0 0 p.m. I am i n t e r e s t e d i n p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n a parent study group, but not a t the time l i s t e d above I am not i n t e r e s t e d i n a parent  (Telephone  number)  study group.  (Parent's  signature)  APPENDIX  B  ADLERIAN PARENTAL ASSESSMENT OF CHILD BEHAVIOUR SCALE (APACBS)  86 ADLERIAN PARENTAL ASSESSMENT  OF CHILD  BEHAVIOUR SCALE (APACBS)  DIRECTIONS:  P l e a s e c i r c l e t h e number f o r e a c h i t e m * w h i c h best d e s c r i b e s your i d e n t i f i e d chard's behaviour as y o u s e e i t . P l e a s e t r y t o r e s p o n d t o e v e r y item . ( R e p r i n t e d by p e r m i s s i o n o f t h e autilbr-) " 1  Ul  o O  O  > Your  identified  K Ul  child:  I h-) 6 6 I og og  2  :  3  2  CO  S3  1.  Has t o be c a l l e d more t h a n once t o g e t o u t o f bed i n t h e m o r n i n g .  1  2  3  4 5 6 7  2.  Gets dressed f o r s c h o o l without being reminded.  1  2  3  4 5 6 7  3.  Remembers t o t a k e l u n c h money, books, e t c . t o s c h o o l .  1  2  3  4 5 6 7  4-„  Leaves f o r s c h o o l without reminded.  being  1  3  4 5 6 7  5»  Makes h e l p f u l s u g g e s t i o n s family discussions.  during  1  2  3  4 5 6 7  6.  I n v o l v e s you i n r e s o l v i n g v e r b a l arguments w i t h o t h e r c h i l d r e n ( f o r example; b r o t h e r s o r s i s t e r s , o r c h i l d r e n i n the neighborhood).  1  2  3  4 5 6 7  7.  Does c h o r e s  reminded. 1  2  3  4 5 6 7  8.  F i g u r e s out s o l u t i o n own p r o b l e m s .  1 .2  3  4 5 6 7  9.  Changes b e h a v i o u r i t bothers you.  3  4 5 6 7 4 5 6 7  without.being  to his/her  when t o l d  that  10.  P u t s d i r t y c l o t h e s i n hamper without being reminded.  3  11".  Argues w i t h you  3 4 5 6 7  87  <!  Ul  td  w  LW  >  > K  belongings scattered the house.  o 3  K o  M 1-3 H  O  £g  Ul  2  3  1  2  3  ey ^ W  Leaves around  13-  I n t e r r u p t s you times.  14.  Is on time f o r meals.  12 3 4-567  15.  E a t s most f o o d o f f e r e d w i t h o u t b e i n g coaxed.  1  16.  Has t a b l e manners w h i c h a c c e p t a b l e t o you.  17.  T a t t l e s on o t h e r c h i l d r e n ( f o r examplec. s b r o t h e r s o r s i s t e r s , o r c h i l d r e n i n the neighborhood).  1  2  3  4-5  6  7  18.  Throws temper t a n t r u m s .  1  2  3  4-5  6  7  19.  S h a r e s problems she/he independently.  20.  Isconsiderate  21.  Requests h e l p o n t a s k s she/he c a n do i n d e p e n d e n t l y .  1  22.  C l e a n s up a f t e r s n a c k i n g w i t h o u t b e i n g reminded.  23-  are  c a n do  of your f e e l i n g s .  5  2  12.  at inappropriate  4  M  6  7  12 3 4-567  1  2 2  3 3  4  5  4-5  6 6  7 7  1234-567 12  3  4  5  6  7  3  4  5  6  7  12  3  4  5  6  7  B e h a v e s i n s u c h a way t h a t y o u find yourself feeling hurt.  12  3  4  5  6  7  24.  B e h a v e s i n s u c h a way t h a t y o u f i n d y o u r s e l f f e e l i n g annoyed.  12  3  4  5  6  7  25•  B e h a v e s i n s u c h a way t h a t y o u f i n d yourself f e e l i n g discouraged, b e l i e v i n g t h a t the c h i l d cannot improve.  12  3  4  5  6  7  2  88 <  >  s:  > K Ul  0 g  K  O  <  Ul  0  i-3 H g  3  W  W  B  ^  O g  O g  M w  6  3  26.  Behaves i n such a way t h a t you f i n d y o u r s e l f f e e l i n g angry.  1 22 33 ^4 1  5 •6  7  27.  Stays w i t h d i f f i c u l t tasks u n t i l they a r e completed.  4 1 1 2 2 3 3 4  5  7  28.  D i s t u r b s you when you are d r i v i n g .  29.  Remembers where she/he puts belongings.  4 5 6 7 1 12 2 3 3 4 1 2 33 4^ 5 6 7  30.  Has to be t o l d more than once to go to bed.  1 1 2 2 3 3 4 4  5  6  7  31.  Is q u i e t a f t e r going to bed.  1 1 2 2 3 3 4 4  5  6  7  32.  I n v o l v e s you i n r e s o l v i n g p h y s i c a l f i g h t s with other c h i l d r e n ( f o r example: b r o t h e r s or s i s t e r s , or c h i l d r e n i n the neighborhood).  1 1 22 33 44  5  6  7  6  APPENDIX  C  ATTITUDES TOWARD CHILD REARING SCALE  90 ATTITUDES TOWARD CHILD REARING SCALE Croake and H i n k l e For each of the f o l l o w i n g statements p l e a s e i n d i c a t e on the IBM sheet the extent to which you agree or d i s g r e e w i t h the statements by b l a c k e n i n g SA ( s t r o n g l y agree), A (agree), U (undecided), D ( d i s a g r e e ) , or SD ( s t r o n g l y d i s a g r e e ) . 1. W i t h h o l d i n g allowance  i s a good method of d i s c i p l i n e .  2.  A c h i l d should be i n v i t e d to p a r t i c i p a t e i n p a r e n t - t e a c h e r conferences.  3.  A parent should remind a c h i l d to say " p l e a s e " and you" when he f o r g e t s .  "thank-  4. A parent should r e g u l a r l y help the c h i l d w i t h h i s homework. 5.  I t i s h e l p f u l t o f r e q u e n t l y remind a c h i l d of the r u l e s at home.  6. A c h i l d should obey the wishes of h i s e l d e r s . 7. A c h i l d should be able to t r e a t h i s p l a y t h i n g s as he without f e a r of punishment.  