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 IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS i n 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 as c o n f o r m i n g to the r e q u i r e d s t a n d a r d THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA A p r i l , 1 9 7 9 (c) Aerock Fox, 1 9 7 9 I n p r e s e n t i n g t h i s 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 o f 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 C olumbia, I agree t h a t the L i b r a r y s h a l l make i t f r e e l y 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 . I f u r t h e r agree t h a t p e r m i s s i o n f o r e x t e n s i v e c o p y i n g o f t h i s t h e s i s f o r s c h o l a r l y purposes may be g r a n t e d by the Head o f my D e p a r t -ment o r by h i s r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s . I t i s u n d e r s t o o d t h a t copy-i n g o r p u b l i c a t i o n o f t h i s t h e s i s f o r f i n a n c i a l g a i n s h a l l n ot be a l l o w e d w i t h o u t my w r i t t e n p e r m i s s i o n . Department of C o u n s e l l i n g P s y c h o l o g y The U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia 2075 Wesbrook P l a c e Vancouver, Canada V6T 1W5 ABSTRACT The purpose 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 of the S y s t e m a t i c 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 (STEP) program on the p a r e n t p a r t i c i p a n t s of a s t u d y group. T h i s s t u d y a l s o 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 p a r e n t p a r t i c i p a n t s ' grade 8 c h i l d . A c r i t i c a l r e v i e w of the r e l a t e d l i t e r a t u r e s u g g e s t e d t h a t programs, s u c h as STEP, do not demonstrate s i g n i f i c a n t s t a t i s t i c a l e v i d e n c e i n s u p p o r t of the p r o p o s i t i o n t h a t t h e y change 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 , the c h i l d ' s "behaviour and the c h i l d ' s performance i n s c h o o l . I t was h y p o t h e s i z e d t h a t t h e r e would 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 between the e x p e r i m e n t a l group and the c o n t r o l group i n : (1) 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 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) f a m i l y 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 t h e i r grade 8 c h i l d ; (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 and t h e i r grade 8 c h i l d ; and (4) the grade 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 the p a r t i c i -pant and by the t e a c h e r . A l l measures on the p o s t t e s t between the e x p e r i m e n t a l group and the c o n t r o l group showed no s i g n i f i c a n t change. The r e s u l t s o f the s t u d y suggest t h a t the STEP program i s not an e f f e c t i v e method i n p r o m o t i n g change 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 . I t i s f e l t t h a t f o r s i g n i f i c a n t changes to 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 to g i v e the p a r t i c i p a n t s ' the o p p o r t u n i t y t o p r a c t i s e the s k i l l s and p r i n c i p l e s p r e s e n t e d . I t i s a l s o recommended t h a t t h e STEP program as 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 needs of p a r e n t s o f a d o l e s c e n t s . Chairman's S i g n a t u r e i v TABLE OF CONTENTS Page LIST OF TABLES v i LIST OF FIGURES v i i ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS v i i i CHAPTER I 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 I I REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE 9 R e s e a r c h S t u d i e s 10 Statement of the Hypotheses 2 3 I I I METHODOLOGY 2 6 P o p u l a t i o n 2 6 Sample and Assignment of S u b j e c t s t o Groups 2 6 D e s c r i p t i o n o f I n s t r u m e n t s 2 8 R e s e a r c h D e s i g n 3 3 P r o c e d u r e s 3 9 A n a l y s i s o f Data 42 IV RESULTS 44 D a t a A n a l y s i s 44 Summary 5 7 V CHAPTER Page V DISCUSSION 58 I n t e r p r e t a t i o n of F i n d i n g s 58 L i m i t a t i o n s 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 f o r F u r t h e r R esearch 67 C o n c l u s i o n 73 REFERENCES . 77 APPENDIXES A A n n o u n c e m e n t / R e g i s t r a t i o n N o t i c e 82 B A d l e r i a n P a r e n t a l Assessment of C h i l d B e h a v i o u r S c a l e 85 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 F a m i l y Environment S c a l e 93 E 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 (Form P) 98 F 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 (Form A) 102 G 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 C h e c k l i s t 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 I l l J Thank You/Feedback L e t t e r 113 K O u t l i n e o f F i r s t S e s s i o n 115 v i LIST OF TABLES Ta b l e Page 1 D e s c r i p t i v e C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the Sample .... 35 2 P r e t e s t Means and 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 and C o n t r o l P a r e n t s on a l l Measures 37 3 Means, S t a n d a r d D e v i a t i o n s and 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 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 45 4 Means, S t a n d a r d D e v i a t i o n s and 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 the F a m i l y Environment S c a l e 47 5 Means, S t a n d a r d D e v i a t i o n s and 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 the P a r e n t - A d o l e s c e n t Communication (Form P) 49 6 Means, S t a n d a r d D e v i a t i o n s and 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 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 (Form A) 51 7 Means, S t a n d a r d D e v i a t i o n s and 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 the A d l e r i a n P a r e n t a l Assessment o f C h i l d B e h a v i o u r S c a l e 53 8 Means, S t a n d a r d D e v i a t i o n s and 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 the 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 C h e c k l i s t ' 55 v i i LIST OF FIGURES F i g u r e Page 1. 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 46 2 . 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 48 3. P r e t e s t and P o s t t e s t Mean Changes on 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 (Form P) 50 4. P r e t e s t and P o s t t e s t Mean Changes on 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 (Form A) 52 5- 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 o f C h i l d B e h a v i o u r , 5^ 6 . P r e t e s t and P o s t t e s t Mean Changes on the 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 C h e c k l i s t 56 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would l i k e 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 committee, D r. John F r i e s e n , Dr. H a r o l d R a t z l a f f and Dr. B i l l Borgen f o r t h e i r encouragement and s u p p o r t . I would e s p e c i a l l y l i k e t o thank Dr. F r i e s e n f o r assuming the r o l e of chairman o f my s t u d y . A v e r y s p e c i a l word of thanks s h o u l d a l s o go t o Dr. R a t z l a f f f o r h i s a s s i s t a n c e and d e d i -c a t e d i n t e r e s t i n t h e computer a n a l y s i s of my d a t a . I am g r a t e f u l t o Dr. Dennis H i n k l e , from V i r g i n a P o l y t e c h n i c U n i v e r s i t y , f o r p r o v i d i n g a s s i s t a n c e i n s c o r i n g the d a t a and f o r h i s guidance and encouragement i n c a r r y i n g out t h e s t u d y . A v e r y s p e c i a l "thank you" t o my f e l l o w c o u n s e l l o r s a t A l p h a Secondary S c h o o l who l e s s e n e d my r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s , a l l o w i n g me c o n s i d e r a b l e freedom t o complete my degree. My s p e c i a l thanks t o Mr. Jack Ewen, p r i n c i p a l a t A l p h a , who gave me the f l e x i b i l i t y and time t o devote t o the p a r e n t s t u d y group. I would l i k e t o thank a l l t h e p a r e n t s and c h i l d r e n who p a r t i c i p a t e d i n t h i s s t u d y . 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 has s i g n i f i c a n t l y f u r t h e r e d the cause of p a r e n t e d u c a t i o n . F i n a l l y , I would l i k e 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 and 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 most a r d e n t s u p p o r t e r and 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 t h e f a m i l y r a t h e r t h a n j u s t t h e c h i l d w i t h i n the s c h o o l , has become more common i n r e c e n t y e a r s . The A d l e r i a n v i e w p o i n t m a i n t a i n s t h a t behav-i o u r 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 w o r k i n g w i t h t h e s i g n i f i c a n t a d u l t i n t h e i r l i v e s . E d u c a t o r s , and more s p e c i f i c a l l y c o u n s e l l o r s , a r e r e a l i z i n g the importance of changing the s o c i a l environment i n w h i c h the c h i l d l i v e s . I n such an approach, t h e j p a r e n t s l i v i n g w i t h the c h i l d a r e t a u g h t the s k i l l s n e c e s s a r y t o reduce de-v i a n t b e h a v i o u r and i n c r e a s e more a d a p t i v e forms of i n t e r -a c t i o n . I t i s assumed t h a t such an approach s h o u l d be h i g h l y e f f i c i e n t i n terms of the amount of p r o f e s s i o n a l t i m e r e q u i r e d f o r t r e a t m e n t . T r a i n i n g the p a r e n t as t r e a t m e n t agents s h o u l d a l s o i n c r e a s e the permanence of t h e changes i n c h i l d b e h a v i o u r . 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 s y s t e m a t i c p r o -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 . I r o n i c a l l y our s o c i e t y not o n l y p r o v i d e s , but a l s o r e q u i r e s , t r a i n i n g f o r p r o f e s s i o n a l s who work w i t h c h i l d r e n . Yet i t i s assumed t h a t any one can be a p a r e n t . I n our r a p i d l y c h a n g i n g s o c i -e t y the t a s k s of p a renthood have become more d i f f i c u l t . The p a r e n t s a r e s e e k i n g i n f o r m a t i o n on how t o 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 r e n . As a means o f h e l p i n g 2 p a r e n t s meet t h i s t a s k , s c h o o l s are i n a u g u r a t i n g v a r i o u s p a r e n t 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-io u r a l 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 g r o u p s , p a r e n t e f f e c t i v e n e s s t r a i n i n g c o u r s e s , and g e n e r a l l y a p r o -f u s i o n o f books and o t h e r m a t e r i a l a l l a t t e m p t i n g t o p r o v i d e i n f o r m a t i o n on how t o improve p a r e n t s r e l a t i o n s h i p s w i t h t h e i r c h i l d r e n . T h i s i n v e s t i g a t o r was concerned w i t h the s t u d y - d i s c u s s i o n group method of p a r e n t e d u c a t i o n . The grow-i n g i n t e r e s t i n d e v e l o p i n g new p a r e n t - c h i l d r e l a t i o n s h i p s has been 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 c l a r i f i c a t i o n and i n p u t from o t h e r p a r e n t s who are s t r u g g l i n g t o a p p l y the new i d e a s . Thus groups have been formed t o s t u d y p o i n t s o f view of p a r t i c u l a r a u t h o r s . Dinkmeyer and Munro (1971) d i s c u s s the v a l u e of the group p r o c e s s f o r h e l p i n g p a r e n t s . The p a r e n t group p r o v i d e s a unique 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 to become more aware of the p a r e n t -c h i l d r e l a t i o n s h i p and to e x p e r i e n c e feedback 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 . T h i s i s d e r i v e d t h r o u g h f e e d -back 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 c o n s t a n t l y a v a i l a b l e . A t the same t i m e , t h e r e i s t h e o p p o r t u n i t y t o c r e a t e a s t r o n g i n t e r d e p e n d e n c e w h i c h t a k e s advantage o f the u n i v e r s a l problems t h a t c o n f r o n t p a r e n t s . 