wishes,  8. In most q u a r r e l s between young c h i l d r e n , a d u l t s should arbitrate. 9.  A c h i l d should be able to choose how wants at a meal.  much of each food  he  10.  A c h i l d should not be allowed to wear c l o t h e s t h a t are noticeably d i r t y .  11.  A c h i l d should p a r t i c i p a t e i n a d e c i s i o n about h i s bedtime.  12.  P h y s i c a l punishment i s o f t e n the o n l y method of d i s c i p l i n e t h a t w i l l work.  13.  A parent should demand r e s p e c t from h i s c h i l d .  14. The parent should make i t h i s r e s p o n s i b i l i t y to see how c h i l d i s behaving i n s c h o o l . 15•  his  A parent should step i n i f the teacher seems to not understand the behaviour of h i s c h i l d .  91 16.  A parent should not i n t e r f e r e i f an o l d e r c h i l d seems to he p i c k i n g on a younger c h i l d .  17.  A c h i l d of s i x can he h e l p f u l i n d e c i d i n g whether the f a m i l y should buy a new c a r .  18. A c h i l d should not be allowed to go o u t s i d e on a c o l d without wearing warm c l o t h i n g .  day  19.  I f a parent r e a l l y does a good job r e a r i n g h i s c h i l d , c h i l d w i l l t u r n out f i n e .  the  20.  A parent should assume t h a t a c h i l d w i l l do whatever the c h i l d has agreed to do.  21.  A parent should t r y to convince a f e a r f u l i s n o t h i n g of which to be a f r a i d .  22.  A parent who reminds a c h i l d s e v e r a l times to do a task i s t r a i n i n g the c h i l d i n d i s o b e d i e n c e .  23.  A parent should remind a c h i l d when i t i s time to go to  c h i l d t h a t there  24. A l l members of a f a m i l y r e g a r d l e s s of age should agree most f a m i l y d e c i s i o n s .  bed. on  25-  A parent should p r a i s e h i s c h i l d when the c h i l d has been good.  26.  A c h i l d should be able to spend h i s allowance  as he  27.  A parent should make sure a c h i l d l o o k s r i g h t  i n his dress.  28.  A c h i l d should be p a i d f o r doing e x t r a chores around the house.  29-  I t i s b e s t f o r the parent not to become i n v o l v e d when the c h i l d i s misbehaving.  30.  A parent should stop a f i g h t between two looks as i f one of them w i l l get h u r t .  31.  C h i l d r e n need punishment i n order to l e a r n proper behaviour.  32.  A c h i l d should be r e s p o n s i b l e f o r p u t t i n g away h i s own as soon as he l e a r n s to walk.  33*  A c h i l d needs to be reminded regularly as to what's and wrong.  34.  A parent should step i n i f an a d u l t neighbor seems to be u n f a i r l y reprimanding h i s c h i l d .  chooses.  children i f i t  toys  right  92 35-  To c o r r e c t a c h i l d f o r s o m e t h i n g t h a t he a l r e a d y knows i s wrong i s n o t h e l p f u l t o t h e c h i l d .  36.  A parent i s morally  37.  A parent should  38.  I f a child out f i n e .  step  r e s p o n s i b l e f o r how h i s c h i l d  behaves.  i n i f a b u l l y i s p i c k i n g on h i s c h i l d .  receives lots  o f l o v e a n d a f f e c t i o n he w i l l  turn  39• A p a r e n t i s d i s r e s p e c t f u l o f t h e c h i l d when -he does somet h i n g t h e c h i l d c a n do f o r h i m s e l f . 4-0. A p a r e n t s h o u l d  point out a c h i l d ' s  mistakes.  APPENDIX  D  FAMILY ENVIRONMENT SCALE  " Reproduced by s p e c i a l permission from The Family Environment Scale by Rudolf Moos, Ph.D. Copyright date, 1974 SOCIAL C I J M A I T Published by Consulting Psychologists Press, Inc. A  R U D O L F II. M O O S  '  INSTRUCTIONS  ,.  '„  f  There -ire 90 statements in this booklet; They arc statements . ' about •f'Smijics. You arc to decide which of those statements .are [• '. v'.. true of your family and. which are false. Make all your marks''on . ,' •;. the separate answer sheets. If you think the statement is True or.' • ,<'-•• '• •imostly/ 7Vuc.of.'•your/family, make an >J in the box labeled T ^ /"(true), if.ypu think the statement is False or mostly False.of.your' ;* •*' family,.make an'X in the" box labeled F (false).: . ' -1 ;  •>  '.'•, '  • • . 4 ' - ^ <•* '•"• ' v  ;  '.  -V  , ' , .••''You' may rfeel,- that some .of the statements are irue for some , y . J , family .members and. false for others. Mark T if.the statement-is true for most'members: Mark F if the statement is false for most - .' members. If the members arc evenly divided, decide what is'thc;' •* •' • V stronger overall impression and answer accordingly'. " T"> •  s  •  ' 'i •  i'•'<»',-..•*.:,  •  '  .v'  '  ,v> ••'  ,  '  ' •  . '  >':  CONSULTING'-PS^CHOLOGISTS.PRESS; INC.; •••:,, < 577 College.^v<L;-'?a'lo-:Alto;'.Cai(fornia'i94306 ' >S'Vi (  :  .fk'Z-'-'u'-'"" .» '••VJ : -/:c - '•/••'•/' v. > v-l <i&{\r..':..' i.^'.^Copyrighi 1974' by 'Consulting Psychologists Press,' Palo A l t o , C A - 9 4 3 0 6 ; i '•} -/'Xii, rights reserved. -This tost, or parts thereof, riiay' not be reproduced'In j'; • •- 'f»n.y!form without pkrmUslfJjVJbfJthc'publhher.'v •*••$ '•''-U'S' ! k  1st"> it*. •  '  "Remember,we.woijktlike to,know what your family seems like to yowl.So do not try, to figure out how other members see your > " ' TanVilyy but do give us your general impression of your family .:• •, >for'each'$tat,6mcfit.' '• ; ."",'  :  !  vV  ;  95  1. Family members really help and support one another.  20. There are very few rules to follow in our family.  2. F a m i l y members often keep their feelings to themselves.  21. We put a lot of energy into what wc do at. home.  3. We fight a lot in our family.  22. It's hard to " b l o w off s t e a m " at home without upsetting somebody.  4. We don't do things on our own very often in our family. 5. We leel it is important lo he the best at whatever you do.  G. We often talk about political and social problems. 7. We spend most weekends and evenings at home. 8. F a m i l y members attend church, synagogue, or Sunday School fairly often.  9.  Activities in our family are pretty carefully planned.  10. F a m i l y members are rarely ordered around. 1 1. We often seem to be killing time at home. 12. We say anything wc want l o around home. 13. F a m i l y members rarely become openly angry. 14. In our family, we are strongly encouraged to be independent. 15. G e t t i n g ahead in life is very important in our family.  23.  f a m i l y members sometimes gel so angry they throw things.  24. We think things out for ourselves in our family. 25. I low much money a person makes is not very important to us. 26.  Learning about new and different things is very important in our family.  27. N o b o b y in our family is active ifi sports, Little League, bowling, etc. 28. We often talk about the religious meaning of Christmas, Passover, or other holidays. 29. It's often hard to find things svhen you need them in our household. 30. There is one family rnember who makes most of the decisions. 31. There is a feeling of togetherness in our family.  H i . We rarely go to lectures, plays or concerts.  32. We tell each other about our personal problems.  17. Friends often come over for dinner or to visit.  33. F a m i l y members hardly ever lose their tempers.  IS.  34. We come and go as we want to in our family.  We don't say prayers in our fa m i I y.  19. We are generally very neat and orderly.  35. We believe in c o m p e t i t i o n and " m a y the best man w i n . "  36.  Wc arc not that interested in cultural activities.  37.  We often go to movies, sports events, camping, etc.  38.  We don't believe in heaven or hell.  39.  Being on time is very important in our family.  •'10. There are set ways of doing things at home. •••11. We rarely volunteer when something has lo be done at home. 42.  If wc feel like doing something o n the spur of the moment we often just pick up and go.  43.  Family members often criticize each other.  44.  There is very little privacy in our family.  45.  We always strive to do things just a little better the next lime.  54.  Family members almost always rely on themselves when a problem comes up.  55.  Family members rarely worry about job promotions, school grades, etc.  56. Someone in our family plays a musical instrument. 57.  Family members are not very involved in recreational activities outside work or school.  58.  Wc believe there arc some things you just have to take on faith.  59.  Family members make sure their rooms are neat.  60.  Everyone has an equal say in family decisions.  61.  There is very little group spirit in our family.  62.  Money and paying bills is openly talked about in our family.  63.  If there's a disagreement in our family, we try hard lo smooth things over and keep the peace.  64.  Family members strongly encourage each other lo stand up for their rights.  46.  We rarely have intellectual discussions.  4 7.  F v c r y o n e in our family has a hobby or two.  48.  Family members have strict ideas about what is right and wrong.  49.  People change their minds often in our. family.  50.  There is a strong emphasis on following rules in our family.  65.  In our family, we don't try that hard to succeed.  51.  F a m i l y members really back each other up.  66.  Family members often go to the library.  52.  Someone usually gets upset if y o u complain in our family.  67.  53.  F a m i l y members sometimes hit each other.  Family members sometimes attend courses or take lessons for some hobby or interest (outside of school).  68.  In our family each person has different ideas about what is right and wrong.  80.  Rules are pretty inflexible in our household.  69.  Each person's duties arc clearly defined in our family.  81. There is plenty of time and attention for everyone in our family.  70.  We can do whatever we want to in our family.  82. There are a lot of spontaneous discussions in our family.  71.  We really get along well with each other;  83.  72.  