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 to c o n t r i b u t e t o each o t h e r and t o d e v e l o p new approaches to 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 p r o c e s s of feedback from c o n t e m p o r a r i e s has tremendous e f f e c t upon the group dynamics. P a r e n t s 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 s t a n d to improve the 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 under-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 c h i l d - t r a i n i n g 3 t e c h n i q u e s , and u l t i m a t e l y i m p r o v i n g 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 ( P o r s , 1977).. Much of the l i t e r a t u r e on p a r e n t e d u c a t i o n d e a l s w i t h models. Some i n c l u d e manuals o r o u t l i n e s o f s t u d y , and o t h e r s a r e l o o s e i n s t r u c t u r e . The model, S y s t e m a t i c 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 (Dinkmeyer and McKay, 1 9 7 6 ) , h e r e a f t e r r e f e r r e d t o as "STEP", was the s u b j e c t of s t u d y by t h i s i n v e s t i g a t o r . I t o f f e r s p a r e n t s a p r a c t i c a l a l t e r n a t i v e to meet the c h a l l e n g e s of r a i s i n g c h i l d r e n t o d a y . STEP i s an A d l e r i a n t h e o r y - b a s e d program bl e n d e d w i t h communication s k i l l s w h i c h f o l l o w the b a s i c p r i n c i p l e s on -human b e h a v i o u r s e t down by A l f r e d A d l e r and p o p u l a r i z e d i n the U n i t e d S t a t e s by R u d o l f D r e i k u r s . The program i s d e s i g n e d f o r p r o f e s s i o n a l , t r a i n e d , o r i n e x p e r i e n c e d l a y l e a d e r s h i p . STEP c o n s i s t s of a v a r i e t y o f m a t e r i a l s d e s i g n e d t o enhance an u n d e r s t a n d i n g and a p p l i c a t i o n o f the concepts o f t h e program, and t o p r o -v i d e 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 t h r o u g h r e a d i n g , d i s -c u s s i n g , l i s t e n i n g , p r a c t i s i n g , and v i e w i n g v i s u a l m a t e r i a l s . The program c o n t a i n s a l e a d e r ' s manual, p a r e n t ' s handbook, c a s s e t t e s , 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 t a s k assignments f o r a p p l i c a t i o n of the p r i n c i p l e s t a u g h t i n each s e s s i o n . Purpose There a r e i n excess of t e n STEP programs i n o p e r a t i o n a t v a r i o u s s c h o o l s i n the Lower M a i n l a n d a l o n e (as i n d i c a t e d 4 by the B r i t i s h Columbia A s s o c i a t i o n o f A d l e r i a n P s y c h o l o g y , 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 the 1979-1980 s c h o o l y e a r . A t l e a s t f o u r s c h o o l s 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 program d u r i n g the 1978-1979 s c h o o l y e a r . A l t h o u g h t h e r e i s an i m p r e s s i v e body o f s u b j e c t i v e e v i -dence a t t e s t i n g t o the s u c c e s s of the STEP program, t h e r e i s l e s s p r e c i s e i n f o r m a t i o n on the magnitude o f p a r e n t a l changes and t h e i r e f f e c t s upon t h e c h i l d r e n . I t was s u s p e c t e d t h a t the p a r e n t and the c h i l d a r e most l i k e l y t o change f a v o u r -a b l y w i t h exposure to t h e STEP program but more e m p i r i c a l e v i d e n c e was r e q u i r e d t o s u p p o r t o r d i s p u t e t h i s s t a t e m e n t . An e v a l u a t i o n o f the e f f e c t i v e n e s s o f the STEP program w i l l a i d the Burnaby and o t h e r s c h o o l d i s t r i c t s i n d e t e r -m i n i n g the u s e f u l n e s s of t h e program. Statement of the Problem P a r e n t e d u c a t i o n i s not a r e c e n t phenomenon. I n t h e l a s t decade, however, t h e r e has been an upsurge of 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 v a r i o u s p r o -grams. However, the e f f e c t s t h a t p a r e n t i n g programs have on the f a m i l i e s i n v o l v e d r e m a i n u n c e r t a i n . 1. The main purpose of 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 the STEP program on the p a r e n t p a r t i c i p a n t s of the s t u d y group. Does the STEP program h e l p f a c i l i t a t e d e m o c r a t i c p a r e n t a l 5 a t t i t u d e s and b e h a v i o u r toward c h i l d r e n ? 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 p a r -ents p a r t i c i p a t e i n STEP? Does the 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 p a r e n t s p a r t i c i p a t e i n STEP? 2. A s e c o n d a r y purpose was to determine the i n d i r e c t e f f e c t s o f t h e program. S p e c i f i c a l l y , does c h i l -drens* c l a s s r o o m b e h a v i o u r become l e s s n e g a t i v e d u r i n g and a f t e r the 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. S y s t e m a t i c 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 (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 s t u d y program t a u g h t i n w e e k l y two-hour m e e t i n g s . The t o p i c s and f o r -mat o f the program are ..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 p a r e n t o r p a r e n t s of a c h i l d a t -t e n d i n g Grade 8 a t A l p h a Secondary S c h o o l who r e c e i v e d the t r e a t m e n t (STEP program) f o r a t l e a s t e i g h t o f the t e n , two-hour weekly s e s s i o n s . They may a l s o be r e f e r r e d to as the e x p e r i m e n t a l p a r - e n t s . 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 ver the same iQ-week p e r i o d of t i m e b e f o r e t h e y a t t e n d e d 6 th e STEP program. 4 . T a r g e t C h i l d r e n ; A son o r daughter o f the p a r t i c -i p a n t who was a t t e n d i n g Grade 8 a t A l p h a Second-a r y S c h o o l . They a l s o may "be r e f e r r e d t o as the e x p e r i m e n t a l c h i l d r e n . 5 . C o n t r o l C h i l d r e n : A s on o r dau g h t e r o f the p a r e n t s p a r t i c i p a t i n g as c o n t r o l s and who was a t t e n d i n g Grade 8 a t A l p h a Secondary S c h o o l . 6. A d l e r i a n P a r e n t a l Assessment o f C h i l d B e h a v i o u r  S c a l e (APACBS): A 3 2 - i t e m , seven p o i n t , L i k e r t -t y p e s c a l e d e s i g n e d to a s s e s s the p a r e n t ' s p e r c e p -t i o n s o f t h e i r c h i l d ' s "behaviour. 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 toward improved "behaviour. 7. 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): A 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 , L i k e r t - t y p e s c a l e d e s i g n e d to measure i n t e n s i t y o f d e m o c r a t i c and 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 change toward more d e m o c r a t i c a t t i t u d e s . 8 . F a m i l y Environment S c a l e (FES): A 9 0-item i n s t r u -ment where the respondent answers e i t h e r t r u e o r f a l s e f o r each i t e m . T h i s f a m i l y i n c o n g r u e n c e s c a l e was g i v e n t o p r o v i d e i n f o r m a t i o n on how c l o s e l y f a m i l y members agreed on the 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 . 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 toward a more congrue n t f a m i l y . 9. 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 (PAC) (Form P and A ) : A 4 0 - i t e m s c a l e to measure the de-gree o f 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 toward more communication. 10. 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 C h e c k l i s t (WPBIC): A 5 0-item c h e c k l i s t o f the most f r e q u e n t l y mentioned n e g a t i v e "behaviour. 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 toward more a p p r o p r i a t e "behav-i o u r . 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 of the STEP Program i n c l u d e d changes i n : 1. 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 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 and 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 . 2. F a m i l y 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 t a r g e t c h i l d , and measured by the F a m i l y Environment S c a l e . 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 , and measured by the P a r e n t - A d o l e s c e n t Communication,Inventory. 8 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 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 P a r e n t a l  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 t h e 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 C h e c k l i s t . T h i s t h e s i s i s o r g a n i z e d i n t o f i v e c h a p t e r s p l u s a r e f -erence s e c t i o n and an a p p e n d i x . The f i r s t 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 h i s t o r y o f the s t u d y - d i s c u s s i o n group method of p a r e n t e d u c a t i o n . C h a p t e r I I p r o v i d e s an o v e r v i e w o f l i t e r a t u r e w h i c h 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 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 Chapter I I I d e s c r i b i n g the r e s e a r c h methodology. C h a p t e r IV summarizes the r e s u l t s of t h e s t u d y w h i l e the f i n a l 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 based on the f i n d i n g s . T i t l e s o f books and a r t i c l e s , used i n the s t u d y o f t h e STEP program and the w r i t i n g o f t h i s t h e s i s , appear i n t h e r e f e r e n c e s e c t i o n . C o p i e s o f l e t t e r s and measurement i n s t r u m e n t s used i n the s t u d y appear i n the Appendix. 