We are usually careful about what we say to each other.  In our family, wc believe you don't ever get anywhere by raising your voice.  84.  73.  Family members often try lo one-up or out-do each other.  We arc not really encouraged to speak up for ourselves in our family.  74.  It's hard to be by yourself without hurting someone's feelings in our household.  85.  Family members are often compared with others as to how well they are doing at work or school.  75.  "Work before play" is the rule in our family.  86.  Family members really like music, art and literature.  76.  Watching T . V . is more important than reading in our family.  87. O u r main form of entertainment is watching T . V . or listening to the radio.  77.  Family members go out a lot.  78.  79.  88.  Family members believe that if y o u sin you will be punished.  T h e Bible is a very important book in our home.  89.  Dishes are usually done immediately after eating.  M o n e y is not handled very carefully in our family.  90.  Y o u can't get away with much in our family.  APPENDIX  E  PARENT-AD0LESCENT COMMUNICATION INVENTORY (FORM P)  99  T o t a l Score  FORM P  PARENT-ADOLESCENT COMMUNICATION INVENTORY Developed by MILLARD  J. B I E N V E N U , SR.  W i t h this i n v e n t o r y you a r e offered an o p p o r t u n i t y to make an objective study of c o m m u n i c a t i o n between y o u r s e l f and y o u r teen-age son or d a u g h t e r l o discover the good points in this r e l a t i o n s h i p and also where you may be h a v i n g problems. Y o u w i l l find i t both i n t e r e s t i n g and h e l p f u l to make t h i s study. B e sure to keep the p a r t i c u l a r c h i l d under study here in m i n d ns you answer the questions below.  DIRECTIONS 1.  T h e P a r e n t - A d o l e s c e n t I n v e n t o r y is not n test. T h e r e a r e no r i g h t or w r o n g answers to i t . T h e most helpful a n s w e r to each question is your i n d i c a t i o n of the w a y you feel a t the moment. B e sure to keep one particular son or d a u g h t e r in m i n d as you complete t h i s f o r m .  2.  Y o u r answers to this i n v e n t o r y a r c confidential. Y o u a r e n o t asked to s i g n y o u r name or to i d e n t i f y y o u r s e l f in any w a y . Y o u can n o t receive a grade because a l l of the answers you give a r e considered right answers f o r you. Use the f o l l o w i n g examples f o r p r a c t i c e . P u t a ( J ) in one of the three blanks on the r i g h t to show how the question applies to you and to y o u r ways of r e l a t i n g to the son or d a u g h t e r .  3.  YKS uauntly  Does y o u r s o n / d a u g h t e r t r y to see y o u r side of t h i n g s ?  NO Momrllmea  Hellion*  ,  Do you express y o u r opinions to h i m / h e r ?  .  •1. T h e Y E S column is to be used when the question can be answered as h a p p e n i n g most of the t i m e or usually. T h e N O column is to be used when the question can be answered ns seldom or never. T h e middle column S O M E T I M E S should be m a r k e d when you definitely can not a n s w e r Y K S or N O . U S E T H I S C O L U M N A S L I T T L E A S P O S S I B L E . M o s t parents a r e able to give a yes or no answer to these questions. 5.  Read each question c a r e f u l l y and m a r k your Re sure to answer every q u e s t i o n .  pernonal  answer  to i t .  Copyright I960 Millard P. Hienvenu, Sr. All rights renurvnd. I'rinwd in ihv United SluWi of America. I'ublinhod by F A M I L Y L I K E P U B L I C A T I O N S , INC. Box 427, SnludB, N. C. 28773  100  VIM usually  1.  2.  Is f a m i l y c o n v e r s a t i o n easy a n d p l e a s a n t ul mealtimes?  NO Ronirllmel  .  D o y o u w a i t u n t i l y o u r s o n / d a u g h t e r is through talking before " h a v i n g your s a y ? "  3.  D o y o u p r e t e n d y o u a r e l i s t e n i n g to h i m / h e r when actually you have tuned h i m / h e r out?  -1.  D o e s y o u r s p o u s e tend to l e c t u r e a n d p r e a c h  '  too m u c h t o y o u r s o n / d a u g h t e r ?  .  5.  Does y o u r  6.  Does y o u r s o n / d a u g h t e r seem to respect opinion?  7.  D o y o u ever l a u g h at y o u r s o n / d n u g h t e r or make fun of h i m / h e r ?  8.  f a m i l y d o t h i n g s as n g r o u p ?  Do you wish your son/daughter  your _____  were  n different kind of person? 9.  .  D o y o u feel t h a t y o u r s o n / d a u g h t e r  is b a d ?  10.  Does y o u r f a m i l y talk t h i n g s w i t h each o t h e r ?  11.  Does y o u r s o n / d a u g h t e r discuss personal problems with you?  12.  Does your spouse w i s h y o u r son/daughter were a different kind of person?  13.  Dl.  over _  D o e s y o u r s o n / d a u g h t e r t a l k to y o u i n a disrespectful manner?  Does y o u r s o n / d a u g h t e r discuss problems w i t h your spouse?  17.  Do you ask your son's/daughter's opinion in deciding h o w much spending money he/she should have?  ,  .  .  D o y o u discuss matters of sex w i t h y o u r son/daughter?  ____.  _____ .  Is it e a s y f o r y o u r s p o u s e t o t r u s t y o u r soil/daughter ?  20.  .  personal  Does y o u r spouse p a y y o u r s o n / d a u g h t e r c o m pliments or say nice t h i n g s to h i m / h e r ?  19.  .  interests and activities?  10.  18.  .  D o you show an interest in your son's/ daughter's  15.  nrltlum  D o e s y o u r s o n / d a u g h t e r help y o u to u n d e r s t a n d h i m / h e r b y s a y i n g h o w h o Ashe t h i n k s a n d f e e l s ?  . _„.._  .  101  V KH  NO  UHUaily  aumrllmvs  Kcltlom  21. Do you pay c o m p l i m e n t s or say nice t h i n g s to y o u r s o n / d a u g h t e r ? 22. Do you have confidence in his/her a b i l i t i e s ? 23. Is y o u r s o n / d a u g h t e r s a r c a s t i c toward y o u ?  .  2- 1. Is it easy for you to t r u s t your s o n / d a u g h t e r ?  ______  .  25. Does y o u r spouse have confidence in y o u r sou's/daughter's a b i l i t i e s ? 2(3. W h e n a difference arises are you and y o u r s o n / d a u g h t e r able to discuss it together (in a calm m a n n e r ) ?  _____ .  .  27. Do you consider y o u r s o n ' s / d a u g h t e r ' s ideas in m a k i n g f a m i l y d e c i s i o n s ? 28. Do you c r i t i c i z e y o u r s o n / d a u g h t e r too m u c h ?  _ .  _____  20. Does y o u r spouse really t r y to see y o u r s o n ' s / d a u g h t e r ' s side of t h i n g s ? 30. Do you allow y o u r s o n / d a u g h t e r to get a n g r y and blow off s t e a m ?  . .  31. Do you consider y o u r son's/daughter's o p i n i o n in m a k i n g decisions w h i c h concern h i m / h e r ?  ,  32. Docs y o u r spouse c r i t i c i z e y o u r s o n / d a u g h t e r too m u c h ? 33. Du you find y o u r s o n ' s / d a u g h t e r ' s voice irritating?  .  3-1. Do you t r y to make y o u r s o n / d a u g h t e r fee! better when he/she is "down in the d u m p s ? "  .  .  35. Do you really t r y to see y o u r son's/ d a u g h t e r ' s side of t h i n g s ?  ,  3(3. Do you encourage y o u r s o n / d a u g h t e r to tell you h i s / h e r p r o b l e m s ? 37. Does y o u r s o n / d a u g h t e r really t r y to see y o u r side of t h i n g s ? 38. Do you tend to lecture and preach too much to your s o n / d a u g h t e r ? 39. Does y o u r sou 'daughter accept y o u r reasons for decisions you make c o n c e r n i n g h i m / h e r ? •10. Do you feel it hard to say w h a t you feel in t a l k i n g w i t h y o u r s o n / d a u g h t e r ?  .  .__  . .  . ,  ,  APPENDIX  F  PARENT ADOLESCENT COMMUNICATION INVENTORY  (FORM A)  T o t a l Score.  FORM A  PARENT-ADOLESCENT COMMUNICATION INVENTORY Developed by M I L L A R D J. B I E N V E N U ,  SR.  W i t h t h i s i n v e n t o r y you are offered an o p p o r t u n i t y to make an objective study of c o m m u n i c a t i o n between y o u r s e l f and y o u r parents to d i s cover the good points in t h i s r e l a t i o n s h i p and also where you m a y be h a v i n g problems. Y o u w i l l find it both i n t e r e s t i n g and helpful to make this s t u d y .  DIRECTIONS 1.  T h e P a r e n t - A d o l e s c e n t I n v e n t o r y is not a test. T h e r e are no r i g h t or w r o n g a n s w e r s to it. T h e most h e l p f u l answer to each question is your i n d i c a t i o n of the way you feel at the moment.  2.  Y o u r answers to t h i s i n v e n t o r y are c o n f i d e n t i a l . Y o u are not asked to s i g n y o u r name or to i d e n t i f y y o u r s e l f in any w a y . Y o u can not receive a grade because all of Die answers you give are considered r i g h t answers f o r you.  3.  U s e the f o l l o w i n g examples for p r a c t i c e . P u t a check (J) i n one of the three blanks on the r i g h t to show how the question applies to you and to y o u r ways of r e l a t i n g to y o u r p a r e n t s . VKS usually  •umetlm«»  NO seldom  Do others t r y to see y o u r side of t h i n g s ? Do you express your opinions to y o u r p a r e n t s ? 4.  T h e Y E S column is to be used when the question can be answered as h a p p e n i n g most of the time or usually. T h e N O column is to be used when the question can be answered as seldom or never. T h e middle column S O M E T I M E S should be m a r k e d when you defin i t e l y can not a n s w e r Y E S or N O . U S E T H I S C O L U M N AS L I T T L E A S P O S S I B L E . M o s t y o u n g people are able to give a yes or a no a n s w e r to these questions.  5. Read each question c a r e f u l l y and m a r k your personal B e s u r e to answer every question.. I'rlnU'd  In  111.  Copyright United Stat*, OrisIn-lly  answer  M l l l n r d J . I l l r n v c n u , Sr. A l l rlllhta renorvod. A m e r i c a . P u b l i s h e d by F A M I L Y L I F E 1 ' U H L I C A T I O N S , I l i . x <W_&. I J i i r h u m , N . C . 2 1 1 0 8 . p u b l U h e c f II) T h e F a m i l y C o o r d i n a t o r , A p r i l 11)01). of  to it.  INC.  104  YES 9  usually  1.  