9 C h a p t e r 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 group 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 c h i l d - t r a i n i n g 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 t o d e v e l o p programs i n e d u c a t i o n . The l i t e r a t u r e on p a r e n t e d u c a t i o n i s e x t e n s i v e . P a r e n t E f f e c t i v e n e s s T r a i n -i n g groups based on Gordon's work e x i s t i n many areas (Gordon, 1 9 7 0 ) . The p h i l o s o p h y o f A l f r e d A d l e r has g a i n e d p o p u l a r i t y t h r o u g h 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 (Dinkmeyer and McKay, 1973; D r e i k u r s and S o l t z , 1 9 6 4 ) . Study groups have been formed to 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. B e h a v i o u r a l m o d i f i c a t i o n programs ( B e c k e r , 1971; K r u m b o l t z and K r u m b o l t z , 1972; P a t t e r s o n and G u l l i o n , 1968) and t r a n s -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, 1 9 7 4 ) . The 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 chosen on the 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: the e f f e c t of 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 p r o -grams. F o l l o w i n g the r e v i e w of the l i t e r a t u r e , i t was the 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 energy has been f o c u s e d i n t h e f i e l d b u t v e r y l i t t l e good r e s e a r c h has emerged. 10 R e s e a r c h S t u d i e s A c c o r d i n g t o B r i m (1959)» much o f the r e s e a r c h up t o 1959 s u f f e r e d f rom i m p r o p e r r e s e a r c h d e s i g n . ( F o r an e x t e n -s i v e r e v i e w o f r e l a t e d s t u d i e s p r i o r t o I 9 6 0 , t h e r e a d e r i s r e f e r r e d 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 ( B r i m , 1959) )• The f o l l o w i n g i n v e s t i g a t i o n s t o o k p l a c e a f t e r 1958. Dinkmeye r (1959) e x p l o r e d the e f f e c t s o f A d l e r i a n c h i l d g u i d -ance t h r o u g h t h e p r o c e s s o f f a m i l y c o u n s e l l i n g i n an a u d i e n c e s e t t i n g . He f o u n d no s i g n i f i c a n t improvement i n c h i l d r e n ' s b e h a v i o u r . However , t h e mothe r s g e n e r a l l y f e l t s a t i s f i e d w i t h t h e i r e x p e r i e n c e . Some o f t h e mothers i n d i c a t e d t h a t t h e y f e l t the need f o r some p r i v a t e c o u n s e l l i n g . There was no e v i d e n c e 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 s p e c i f i c a r e a s o f c h i l d a d j u s t m e n t . The e v i d e n c e d i d no t i n d i c a t e t h a t the mothe r s c o u l d b e t t e r empa th i ze w i t h t h e i r c h i l d r e n as measured by t h e i r a b i l i t y t o o b s e r v e changes i n t h e i r c h i l -d r e n ' s p e r c e p t i o n s o f t h e i r p r o b l e m s . H a l e y (1963) f ound s i g n i f i c a n t changes i n c e r t a i n p a r -e n t a l a t t i t u d e s a t the c o n c l u s i o n o f a p a r e n t c o u n s e l l i n g p r o g r a m . 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 be tween p r e -t e s t and t r e a t m e n t . Change i n c h i l d r e n ' s p e r c e p t i o n o f p a r e n t a l a t t i t u d e s ( f a m i l y c o n t r o l o f b e h a v i o u r ) was n o n -s i g n i f i c a n t . A f o l l o w - u p assessment r e v e a l e d no 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 o r c h i l d r e n ' s p e r c e p t i o n s o f p a r e n t a l a t t i t u d e s . 11 An e x t e n s i v e r e s e a r c h p r o j e c t i s t h o r o u g h l y d i s c u s s e d 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 ( H e r e f o r d , 1961). Would p a r e n t s a t t e n d i n g d i s c u s s i o n g roups e x p e r i e n c e a t t i t u d i n a l changes i n a r e a s r e l a t e d t o the p a r -e n t - c h i l d r e l a t i o n s h i p ? The r e s u l t s showed t h a t the e x p e r i -m e n t a l g roup 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 measured "by t h e P a r e n t A t t i t u d e S u r v e y ( H e r e f o r d , 1963). One c o n t r o l g roup made up o f p a r e n t s a t t e n d i n g a t l e a s t one i n a s e r i e s o f l e c t u r e s on p a r e n t - c h i l d r e l a t i o n s g i v e n "by p r o f e s s i o n a l s , r e v e a l e d s t a t i s t i c a l l y n o n s i g n i f i c a n t c h a n g e s . A l t h o u g h no t e x t was u s e d , the f o r m a t was n o t u n s t r u c t u r e d . The i n f o r m a t i o n a l component c o n s i s t e d o f f i l m s d e s i g n e d t o s t i m u l a t e 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 t o p i c f o r t h e s e s s i o n s . Some groups p r e f e r r e d t o s e t t h e i r own d i s c u s s i o n t o p i c . 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 o r g a n -i z a t i o n a l p r o c e d u r e was p r e s e n t e d . The i n v e s t i g a t o r s c o n -c l u d e t h a t t he n o n p r o f e s s i o n a l l e a d e r was n o t a f a c t o r o f any i m p o r t a n c e , "but t he " d i s c u s s i o n method" was the c r u c i a l , i n f l u e n t i a l f a c t o r . I n a f o l l o w - u p s t u d y 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 p r o g r a m , Shaw and T u e l ( I 9 6 5 J . h y p o t h e s i z e d t h a t good a t t e n d -ance and f a v o r a b l e r e s p o n s e w o u l d c o r r e l a t e p o s i t i v e l y w i t h p a r e n t a l a t t i t u d e c h a n g e s . The a u t h o r s used the F a m i l y L i f e  A t t i t u d e I n v e n t o r y , bu t found 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 c o r r e l a t i o n . I n a n o t h e r s t u d y u s i n g t h e d i s c u s s i o n method , R o b i n s o n and P e t t i t (1966) o r g a n i z e d an e i e v e n - w e e k d i s c u s s i o n g roup 12 made up of parents ( a l l mothers) of underachieving fourth graders. Would weekly sessions focusing on "modern methods" of teaching math and reading, change parental attitudes to-ward t h e i r underachieving children? The researchers found no s i g n i f i c a n t changes i n parental attitudes. And although there were changes i n the academic performance of the c h i l -dren, the results were inconclusive. I t was suggested that fathers "be included i n future programs. Shaw and Rector ( 1 9 6 8 ) reported the res u l t s of a three-year study that dealt i n part with parent-discussion groups focusing on problems of c h i l d development. Parents of f i r s t grade, seventh grade, and high school students made up three sections. Each section had i t s choice to e n r o l l i n a four, eight or twelve-week program. The sessions were led by trained counsellors. Although the investigators report a favorable attitude on the part of the parents who p a r t i c i -pated, an absence of data concerning changes i n parental attitudes related to program effectiveness leaves the results inconclusive. The authors reportsa more favorable response from parents attending the longer sessions. Kamali ( 1 9 6 9 ) recorded the effects a course involving Adlerian p r i n c i p l e s had on parental attitudes. The results indicated that: (1) females, with the exception of mothers, seemed to be more receptive to suggestions and new ideas regarding c h i l d - r e a r i n g than males; 13 (2) mothers appeared t o "be l e s s open t o new i d e a s t h a n m a r r i e d f e m a l e s w i t h o u t c h i l d r e n o r s i n g l e f e m a l e s . Swenson (1970) s t u d i e d changes i n p a r e n t a l a t t i t u d e s , 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 as r a t e d "by t h e i r t e a c h e r s , and c h i l d r e n ' s l e v e l of adjustment as r a t e d by t h e i r p a r e n t s . He compared an A d l e r i a n p a r e n t d i s c u s s i o n group w i t h an e c -l e c t i c f i l m 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 v a r i a b l e s . Swenson found o n l y one s i g n i f i c a n t change. Teachers' r a t i n g s o f one group o f p u p i l s i n the "middle l e v e l o f 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 i n the pre to p o s t a n a l y s i s . The a u t h o r c o n c l u d e d t h a t p a r e n t a l p a r t i c i -p a t i o n i n a p a r e n t d i s c u s s i o n group 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 g a i n i n the t e a c h e r ' s r a t i n g s of c h i l d r e n who b e g i n the s c h o o l y e a r w i t h a near average r a t i n g . C a r k h u f f and Bierman (1970) a s s e s s e d a t t i t u d i n a l and b e h a v i o u r a l change i n p a r e n t s u n d e r g o i n g t r a i n i n g i n i n t e r -p e r s o n a l s k i l l s . A l t h o u g h t h e r e were s i g n i f i c a n t p o s i t i v e changes i n how p a r e n t s p e r c e i v e d 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, changes i n p a r e n t s ' f u n c t i o n i n g were not s i g n i f i c a n t . E a s t l a c k (1970) compared the r e s p o n s e s o f a p a r e n t s t u d y group u s i n g D r e i k u r s and S o l t z ' s C h i l d r e n : The  C h a l l e n g e (1964) and an e x p e r i m e n t a l group who a t t e n d e d a F a m i l y E d u c a t i o n C e n t e r , u s i n g a p a r e n t a l p r a c t i s e s q u e s t i o n -n a i r e . 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 t oward d e m o c r a t i c b e h a v i o u r among p e o p l e a f t e r a t t e n d i n g the F a m i l y E d u c a t i o n C e n t e r ; (2) t h e ma jo r c a t e g o r i z a t i o n o f p a r e n t a l p r a c t i c e s b e -f o r e 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 , and a f t e r c o u n s e l l i n g , d e m o c r a t i c ; (3) the p a r t i c i p a n t s 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 o f p r a c t i c a l p a r e n t i n g . P i a t t (1971) e x p l o r e d the e f f e c t s o f A d l e r i a n c o u n s e l -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 , and p a r e n t s on 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 by t h e i r p a r -en t s and t e a c h e r s . The c h i l d r e n o f t h e e x p e r i m e n t a l g roup , met i n c o u n s e l l i n g g roups once a week, w h i l e the t e a c h e r s 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 . The t e a c h e r s a l s o r e c e i v e d i n d i v i d u a l c o n s u l t a t i o n s o r v i e w e d d e m o n s t r a -t i o n s o f c l a s s r o o m d i s c u s s i o n s . The p a r e n t g roup e x p e r i e n c e c o n s i s t e d o f a c o m b i n a t i o n o f v i e w i n g f a m i l y c o u n s e l l i n g d e m o n s t r a t i o n s and d i s c u s s i n g t o p i c s f rom a s s i g n e d r e a d i n g s . P i a t t u sed a p l a c e b o group as w e l l as a c o n t r o l g r o u p . I n the p l a c e b o g r o u p , t h e c h i l d r e n met once a week w i t h a c o u n -s e l l o r t o l i s t e n t o r e c o r d s o r s t u d y . There was m i n i m a l i n t e r a c t i o n w i t h t h e c o u n s e l l o r . The s t u d y r e v e a l e d p o s i t i v e changes i n a l l c h i l d r e n o f t h e e x p e r i m e n t a l g roup as r a t e d by t h e i r p a r e n t s . The t e a c h e r s r a t e d a l l bu t two c h i l d r e n as s h o w i n g improvemen t . The b e h a v i o u r o f most o f the 1 c h i l d r e n i n the placebo and c o n t r o l groups was r a t e d "by teachers and parents as remaining about the same or d e t e r i -o r a t i n g . 