Is f a m i l y c o n v e r s a t i o n e a s y a n d  pleasant  al meals?  .  2.  Do your parents w a i t until you are t h r o u g h talking before " h a v i n g their s a y ? "  15.  D o y o u p r e t e n d y o u a r e l i s t e n i n g to y o u r p a r ents w h e n a c t u a l l y you have tuned them o u t ?  4.  D o y o u feel t h a t y o u r f a t h e r lectures a n d p r e a c h e s to y o u too m u c h ?  5.  Does your  6.  D o y o u r p a r e n t s s e e m to r e s p e c t y o u r o p i n i o n ?  f a m i l y d o t h i n g s as a  group?  7.  D o they l a u g h at you or m a k e f u n of  8.  1.1 n y o u f e e l y o u r m o t h e r w i s h e s y o u w e r e a different k i n d of person?  you?  9.  D o either of y o u r parents believe you are bad?  that  10.  Does y o u r f a m i l y talk t h i n g s over w i t h each other ?  11.  Do you discuss personal problems your mother?  12.  D o y o u feel y o u r f a t h e r w i s h e s y o u w e r e a different k i n d of person?  13.  D o y o u r p a r e n t s s e e m to t a l k to y o u as i f y o u were much younger than you actually are?  11.  with  Do they show an interest in y o u r  interests  and activities ? 15.  Do you discuss personal problems w i t h your father ?  1G.  D o e s he p a y y o u c o m p l i m e n t s o r s a y n i c e t h i n g s to y o u ?  17.  Do y o u r parents ask y o u r o p i n i o n in d e c i d i n g how m u c h spending money you should  18.  Do y o u d i s c u s s m a t t e r s of sex w i t h  have?  either  of y o u r parents ? 1!).  Do you feel t h a t y o u r f a t h e r t r u s t s  20.  Do you help y o u r p a r e n t s u n d e r s t a n d you by s a y i n g how you think and  21.  feel?  Does y o u r m o t h e r pay c o m p l i m e n t s or say nice things  22.  you?  to  you?  D o c s s h e h a v e c o n f i d e n c e .in y o u r sarcastic  abilities?  23.  A r e your parents  24.  D o y o u feel t h a t y o u r m o t h e r t r u s t s  toward  you?  25.  Does y o u r f a t h e r have confidence in y o u r  you?  abilities ? 2(1.  D o y o u h e s i t a t e to d i s a g r e e w i t h of y o u r parents?  either  NO -ometlmes  seldom  YES u-uall?  27.  D o y o u f a i l to a s k y o u r p a r e n t s f o r t h i n g s because you believe they will deny y o u r requests?  28.  D o e s y o u r m o t h e r c r i t i c i z e y o u too m u c h ?  2D.  NO _l-_m  BometlineH  .  v  D o e s y o u r f a t h e r r e a l l y t r y to see y o u r s i d e of t h i n g s ?  30.  D o e i t h e r o f y o u r p a r e n t s a l l o w y o u to get angry and blow oH steam?  31.  Do either of y o u r parents consider y o u r o p i n i o n  32.  Does y o u r  33.  D o y o u find y o u r m o t h e r ' s tone of v o i c e  f a t h e r c r i t i c i z e y o u too  much?  3'1.  D o y o u r p a r e n t s t r y to m a k e y o u feel  irritating? when 35.  you  are  "down  in the  better  dumps?"  D o c s y o u r m o t h e r r e a l l y t r y t o see y o u r side of  things?  3C.  D o y o u find y o u r f a t h e r ' s t o n e of v o i c e irritating ?  37.  D o either of y o u r parents e x p l a i n t h e i r r e a s o n f o r not l e t t i n g y o u do s o m e t h i n g ?  38.  D o y o u feel t h a t y o u r m o t h e r lectures a n d preaches  to y o u too  much?  39.  D o you ask y o u r p a r e n t s a b o u t t h e i r reasons for decisions they make c o n c e r n i n g y o u ?  '10.  D o y o u f i n d i t h a r d to s a y w h a t y o u f e e l at h o m e ?  M A K E  SURE  YOU  H A V E  A N S W E R E D  GENERAL Your Ago  INFORMATION  Grade.. Years  N A M E  A L L T H E QUESTIONS  Sex:  Months  Male  Female  (Circle One)  OF SCHOOL  T o w n Y o u L i v e In  ,  N o . of C h i l d r e n L i v i n g at H o m o (not c o u n t i n g yourself) Where  Do Y o u  F i t Into the F a m i l y ?  Oldest Child AT  HOME  1 LIVE  In the M i d d l e WITH:  (Circle  One)  Youngest  Q  Real Mother  fj  •  Step-Mother  •  Other P l e a s e fill i n t h e n e x t  page  Child Real  Only Father  Step-Father  Child  APPENDIX  G  WALKER PROBLEM BEHAVIOUR IDENTIFICATION CHECKLIST  Walker Problem Behavior Identification Checklist  107  Revised 1976 by Hill M. Walker, Ph.D. Published  bv  WESTERN PSYCHOLOGICAL SERVICES $  PUBLISHERS A N D DISTRIBUTORS 12031 WILSHIRE B O U L E V A R D LOS ANGELES, C A L I f O R N I A 90025  A DIVISION OF M A N S O N WESTERN CORPORATION Name:  School:  Address:  Grade: Sex: M  Age:  Date:  Classroom:  Position of Rater:  Rated By:  INSTRUCTIONS Please read each statement carefully and respond by circling the number to the right of the statement if you have observed that behavioral item in the child's response pattern during the last two month period. If you have not observed the behavior described in the statement during this period, do not circle any numbers (in other words, make no marks whatsoever if the statement describes behavior which is NOT present). Examples: Scales  1. 2. 3. 4.  