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 at a Community Parent-Teacher-Counsellor Center i n A r i z o n a . Steed assessed the usefulness of A d l e r i a n Family c o u n s e l l i n g i n modifying the f a m i l i e s ' i n t e r a c t i o n a l process. 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 eight fami-l i e s were asked to wait f o r 5 weeks to begin t h e i r counsel-l i n g and comprised a "waiting f o r treatment" c o n t r o l group. Both groups were pr e t e s t e d and p o s t t e s t e d w i t h a modified form of Farber's Index of M a r i t a l I n t e g r a t i o n . Steed hypoth-esized t h a t experimental 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 other and t h e i r c h i l d r e n ; 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 toward themselves, t h e i r parents and t h e i r s i b l i n g s . I n s p e c t i o n of the data i n d i c a t e d that many changes had taken place i n the c o u n s e l l i n g group but none of Steed's hypotheses were s t a t i s t i c a l l y supported. The process of A d l e r i a n parent education, Steed suggested, sometimes i n -volves a p e r i o d of r e g r e s s i o n before p o s i t i v e changes occur. He also suggested t h a t while many changes were p o s i t i v e , enough r e g r e s s i v e changes occurred to cancel out the p o s i -t i v e v a r i a t i o n s . S a n t i l l i (1973) compared the r e s u l t s of 14 four-hour weekly sessions of two groups of parents who reported 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 . S e v e r a l f a c e t s of human i n t e r a c t i o n were measured. Of p a r t i c u l a r i n t e r e s t to t h i s study were the i n t e r p e r s o n a l process measures between parent and c h i l d . The r e s u l t s showed a s i g n i f i c a n t increase between pre-t e s t and p o s t t e s t f o r both groups i n empathetic understand-ing and communicated respect. Although the Sunday group experienced more change, the d i f f e r e n c e was not s i g n i f i c a n t . I n a study to determine the e f f e c t s of an A d l e r i a n par-ent study group used i n combination w i t h s p e c i a l reading 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 reading and adjustment problems, Runyan (1973) found that there were p o s i t i v e changes i n the experimental 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 behaviour as r a t e d by parents and teachers. 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 experimental and c o n t r o l groups on the p o s t t e s t . No changes i n locus of c o n t r o l ofathe c h i l d r e n were found. The author concluded that locus of c o n t r o l change would r e q u i r e a longer t r e a t -ment p e r i o d . B e r r e t t (1973) studied the e f f e c t s of an A d l e r i a n par-ent study group on feathers* a t t i t u d e s , c h i l d - r e a r i n g prac-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 behaviour. The subjects included mothers of both hearing impaired and non-hearing impaired c h i l d r e n . The mothers who p a r t i c i p a t e d i n the groups obtained a score on the a t t i t u d e assessment which i n d i c a t e d they expressed a more l i b e r a l a t t i t u d e toward t h e i r c h i l d r e n than the mothers who-had not yet experienced a group. ,17 The parent 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 hearing impaired c h i l d r e n of the mothers who attended a study group d i s p l a y e d a lower occurrence of negative behaviours than the c h i l d r e n of mothers who had not yet attended the group. Concerning the nonhearing impaired c h i l d r e n , only the c h i l d r e n of the mothers who were p r e t e s t -ed and then experienced treatment, were rated as d i s p l a y i n g a lower occurrence of negative behaviour. The parents were also asked to i n d i c a t e i f t h e i r c h i l d ' s behaviour bothered them. The parents who p a r t i c i p a t e d i n the study group r e -ported fewer occurrences of c h i l d r e n ' s bothersome behaviour than the parents of the c o n t r o l group. The i n v e s t i g a t o r concluded that the A d l e r i a n theory of p a r e n t - c h i l d r e l a t i o n -s h i p s , which 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 demo-c r a t i c l i v i n g has s i g n i f i c a n t value i n today's world. I n the Walter and Gilmore ( 1 9 7 3 ) study, twelve con-secutive r e f e r r a l s were randomly assigned to e i t h e r a placebo or ah experimental group. F a m i l i e s i n the experimental group received f o u r weeks of parent t r a i n i n g . Parents i n the placebo group met f o r an equal number of weekly meetings and discussed audio tapes which they had p r e v i o u s l y made concerning 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 -i c a n t increases i n ra t e s of targeted deviant c h i l d behaviour. However, four parents i n d i c a t e d i n t h e i r g l o b a l evaluations that 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 experimental group showed a s i g n i f i c a n t decrease i n rates i n behaviour--the g l o b a l r a t e s showed a l l s i x parents 18 thought t h e i r c h i l d had improved. Parents i n "both groups rated t h e i r confidence i n the treatment procedures before and a f t e r each session. Their ratings showed no differences between groups, nor were there changes over time. Laine (197^0 studied the impact of a Dreikurs parent study group on parental attitudes toward school as well as the i r i n t e r a c t i o n with the school. The results of his study indicated that parental attitudes did not change but that th e i r intentions toward in t e r a c t i n g with the school were more p o s i t i v e . However, the actual t r a n s l a t i o n of intent-ions into behaviour was not studied. The Wiltz and Patterson (1974) study showed that f i v e weeks of parent t r a i n i n g i n the "standardized program" pro-duced s i g n i f i c a n t decreases i n observed rate of deviant c h i l d behaviour. On the other hand, the six 'waiting l i s t ' control f a m i l i e s , observed a f t e r a comparable period of time, showed no change. In a study of parental d i s c i p l i n a r i a n attitude and over-protectiveness, Mahoney (1975) studied the influence of a Parent-Teacher Education Center on parent 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 th e i r perceptions and behaviour change i n the c h i l d with whom they were most concerned. The ten-week treatment series consisted of three segments: a parent discussion group, a family counselling demonstration viewed by a l l participants, and a discussion group f o r teachers. The instruments were administered before and a f t e r treatment. Analysis of the pre and posttest 19 scores of the attitude instrument revealed that the p a r t i c i -pants were significantly less overprotective and less over-indulgent. There were no significant changes in the accept-ance and rejection scales. The participants' perceptions of child behaviour also showed significant changes in self, social, school, home and total adjustment. The attitude study was replicated with different populations during two subsequent series. The f i r s t replication yielded the same results as the i n i t i a l study. The second replication showed significant positive changes in a l l four attitudes. F Frazier and Matthes (1975) compared Adlerian and be-havioural approaches used in parent education programs. The purpose of their study was to assess the effects of parent education programs based on the Adlerian and behavioural models relative 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 participation 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 assist the parents in learning and use of democratic child-rearing practices as presented in Rudolf Dreikurs' (1964) Children: The Challenge. It was hypothesized that there would be significant differences in favor of the study group on the Metropolitan 20 Elementary Reading Test, the Walker Behaviour Identification  Checklist and the Attitude Toward the Freedom of Children--Scale II. Results were such that the hypothesis could not be accepted. There were no significant changes in favor of the study group. Children whose parents participated in the Adlerian parent study group did not show significant improve-ment in 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 in attitudes toward child-rearing. i . . . Nordal (1976) studied the effects of Adlerian parent training on rational self-esteem and child-rearing attitudes, and on the learner self-concept and home and school behav-iour of the preschool child. Parent training for the mothers in 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 their 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 for learner self-concept on the Florida Kay and for behaviour on the Anderson Behaviour Rating Scale by the teacher and their home v i s i t o r . The findings of this study seemed to indicate that Adlerian parent training does result in positive changes in child-rearing attitudes and improves child behaviour at home. However, the treatment did not significantly alter 21 the learner self-concept, home behaviour, or school behav-iour of the preschool c h i l d . The Goula Study (1976) attempted to evaluate the e f f e c t of an Adlerian parent study group with a communication t r a i n -ing component and one without a communication t r a i n i n g com-ponent r e l a t i v e to each other and to a no treatment control group. The Adlerian Parental Assessment of Child Behaviour  Scale developed by McKay was used to measure the mothers' perception of the behaviour of t h e i r i d e n t i f i e d c h i l d and the Mother-Child Interaction Exercise, developed by Goula and McKay, was used to measure the number of f a c i l i t a t i n g and n o n f a c i l i t a t i n g statements made by mothers of t h e i r i d e n t i -f i e d c h i l d . The r e s u l t s of the study indicated no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f -ferences among the groups i n the mothers' perception of the behaviour of t h e i r i d e n t i f i e d c h i l d . There were no s i g n i f i -cant differences 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 i d e n t i f i e d c h i l d . F i n a l l y , there were no s i g n i f i c a n t differences among the groups i n the number of mothers' n o n f a c i l i t a t i n g statements made to t h e i r i d e n t i f i e d c h i l d . Noble (1976) attempted to determine the d i f f e r e n t i a l effects of two systematic approaches to educating parents, Parent Effectiveness Training and Adlerian Parent Groups. Child-rearing attitudes as measured by the Parental Attitude  Research Instrument, were the c r i t e r i o n variable. 22 Results indicated no s i g n i f i c a n t difference between the two experimental treatments. Neither 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 children's emotional needs, or t h e i r encouragement of parent-child communications, as measured by the Parental Attitude Research Instrument. Fears ( 19?6) conducted a pretest and posttest evalua-t i o n of 100 parents who attended Adlerian parent study groups i n -Largo, F l o r i d a . She reported that parents see p o s i t i v e changes i n t h e i r children's behaviour as a r e s u l t of using Adlerian c h i l d - r e a r i n g practices i n the home. Fear further reports a decrease i n the number of school counselling cases referred during the following school year. I t was impossible to assess whether the. parent education program was respons-i b l e f o r t h i s trend* McKay (1976) studied whether parent p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n a STEP group resulted i n measurable change i n the mother's ratings of the behaviour of the children with whom>they were most concerned, and changes i n the observed verbal behaviour of the mothers. The results indicated that p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n a STEP group does change the mother's perception of her t a r -get child's behaviour ( i . e . , mothers who participated i n the STEP group viewed t h e i r target chi l d ' s behaviour i n a s i g n i -f i c a n t l y more posit i v e way). Changes i n the verbal behav-iour of the mothers were not s i g n i f i c a n t . I t appears as i f th i s study i s one of the few which shewed s i g n i f i c a n t changes i n mother's perceptions of children'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 Adlerian based parent study group. 23 There was no assessment of a c t u a l changes i n c h i l d r e n ' s be-haviour. Only the perceptions of the mothers regarding 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 . The program should "be tested w i t h d i f f e r e n t populations such as f a t h e r s and couples, and parents of teenagers. A l s o , the r e l a t i o n s h i p between parents' perceptions of t h e i r c h i l d r e n ' s behaviour and unbiased observers' r a t i n g s of the c h i l d r e n ' s behaviour should be i n v e s t i g a t e d . In a d d i t i o n , the parents' behaviour could be observed and r a t e d . I t i s al s o f e l t that i t would be valuable, to i n v e s t i g a t e the e f f e c t s of STEP.where pre and p o s t t e s t i n g were conducted w i t h parents who were.not- aware tha t research was-being conducted. Statement of the Hypotheses S p e c i f i c a l l y , t h i s study 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 the 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 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 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 A t t i t u d e s Toward  Ch i l d - R e a r i n g S c a l e . 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 ( ©< = .01) 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 environment 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 Family Environment Scale (Moos, 1974(). 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 ( 0< = .01) difference i n the mean rating of par-ent-adolescent communication between subjects 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 (Bienvenu, 1967). 4. 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) difference 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-Adolescent Communication Inventory, Form A (Bienvenu, 1967). 5 . 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) difference i n the mean rat i n g 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 (McKay, 1976). 6. 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 ( 0<- = .01) difference i n the mean rat i n g of 25 c h i l d b e h a v i o u r between t h e 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 the 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 C h e c k l i s t (Walker, 1 9 7 6 ) . 26 Chapter III METHODOLOGY This chapter w i l l he concerned with the procedures i n -volved i n testing the hypotheses for th i s study. Sampling procedures, description of instruments, the research design, research and treatment procedures, methods of measurement and the analysis of data are discussed. Population The population f o r th i s study was defined as parents of children who are attending grade 8 at a secondary school i n B r i t i s h Columbia and who volunteer f o r parent education pro-grams such as STEP. Sample and Assignment of Subjects to Groups The sample f o r the present study consisted of parents of grade 8 students attending Alpha Secondary School who were w i l l i n g to pa r t i c i p a t e i n the STEP program. A l e t t e r announcing the formation of a STEP group was sent to a l l parents of grade 8 students attending Alpha Secondary School (Appendix A). Parents were offered the option of e n r o l l i n g ihethe STEP group immediately or of sign-ing up f o r a group at a l a t e r date. 27 The sample consisted of two equal sized groups; an ex-perimental group and a control group. The experimental group was comprised of parents who pa r t i c i p a t e d i n the STEP program at that time and the control group were those parents who volunteered f o r the program as well but were un-able to p a r t i c i p a t e at that time, but would at the next session. In order to form two equal sized groups, two par-ents were assigned to the control group through counsellor r e f e r r a l . These parents had indicated during a previous counsellor-parent interview that they would be interested i n p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n a parent education group but had not completed a response to the l e t t e r sent to them. The parents were contacted by telephone and asked i f they would p a r t i c i -pate at a l a t e r date. Two of four parents contacted re-sponded favorably and were assigned to the control group. Both the experimental group and the control group contained eleven subjects each. A l l eleven individuals assigned to the experimental group attended at l e a s t eight of the ten sessions of the STEP program. Of the eleven individuals assigned to the control group, a l l eleven provided data that was usable. The p a r t i c i p a t i n g subjects were t o l d the i n f o r -mation they provided would a s s i s t to improve the existing program and any program offered i n the future. The parents selected f o r t h i s study, (1) resided i n the Burnaby School D i s t r i c t , 28 (2) had a c h i l d presently attending grade 8 at Alpha 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 , and (3) attended at least eight of the ten treatment sessions. Description of Instruments The measuring instruments used i n this study were the Adlerian Parental Assessment of Child Behaviour Scale (McKay, 1976), the Attitudes Toward Child Rearing Scale (Croake and Hinkle, 1975)> the Family Environment Scale—Form R (Moos, 1974), the Parent-Adolescent Communication Inventory (B'ievenu, I967), and the Walker Problem Behaviour I d e n t i f i c a t i o n  Checklist (Walker, 1967). These instruments provided measurements of the target child's behaviour, the part i c i p a n t s ' c h i l d rearing practices, the s o c i a l climate 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 pa r t i c i p a n t and target c h i l d as an element of s o c i a l i n t e r a c t i o n . Adlerian Parental Assessment of Child Behaviour Scale. The Adlerian Parental Assessment of Child Behaviour Scale designed by McKay (1976), assesses parents' per-ceptions of th e i r c h i l d ' s behaviour. I t i s a thirty-two item, seven point, Likert-type r a t i n g scale (quasi-interval) to test f o r change i n s p e c i f i c behaviours 29 which are dealt with i n STEP. Participants are asked to rate each behaviour on a continuum from "Always" to "Never" (Appendix B). Both responsible and irrespons-i b l e c h i l d behaviours are represented i n the items. A r e l i a b i l i t y test of the instrument was conducted during McKay's research project (1976). The Cronbach's alpha (Cronbach, 1951) test f o r i n t e r n a l consistency ranged from .81 to .89. The Pearson r - t e s t f o r s t a b i l i t y over time yielded a c o e f f i c i e n t of .83. Attitudes Toward Child-Rearing Scale. The test i s a Likert-type scale, designed by Croake and Hinkle (1976), to which a parent must respond by checking one of the following f o r each item: agree, strongly agree, un-decided, disagree, strongly disagree (Appendix C). The scale was constructed using 86 statements selected from Adlerian l i t e r a t u r e . These statements were then sub-mitted to 500 people representing a cross-section of population and the f o r t y most variable observations were selected f o r the f i n a l scale. The statements were con-structed to measure the int e n s i t y of democratic and authoritarian attitudes held by parents. Concurrent v a l i d i t y c o e f f i c i e n t s ranging from .5^  to .86 were determined by co r r e l a t i n g the scores on the Attitudes Toward Child-Rearing Scale with the Attitudes Toward the Freedom of Childr en (Freeman, 1975)> which claims to measure the same construct. 3 0 Family Environment Scale. The Family Environment Scale was designed by Moos ( 1 9 7 ^ ) and consists of a 90-item, ten subscale instrument where the respondent answers either true or f a l s e to each item (Appendix D). I t was developed to assess the s o c i a l climate of families and could be used to compare parent and c h i l d perceptions. I t focuses on the measurement and description of the interpersonal relationships among family members, on the directions of personal growth emphasized within the family, and on the basic organizational structure of the family. The Family Environment Scale consists of the following ten subscales: Cohesion, Expressiveness, C o n f l i c t , Independence, Achievement Orientation, I n t e l -l e c t u a l C u l t u r a l Orientation, Active Recreational Orientation, Moral Religious Emphasis, Organization and Control. The subscales* i n t e r n a l consistencies, using the Kuder-Richardson Formula 2 0 , were a l l i n the accept-able range varying from a low of .64 f o r Independence to a high of . 7 9 for Moral Religious Emphasis. The te s t - r e t e s t r e l i a b i l i t i e s of i n d i v i d u a l scores are a l l acceptable from a low of .68 f o r Independence to a high of .86 f o r Cohesiveness. A family incongruence scale i s given to provide information on how clos e l y members i n a family agree on the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the family's s o c i a l m i l i e u . 