Has temper tantrums Has no friends Refers to himself as dumb, stupid, or incapable . . . . Must have approval for tasks attempted or completed.  4  Statements 1 and 4 are considered to be present while statements 2 and 3 are considered to be absent. Therefore, only the numbers to the right of items 1 and 4 are circled, and the numbers to the right of 2 and 3 are NOT circled. Profile Analysis Chart (PAC) U#* I  ItMt _ IrortilutllY  Copyright c 1970. 1976 by WESTERN PSYCHOLOGICAL SERVICES Nut lo be ropicxlucod in wholo or pail without written permission ol copyright owner  W-97A  All rights roserved.  2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9  Printed in U S A .  108 SCALE  1.  Complains  about  2.  Ii  and  3.  Does  4.  Becomes  5.  Comments  6.  Perfectionistic;  listless  7.  Will  8.  Other  9.  Has  not  others'  eonlorm  lo  that  destroy  no  limits on  dillicully  take  something  apait  act  as  Is  Apotoci.es  12.  Distorts  1.3.  Underachieving:  H.  Disturbs  other  15.  Tries  avoid calling  1G.  Makes  d i s t r u s t f u l or  Reacts  to  to  i< h e  restless, and/or  repeatedly truth  lor  by  him  making  Performs  everything  he  has  tainted  length  ol lime  his  children: teasing, attention  shilling  and/or  statements  below  not  others  go  his way  exactly, right  made  or  continually  himsetl  do  him  taboo  any  control Irom  things  having  were lor  without  when  understands  concentrating  overactive,  his own angry  about  11.  the  or  Meticulous  or  children  one  discrimination towards  tired  hysterical, upset  10.  17.  unfairness and/or  continual!/  his  rather  body  show  It o r a s k to h a v e  It d i s p l a y e d . ,  positions....  behavior  contrary  to  demonstrated  provoking  than  lad  ability  level  lights, interrupting  others  to h i m s e l f  suspicious remarks  s t r e s s f u l s i t u a t i o n s or  .'.1 about  changes  actions ol others  in routine with  toward  geneial body  him a c h e s , h e a d or  stomach  aches,  nausea 18.  Aigues  19.  Approaches  and  20.  Has  nervous  21.  Habitually  22.  Has  Utters  Continually  25.  Comments  26.  Repeats  27.  Has  Refers Does  that  to not  When  31.  Has  32.  Does  situations with  school experience  syllables and/or  nobody  likes  "I  through  can't  do  II"  response  nail-biting, hand-wringing  a c t i o n s or  comments  babbles  to  himself  him or  activity over  and  over  tantrums  himself  as  engage  in  or  dumb,  s t u p i d , or  group  irritated  mood  not  obey ol  shilts: until  incapable  activities by  other  depressed  threatened  33.  Complains Expresses  35.  Openly  36.  L'xpresses  37.  Has  38.  Must  39.  Displays  40.  Is h y p e r c r i t i c a l o l h i m s e l f  41.  Does  42.  Doesn't  43.  Shuns  nightmares,  concern  about  strikes back concern  children,  takes  out  his  liustration(s)  on  another  Inappropriate  with about  one  with  bad  moment,  manic  the  next  punishment  dreams  being  lonely,  angry  behavior  something  unhappy to  ..3  leasing ol other  t e r r i b l e or  horrible  children  happening  to  him.  friends  have  approval  not  complete protest  or  Steals things Does  46.  Reacts  with or  not  47.  Weeps Stutters,  49.  Easily  tasks  tasks  when  avoids  45.  48.  lor  attempted  physical aggression toward  44.  50.  exchanges  an  attention  34.  of  verbal  thing  rapid  no  In  bed.)  idea, thought,  teased or  word  muscle-twitching, eye-blinking,  seeks  one  person  last  (Wets  nonsense  temper  28.  the and  rejects the  23.  29.  have tasks  tics:  enuresis.  24.  30.  must new  Irom other  cries  or  distracted away  frequently  to  without  stammers,  others,  hurt,  noises,  persons  tease,  or  criticize him  activities  children  relationships with  deliance  ..1  completed  attempted  others  heterosexual  Initiate  or  o b j e c t s or  other  i n s t r u c t i o n s or  children  commands  provocation  blocks on  saying words  I r o m t h e t a s k at h a n d b y o r d i n a r y c l a s s r o o m s t i m u l i , i . e . m i n o r  movements  etc  stares blankly  into  space  and  is u n a w a i e  of  his surroundings when  doing  so  Sol. 1 Scora  Scala 2 Scon  Seal* 3 Scoft  Sola 4 Scon  Solo 5 Scors  APPENDIX  H  TELEPHONE INTERVIEW OUTLINE  110  OUTLINE OF THE  TELEPHONE INTERVIEW BEFORE "STEP'  1.  Introduce myself as the l e a d e r and thank parents f o r e x p r e s s i n g an i n t e r e s t to p a r t i c i p a t e i n STEP.  2.  Obtain an understanding r e g a r d i n g t h e i r o b j e c t i v e s f o r j o i n i n g STEP, e.g. d e s i r e to improve t h e i r r e l a t i o n s h i p with t h e i r c h i l d .  3.  D e s c r i b e need f o r attendance a t c l a s s e s and the need f o r i n f o r m a t i o n p r o v i d e d from the package of instruments.  k.  B r i e f l y d e s c r i b e the contents of the package. E x p l a i n t h a t the d i r e c t i o n s f o r completion are g i v e n a t the beginn i n g of each instrument. The approximate time f o r comp l e t i o n would be one hour.  5.  E x p l a i n c o n f i d e n t i a l i t y and anonymity.  6.  E x p l a i n that the package w i l l be d e l i v e r e d p e r s o n a l l y and arrange a d e l i v e r y time.  7.  O b t a i n p e r m i s s i o n f o r c o l l e c t i n g i n f o r m a t i o n from children.  8.  Mention t h a t a $ 5 . 0 0 fee w i l l be c o l l e c t e d a t the f i r s t s e s s i o n to cover the c o s t of the parents handbook and refreshments.  9.  Answer q u e s t i o n s .  10.  Thank parents f o r t h e i r c o o p e r a t i o n .  their  APPENDIX  I  CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION FORM  112 F e b r u a r y 28, 1978  CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION  Name: Address: Age:  Telephone No. Sex:  M a r i t a l Status:  Sccttpation:  Religion:  H i g h e s t Grade o r L e v e l o f E d u c a t i o n Completed: L i s t t h e Name, Age and Sex o f y o u r  Are  Children:  1.  Age  Sex  2.  Age  Sex  3.  Age  Sex  l+.  Age  Sex  5.  Age  Sex  6.  Age  Sex  any of y o u r c h i l d r e n adopted, I f y e s , p l e a s e  P l e a s e i n d i c a t e below whether you have p r e v i o u s l y i n a p a r e n t s t u d y group o r r e a d any m a t e r i a l Adler or Rudolf  Dreikurs.  specify:  participated  "by e i t h e r A l f r e d  APPENDIX  J  THANK Y 0 IT/FEED BACK LETTER  114 March 14,  1979  Dear  Thank you f o r completing  the f a m i l y q u e s t i o n n a i r e s  which were d i s t r i b u t e d to you r e c e n t l y . P r e l i m i n a r y review  seems to i n d i c a t e t h a t the i n -  f o r m a t i o n p r o v i d e d w i l l prove extremely ment of f u t u r e parent  u s e f u l f o r the develop-  e d u c a t i o n programs a t our:-school. .  Feedback r e g a r d i n g the q u e s t i o n n a i r e s w i l l be a v a i l a b l e a f t e r the E a s t e r H o l i d a y s . Your c o o p e r a t i o n and a s s i s t a n c e i s g r e a t l y a p p r e c i ated.  Sincerely,  AF/bg  Aerock Fox, Counsellor  APPENDIX  K  OUTLINE FOR FIRST SESSION  116 OUTLINE FOR  S e s s i o n I: 1.  Understanding C h i l d r e n ' s Behaviour and  Introduction:  In  FIRST SESSION  Misbehaviour  Begin the f i r s t s e s s i o n by i n t r o d u c i n g yours e l f and s t a t i n g the o b j e c t i v e s of the program. Say:  the STEP program you  will:  a) l e a r n a p r a c t i c a l theory of human behaviour b) l e a r n ways to e s t a b l i s h more e f f e c t i v e r e l a t i o n s h i p s w i t h your c h i l d r e n c) l e a r n how to use encouragement d) develop s k i l l s f o r l i s t e n i n g , r e s o l v i n g c o n f l i c t s , and e x p l o r i n g a l t e r n a t i v e s w i t h your c h i l d r e n e) improve communication between y o u r s e l f and your c h i l d r e n f ) l e a r n an approach to a d i s c i p l i n e c a l l e d " n a t u r a l and l o g i c a l consequences" g) l e a r n how to conduct e f f e c t i v e f a m i l y meetings Do the e x e r c i s e suggested to become b e t t e r a c q u a i n t e d . Ask what the members expect to get from the meetings by saying: People come to parent study groups f o r v a r i o u s reasons. What do you hope to get from t h i s experience? E x p l a i n the D i s c u s s i o n Guide 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) 6)  Cards.  s t a y on the t o p i c become i n v o l v e d i n the d i s c u s s i o n share the time be p a t i e n t - - t a k e one step a t a time encourage each other be r e s p o n s i b l e f o r your own behaviour  2.  Reading Assignment:  Choose a l t e r n a t i v e A - D i s c u s s i o n of chapter one i n the parent's handbook  3.  D i s p l a y and D i s c u s s Chart 1A:  4.  P r e s e n t a t i o n of Tape 1,  The Goals of Misbehaviour  S i d e B: F o l l o w the tape w i t h a b r i e f d i s c u s s i o n at each b e l l tone. Include i n the d i s c u s s i o n the q u e s t i o n s o u t l i n e d i n the STEP l e a d e r s manual.  11? 5.  D i s p l a y and d i s c u s s Chart IB.  6.  Have parents read the problem s i t u a t i o n i n the handbook. Then d i s c u s s the q u e s t i o n s .  7.  Summary:  8.  A c t i v i t y f o r the week: F o r the coming week, ask parents to observe i n d i v i d u a l c h i l d r e n and to analyze misbehaviour i n terms of the f o u r goals d i s c u s s e d i n the s e s s i o n .  9.  Reading Assignment: Ask parents to read "Understanding More About Your C h i l d and About Y o u r s e l f as a Parent," chapter two i n the parent's handbook, before next week. D i s c u s s the purpose f o r r e a d i n g Shapter two.  10.  The Goals of P o s i t i v e Behaviour  What d i d you l e a r n from the meeting? What do you t h i n k about the ideas presented i n t h i s session?  D e s c r i b e need f o r attendance book f e e .  a t c l a s s e s and c o l l e c t $£.00  

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0054340/manifest

Comment

Related Items