31 Parent-Adolescent Communication Inventory (Forms P and  A). The Parent-Adolescent Communication Inventory was developed by Bienvenu (1969) 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, c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s , and styl e s of com-munication. I t i s a self-inventory type of device i n which the subjects respond to each item by checking one of three p o s s i b i l i t i e s : "usually," "sometimes," and "seldom" (Appendix E and F(). The responses, to the items are scored from zero to three with a favorable response given the higher score. I t should be noted that a "sometimes" response when ind i c a t i v e of a favorable a t t i -tude or answer i s given a weight of two where-as when suggesting an unfavorable attitude given a weight of one. The higher the t o t a l score, the higher the l e v e l of parent-adolescent communication. I t i s best suited f o r individuals of high school age and i t relates s o l e l y to the i n d i v i d u a l and to his in t e r a c t i o n with other i n d i v i d u a l s . Three r e l i a b i l i t y studies were conducted with the present forty-item inventory. The Spearman-Brown f o r -mula revealed a c o e f f i c i e n t of . 8 6 . Using the Spearman Rho, a t e s t - r e t e s t study revealed a .78 c o r r e l a t i o n co-e f f i c i e n t . A second t e s t - r e t e s t r e l i a b i l i t y study showed an r of . 8 8 . 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 Checklist design-ed by Walker ( 1 9 7 6 ), consists of items that describe be-haviours that i n t e r f e r e or a c t i v e l y compete with suc-cessf u l academic performance. The teacher i s regarded as the most q u a l i f i e d rater using the c h e c k l i s t on i d e n t i f y i n g children with behaviour problems. Ratings from the children's parents, however, can be obtained f o r purposes of comparative analysis. The c h e c k l i s t consists of f i f t y of the most f r e -quently mentioned negative behaviours (Appendix G), i n a pool of three hundred items from a random sample of t h i r t y experienced teachers. The r e l i a b i l i t y of the c h e c k l i s t has been estimated by the Kuder-Richardson s p l i t - h a l f method and by the t e s t - r e t e s t method. The s p l i t - h a l f r e l i a b i l i t y co-e f f i c i e n t obtained on the c h e c k l i s t was .98 (Walker, 1970). Two estimates of the t e s t - r e t e s t s t a b i l i t y have been obtained since i t s o r i g i n a l p u b l i c a t i o n i n 1970. Walker and B u l l (1970), showed an o v e r a l l t e s t - r e t e s t c o e f f i c i e n t of .80 f o r a three week i n t e r v a l . Bolstad (197*0 showed a s t a b i l i t y c o e f f i c i e n t of .89 for one sample and . 8 1 f o r another sample within a four-week period. The c h e c k l i s t provides a detailed description of behaviour through a f a c t o r i a l p r o f i l e which includes acting-out, withdrawal, d i s t r a c t a b i l i t y , disturbed peer rel a t i o n s and immaturity. Research Design The research design used i n t h i s study was a Pretest-Posttest Control Group Design (Campbell and Stanley, 1 9 6 6 ) . The treatment group and the control group had an equal number of subjects, eleven. In t h i s experimental investigation, the following nonrandomized control group, pretest-posttest de-sign was established: Experimental group 0^ X 0^ Control group 0^ 0^ 0^ - Dependent variable measures before treatment 0^ - Dependent variable measures afte r treatment X - Independent variable (treatment) Since the experimental group and the control group were not assigned at random but volunteered for the STEP program, i t was not c e r t a i n that both groups were equivalent. There-fore, a s t a t i s t i c a l analysis was done on the pretests to v e r i f y t h e i r s t a t i s t i c a l equivalence .on the dependent variable In the use of volunteers f o r the experimental group, the p o s s i b i l i t y of contamination of posttest data due to the effects of s e l e c t i o n and testing did e x i s t . That i s , did the volunteer experimental group carry some c r i t i c a l d i f f e r -ence that would not be r e f l e c t e d i n the pretest? And could 3^ this difference, rather than the treatment, account f o r d i f -ferences i n the posttest? It was f e l t that the jeopardizing factor of se l e c t i o n and te s t i n g i s minimized by the procedure used i n est a b l i s h -ing a control group. In the f i r s t place, the control group i t s e l f was made up of volunteers. And, i t was f e l t that these parents, i n of f e r i n g t h e i r services, represent a non-randomized sampling of the population. Parents were e l i g i b l e to serve i n the control group only i f they were planning to par t i c i p a t e i n the next parent educa-t i o n program to be offered during the following F a l l semester. During the i n i t i a l interview, each member of the control group expressed a desire to improve t h e i r r e l a t i o n s h i p with the i r c h i l d and would be very l i k e l y candidates f o r the future parent study group. Also, i t was f e l t that the factors of maturation and regression did not represent a threat to the i n t e r n a l v a l -i d i t y of the study. Maturation i s not l i k e l y a problem due to the use of a control group. I t should be noted that the experimental and the control group were quite s i m i l a r (Table 1) and these s i m i l a r i t i e s are further confirmed by the scores on the pretest (Table 2 ) . . Neither the control nor the experimental group had extreme scores on any of the pretests. Thus, regression was not l i k e l y to be a major threat to the int e r n a l v a l i d i t y either. Summarizing, the control group volunteers who indicated an i n t e r e s t i n parent education, represented a nonrandomized 35 TABLE 1 DESCRIPTIVE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE SAMPLE Charact e r i s t i c Experimentals Controls Numbers i n Sample Mothers Fathers Boys G i r l s 7 4 5 4 7 4 5 4 Age; Range, mothers and fathers Mean, mothers and fathers Range, g i r l s and boys Mean, g i r l s and boys 33-56 44.6 13-15 13-9 32-57 44.5 13-14 13.3 Family Size: Range Mean 1-6 3.0 1-6 3.0 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 Religion: Protestant Catholic Buddist 5 4 2 8 3 0 36 TABLE 1 (continued) DESCRIPTIVE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE SAMPLE Char a c t e r i s t i c Experimentals Controls Country of Origin: Canada Germany China Japan 8 1 1 1 10 1 0 0 Occupations: Housewives Secretaries Sales Positions Management Po s i t i o n Other 4 2 1 1 3 3 2 2 1 3 Target Child: P o s i t i o n i n the Family Oldest Youngest Third 1 7 1 0 8 0 Adopted Parent Real Parent 1 8 2 7 TABLE 2 PRETEST MEANS AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS FOR EXPERIMENTAL AND CONTROL PARENTS ON ALL MEASURES Test Experimental Control Attitudes Toward Child-Rearing Scale Mean 88.64 100.64 S.D. 11.97 6.31 T-Value 2.94 P r o b a b i l i t y 0.01 Family Environment Scale Mean 18 .64 19.73 S.D. 4.70 4.86 T-Value 0.5*+ P r o b a b i l i t y 0.60 Parent-Adolescent Communica-tion'.Inventory .. (Form P) Mean 99.27 101.91 S.D. 3.98 10.18 T-Value 0.80 P r o b a b i l i t y 0.44 Parent-Adolescent Communica-t i o n Inventory (Form A) Mean 92.45 93.91 S.D. 14.02 16.29 T-Value 0.22 P r o b a b i l i t y 0.83 38 TABLE 2 (continued) PRETEST MEANS AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS FOR EXPERIMENTAL AND CONTROL PARENTS ON ALL MEASURES Test Experimental Control Adlerian Parental Assess-ment of Child Behaviour Scale Mean 162.73 166.81 S.D. 16.46 9.10 T-Value 0.72 P r o b a b i l i t y 0.48 Walker Problem Behaviour I d e n t i f i c a t i o n Checklist Mean 7.36 4.18 S.D. 4 .43 ^.53 T T-Value 1.66 P r o b a b i l i t y 0.11 39 sample that was clos e l y related to the experimental group. Therefore, i t was f e l t that contamination of posttest results attributable to the effects of selection, pretest-treatment interaction, maturation and regression were not s i g n i f i c a n t f a c t o r s , and did not pose a threat 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 control group and the exper-imental group was contacted by telephone by the i n v e s t i -gator, approximately two weeks p r i o r to the beginning of the STEP program. An outline of the interview i s provided i n Appendix H. Each subject was asked to com-plete the APACBS, ATCRS, FES, PAC, and a c o n f i d e n t i a l information form (Appendix I ) . General instructions f o r completing the instruments were given at that time. The package of instruments were delivered personally by the investigator one week p r i o r to the STEP program and a l l were completed by the subjects and returned at the time of the f i r s t session of STEP. The grade 8 children of the control and the experi-mental group were assembled i n one large meeting i n school during the week p r i o r to the beginning of STEP. They were administered the FES and the PAC at that time. The instruments were described f o r the purpose of providing input of general parent concerns into the Co-existing program of STEP and f o r any future programs. I t was stated that the counselling department was gath-ering 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 that the information the parents provided the department would greatly a s s i s t the design and content of future parent programs. I t should he noted that none of the information from the data c o l l e c t i o n was applied to t h i s STEP program and that the STEP manual was s t r i c t l y followed. 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 sets of t e s t s . Each teacher of the target and control children completed the WPBIC, during the week p r i o r to the STEP program. Instructions were given i n d i v i d u a l l y to the teachers by the investigator on how to complete the ch e c k l i s t . A l l teachers were given the same ins t r u c -tions. I t was made clear that the children were not to be aware that t h e i r behaviour was being observed. Posttest. During the week following the l a s t treatment session, the subjects were posttested using the i n s t r u -ments according to the procedure outlined f o r the pre-t e s t . Upon completion of posttest procedures, the investigator provided pretest and posttest feedback on • an i n d i v i d u a l basis to those p a r t i c i p a t i n g subjects re-questing i t . A l e t t e r thanking each participant and off e r i n g feedback was sent at t h i s time (Appendix J ) . T r e a t m e n t . P a r t i c i p a t i n g i n the STEP p rogram i n v o l v e d t e n - w e e k l y s e s s i o n s o f a STEP p a r e n t s t u d y g r o u p . E a c h s e s s i o n was two hour s i n l e n g t h . The t r e a t m e n t p r o c e d u r e s i n v o l v e d s p e c i f i c t o p i c s f o r each s e s s i o n , v a r i o u s k i n d s o f m a t e r i a l s , a s e t '. l e s s o n f o r m a t and sequence , and a l e a d e r . The l e a d e r f o r a l l t e n s e s s i o n s was a t r a i n e d s t u d y g roup l e a d e r and the i n v e s t i g a t o r o f t he s t u d y . E a c h s e s s i o n o f t he STEP p rogram was o r g a n i z e d a round one o r more t o p i c s . The f o l l o w i n g a r e the t o p i c s o f each s e s s i o n . S e s s i o n 1 - G e n e r a l i n f o r m a t i o n , o r g a n i z a t i o n , p a r e n t c o n c e r n s S e s s i o n 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 S e s s i o n 3 - How c h i l d r e n use emot ions t o i n v o l v e a p a r e n t / t h e ".good" p a r e n t S e s s i o n k - Encouragement S e s s i o n 5 - C o m m u n i c a t i o n : L i s t e n i n g S e s s i o n 6 - C o m m u n i c a t i o n : E x p l o r i n g a l t e r n a t i v e s and e x p r e s s i n g r e s p o n s i b i l i t y S e s s i o n 7 - D e v e l o p i n g r e s p o n s i b i l i t y S e s s i o n 8 - D e c i s i o n mak ing . f o r p a r e n t s 42 Session 9 - The family meeting Session 10 - Developing confidence and using'your potential An outline of the f i r s t session can he found i n Appendix K. The treatment procedure s t r i c t l y followed the topics and concepts as described i n the STEP manual. The pro-gram -was supplemented by the use of the publication, Basics of Adult-Teen Relationships (Dinkmeyer, 1 9 7 6 ) . This pamphlet was suggested as supplementary reading outside of the regularly scheduled STEP sessions. For a detailed discussion of the treatment procedure the reader i s referred to the leader's manual (Dinkmeyer and McKay, 1 9 7 6 ) . Analysis of Data The APACBS, FES, PAC, and the WPBIC were scored manually. The ATCRS was completed on mechanically scorable answer sheets and sent to the designer of the instrument (Croake, 1 9 7 6 ) and results returned to be included with the rest of the data. A l l r e s u l t s were mechanically punched onto computer cards. Means and standard deviations were determined f o r the experi-mental and control group f o r each dependent variable, both pretest and posttest. An appropriate t- t e s t of significance was calculated between mean pretest and posttest scores for both groups. The .01 l e v e l of si g n i f i c a n c e , rather than .05, was chosen due to the lack of randomization i n s e l e c t i o n of subjects and the repeated use of t-tests-on several indepen-dent measures involving the same subjects. This also de-creased the p r o b a b i l i t y of a Type I error ( i . e . , r e j e c t i n g a true n u l l hypothesis). The consequences of such an error, i n this context, 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 research study set out to determine the e f f e c t i v e -ness of the STEP program on the parent participants of the study group and on t h e i r children's behaviour. The n u l l hypotheses stated that a f t e r p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n the STEP pro-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 posttest r e s u l t s between the experimental and control groups would exist f o r : (1) participants' attitudes toward child-rearing, (2) participants' family environment, (3) parent-adolescent communication as perceived by the participants, (4) parent-adolescent communication as perceived by the target c h i l d , (5) the target child's behaviour as i n f e r r e d by the part i c i p a n t , (6) the target child's behaviour as inf e r r e d by the teacher. Unless differences s i g n i f i c a n t at the .01 confidence l e v e l were found, the n u l l hypotheses would be considered tenable. Data Analysis Tables 3 "to 8 summarize the pretest and posttest means, and changes i n standard deviation for both experimental and con-t r o l groups. An independent t- t e s t was calculated between the experimental and control groups on the posttest. The s t a t i s t i -c a l analysis of the data obtained f o r each hypothesis follows: 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 -ference i n the mean rat i n g of attitudes toward chil 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 not p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n the program, as measured by the Attitudes Toward Child-Rearing  Scale (ATCRS). The r e s u l t s were as follows: The STEP group had a post-test mean of 78.18 while the control group had a posttest mean of 95-82 (Table 3 ) . Table 3 Means, Standard Deviations, and t - S t a t i s t i c s f o r Experimental and Control Parents on the Attitudes Toward Child-Rearing Scale (ATCRS) Pretest Posttest Group M S .D . M S .D. Experimental (N=ll) 88 .64 11 .97 78 .18 22 .18 Control (N=ll) 100 .64 6 .31 9 5 . 8 2 1 1 . 2 9 Independent t - t e s t t= 2 . 9 ^ t=2.35 P r o b a b i l i t y p=0.01 p=o.03 46 The pretest-posttest means are more graphically i l l u s t r a t e d i n Figure 1. 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 difference between the experimental group and the control group on the posttest. The results are not s i g n i f i c a n t at the .01 l e v e l and thus Hypothesis 1 i s accepted. 105-100-95-Mean Scores 90-85-80-Pre Post Note: Decreasing scores indicate a change toward more democratic attitudes Figure 1. Pretest and Posttest Mean Changes on the Attitude Toward Child-Rearing Scale (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 -ference i n the mean rat i n g of the family environ-ment 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 Family Environment Scale (FES). The results related to the second hypothesis are display-ed i n Table 4 and Figure 2. The STEP group had a posttest mean of 16.55> while the control group had a posttest mean of 18.64. Table 4 Means, Standard Deviations, and t - S t a t i s t i c s f o r Experimental and Control Parents on the Family Environment Scale (FES) Pretest Posttest Group M S .D. M S.D. Experimental (N=ll) 18.64 4.70 16.55 C 8 4 Control . (N=ll) 19-73 4.86 18.64 8.21 Independent t - t e s t t=0.5k t=0.73 P r o b a b i l i t y p=0.6o p=0.48 48 Based on the t - s t a t i s t i c , as indicated 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 experi-mental group and the control group on the posttest. The res u l t s are not s i g n i f i c a n t at the . 0 1 l e v e l . Hypothesis 2 i s accepted. 2 0 -1 9 -1 8 -Mean Scores 1 7 -16-1 5 -Pre Post Note: Decreasing scores indicate a change toward a more congruent family Figure 2 . Pretest and Posttest Mean Changes on the Family Environment Scale (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 -ference i n the mean ra t i n g of parent-adolescent communication between subjects 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 Communica- t i o n Inventory, Form Po(PACT"i The results were as follows: The STEP group had a post-test mean of 103•27, while the control group had a posttest mean of 101.18 (Table 5). Table 5 Means, Standard Deviations, and t - S t a t i s t i c s f o r Experimental and Control Parents on the Parent-Adolescent Communication Inventory, Form P (PAC) Group M Pretest S .D . Posttest M S ,D. Experimental (N=ll) 99.27 3.98 103.27 9.81 Control (N=ll) 101.91 10.18 101.18 9-89 Independent t-te s t t= 0 . 8 0 t=o.50 P r o b a b i l i t y p=0.44 p=0.62 50 The pretest-posttest means are graphically i l l u s t r a t e d i n Figure 3« Based on the t - s t a t i s t i c as shown i n Table 5, 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 experimental group and the control group on the posttest. The results are not s i g n i f i c a n t at the .01 l e v e l and Hypothesis 3 i s accepted. 104-Mean Scores 101-100-103-102-9 9 --* Experimental A Control Pre Post Note: Increasing scores indicate a change toward more communication Figure 3- Pretest and Posttest Mean Changes on the Parent-Adolescent 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 -ference i n the mean rat i n g 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-Adoles- cent Communication Inventory, Form A (PAC). The r e s u l t s related to the fourth hypothesis are display-ed i n Table 6 and Figure 4 . The STEP group had a posttest mean of 8 9 . 3 6 , while the control group had a posttest mean of 96.18. Table 6 Means, Standard Deviations, and t - S t a t i s t i c s f o r Experimental and Control Target Children on the Parent-Adolescent Communication Inventory, Form A (PAC) Pretest Posttest Group M S .D . M S .D. Experimental (N=ll) 9 2 . 4 5 1 4 . 0 2 8 9 . 3 6 1 2 . 7 8 Control (N=ll) 9 3 . 9 1 1 6 . 2 9 9 6 . 1 8 12 .98 Independent t-te s t t= 0 . 2 2 t=1.24 Probabili t y p=0.83 p=0.23 52 Based on the t - s t a t i s t i c as indicated 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 difference between the experi-mental group and the control group on the posttest. The resu l t s are not s i g n i f i c a n t at the .01 l e v e l , thus Hypothesis 4 i s accepted. 96-.95-94-93-Mean Scores 92-91-90-8 9 -Pre Post ' Note: Increasing scores indicate a change toward more communication Figure 4 . Pretest and Posttest Mean Changes on the Parent-Adolescent 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 -ference i n the mean rat i n g 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 (APACBS). The r e s u l t s were as follows: The STEP group had a post-test mean of 170.45, while the control group had a posttest mean of 165.36 (Table 7). Table 7 Means, Standard Deviations, and t - S t a t i s t i c s f o r Experimental and Control Parents on the Adlerian Parental Assessment of Child Behaviour Scale (APACBS) Pretest Posttest Group M S.D. M S.D. Experimental (N=ll) 162 .73 1 6 . 4 6 170.45 11 .86 Control (N=ll) 166 .82 9.10 165.36 8 . 32 Independent t- t e s t t=0.72 t=1.17 P r o b a b i l i t y p=0.48 p=0.26 5*+ The pretest-posttest means are graphically i l l u s t r a t e d i n Figure 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 difference between the experimental group and the control group on the posttest. The results are not s i g n i f i c a n t at the .01 l e v e l and thus Hypothesis 5 i s accepted. 180-175-170-Mean Scores 165-160-155 •* Experimental A Control Pre Post Note: Increasing scores indicate a change toward improved behaviour Figure 5« Pretest and Posttest Mean Changes on the Adlerian Parental Assessment of Child Behaviour Scale (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 -ference i n the mean r a t i n g of c h i l d behaviour 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 Walker Problem Behaviour  I d e n t i f i c a t i o n Checklist (WPBIC)~ The r e s u l t s related to t h i s l a s t hypothesis are display-ed i n Table 8 and Figure 6. The STEP group had a posttest mean of 7-91> while the control group had a posttest of 5.64. Table 8 Means, Standard Deviations, and t - S t a t i s t i c s f o r Experimental and Control Target Children on the Walker Problem Behaviour I d e n t i f i c a t i o n Checklist (WPBIC) Pretest Posttest Group M S .D. M S .D. Experimental (N=ll) 7 - 3 6 4.43 7.91 4.57 Control (N=ll) 4.18 4.53 5.64 7.21 Independent t-te s t t=1.66 t=0.88 P r o b a b i l i t y p=0.11 p=0.40 Based on t h e t - s t a t i s t i c , as i n d i c a t e d i n T a b l e 8 , t h e r e 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 th e e x p e r i -m e n t a l 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 . 0 1 l e v e l , thus H y p o t h e s i s 6 i s a c c e p t e d . 8 -7-Mean Sc o r e s 6 -5 -4 -Pre P o s t i- Note: 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 toward more a p p r o p r i a t e b e h a v i o u r F i g u r e 6 . P r e t e s t and P o s t t e s t Mean Changes on the W a l k e r Problem 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 control group parents reported t h e i r attitudes toward ch i l d - r e a r i n g by means of the Attitudes  Toward Child-Rearing Scale. Both groups reported t h e i r t a r -get c h i l d ' s behaviour by means of the Adlerian Parental  Assessment of Child Behaviour Scale. The target children's behaviour was also reported 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 Checklist. Experi-mental and control group parents and th e i r target children reported t h e i r family environment by means of the Family  Environment Scale and t h e i r parent-adolescent communication by means of Parent-Adolescent Communication Inventory. A l l measures 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 control group on the posttest at the <X = .01 l e v e l . 58 Chapter V DISCUSSION This study investigated the effects of the STEP program on the parent participants of the study group. This research also investigated the i n d i r e c t effects the STEP program had on the parent part i c i p a n t s ' grade 8 c h i l d . When considering the problem, th i s investigator chose to measure changes i n : (1) parental attitudes related to chi l d - r e a r i n g as perceived by the participants, (2) family climate as founded upon infe r r e d i n t e r -action by the participants and the target c h i l d , (3) parent-adolescent communication as perceived by the p a r t i c i p a n t and the target c h i l d , (4) the target c h i l d ' s behaviour as inferred by the part i c i p a n t and by the teacher. Interpretation of Findings Hypothesis 1: The data summarized i n Table 3 supports the research hypothesis that states: 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 -ference i n the mean rating of attitudes toward child-rearing 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 Attitudes Toward Child- Rearing Scale. Since the changes reported by 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. These findings are i n accord with those of Swenson ( 1 9 7 0 ) , Steed ( 1 9 7 1 ) . Runyan ( 1 9 7 3 ) . Laine ( 1 9 7 4 ) , and BieLaurier (1975) who reported no s t a t i s t i c a l evidence of change i n parental attitudes concerning the 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 Adlerian parent study group. The intention was to measure the effects of the STEP program on the participants attitudes toward ch i l d - r e a r i n g . If the goal 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 attitudes can be seen as an intervening variable. There was a drop i n mean scores (indicating a change toward more democratic a t t i -tudes) between the pre and post testing of the experimental group. The difference between the means on the pretest and the posttest of the experimental group was more than twice the difference between the means on the pretest and the post-test of the control group (Table 3 )• However i t should be noted that there was a s i g n i f i c a n t difference between the experimental group and the control group on parental a t t i -tudes before the treatment (t= 2 . 9 4 ; p= 0 . 0 1 ) . The r e s u l t s indicate 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 participants attitudes toward chi l d - r e a r i n g . This study gives support to the notion that attitudes are d i f f i c u l t to change. Hypothesis 2: The data summarized i n Table 4 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 the family environ-ment 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 Family Environment Scale. Since the changes reported by 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 was accepted. The intention was to measure the e f f e c t of the STEP pro-gram on the family environment of the p a r t i c i p a n t s . Changes i n the family environment were reported as inferred i n t e r -action by the participants and t h e i r target c h i l d . A Family Incongruence Score i s derived to help one conclude: How closely do the participants and the target c h i l d i n a family agree on the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the family's s o c i a l milieu? The lower the Family Incongruence Score the more congruent the family. Both the experimental and control group showed decreased scores between pre and post t e s t i n g (Figure 2 ) . However, thi s improvement may have been generated by taking the test a second time. It i s i n t e r e s t i n g to note that the normative sample 61 (Moos, 1974), yielded a Family Incongruence Score of 16.74 and the posttest Family Incongruence Scores of the experi-mental and control groups were 16.55 and 18.64 respectively. The r e s u l t s 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 inferred i n t e r a c t i o n of the family environment. Hypothesis 3-The data summarized i n Table 5 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 ..significant ••dif-ference i n the mean rating of parent-adolescent communication 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 Parent-Adolescent Communication  Inventory, Form P. Since the changes reported by 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 .01 confidence l e v e l , the n u l l hypothesis of no difference was accepted. These findings seem consistent with Goula (1976) and i Nobel (1976) who reported no evidence of change i n parent-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 Adlerian parent study group. STEP attempts to educate parents i n more ef f e c t i v e methods of communication. Dinkmeyer and McKay (1975) and Fr a z i e r and Matthes (1975) suggest that when parents are brought together f o r discussion 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 relationships within the family can be achieved. 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 for the control group decreased slightly while the mean scores between the pre and posttests of the experimental group in-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 participation in a STEP group does not significantly change the participants perceptions of parent-adolescent communication. Hypothesis 4: The data summarized in 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 significant dif-ference in the mean rating of parent-adolescent communication between the target child of the participants of STEP and the target child of the control group as measured by the Parent-Adoles- Sent Communication Inventory, Form A. Since the changes reported by the treatment group were not st a t i s t i c a l l y significant at the .01 confidence level, the null hypothesis was accepted. The intention was to: measurertheceffeet of the STEP pro gram on parent-adolescent communication as perceived by the target child of each participant. The mean scores between pre and posttest on the control group increased slightly while the experimental group mean scores decreased between pre and posttest. This might be explained as Steed (1971) 63 suggested, that the process of Adlerian parent education sometimes involves a period of regression before positive changes occur. More significantly, the target children of the participants of STEP may i n i t i a l l y react towards their parents who are interacting with them in a new and different way. Nevertheless, the results indicate that participation in a STEP group does not significantly change the target child's perceptions of parent-adolescent communication. Hypothesis 5-The data summarized in 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 significant dif-ference in the mean rating of child behaviour between subjects participating in STEP and those not participating in the program as meas-ured by the Adlerian Parental Assessment of  Child Behaviour Scale. Since the changes recorded for the treatment group were not st a t i s t i c a l l y significant at the . 0 1 confidence level, the null hypothesis of no difference was accepted. The intention was to measure the effects of the STEP program on the participants' perceptions of their target child's behaviour. When parents are experimenting with new attitudes and perceptions — i f parents report changes in child behaviour, they are also reporting changes in the parent-child relationship. The mean scores between pre and post-testing for the control group showed a slight decrease, while the mean scores for the experimental group increased 64 i n d i c a t i n g a more po s i t i v e change toward improved behaviour. The r e s u l t s 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 p a r t i c i p a n t s ' perceptions of t h e i r target child's behaviour. The v a l i d i t y of the data obtained from the study of mother's perceptions i s strength-ened by the high 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 ( 1 9 7 6 ) , P i a t t ( 1 9 7 1 ) , and others, that p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n an Adlerian study group does not s i g n i f i c a n t l y improve the parents' per-ceptions of c h i l d behaviour. In f a c t , P i a t t found that the behaviour of most of the children i n his Adlerian group were rated by teachers and parents as remaining about the same or deteriorating. Hypothesis 6: The data summarized i n Table 8 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 c h i l d behaviour 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 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 . Since the changes reported by the treatment group are not 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 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 was accepted. These findings are i n agreement with those of P i a t t ( 1 9 7 1 ) , DeLaurier ( 1 9 7 5 ) . and Nordal (1976) who reported no s i g n i f i c a n t improvement i n class behaviour of children whose parents participated i n an Adlerian parent study group. 65 The intention was to measure the e f f e c t of the STEP program on the target c h i l d ' s behaviour i n c l a s s . I t i s hoped that the children of these parents w i l l perceive be-havioural changes i n the parent and w i l l a l t e r t h e i r behav-iour. I t i s assumed that changes i n the parent-child r e l a - -tionship w i l l accompany the changes. Both the target c h i l d group and the control group had increased mean scores between pre and post testing ( i n d i c a t i n g a change toward more i n -appropriate behaviour, Figure 6 ). This increase i n score 1 might be generated by the test i t s e l f or the target c h i l d r e n could be i n d i c a t i n g a negative reaction to t h e i r parents' new ways of i n t e r a c t i n g with them. As Steed (1971) suggests, the process of Adlerian parent education sometimes involves a period of regression before p o s i t i v e changes occur. Per-haps i t would be valuable to measure changes i n the target children's behaviour at l e a s t six months a f t e r the t r e a t -ment. Or perhaps, as Runyan (1973) concluded, that change would require a longer treatment period. The r e s u l t s 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 class behaviour of the part i c i p a n t s ' target c h i l d as i n f e r r e d by t h e i r teacher. Limitations This investigator notes the following l i m i t a t i o n s of this study: 66 1. The population was r e s t r i c t e d to parents from the middle-socioeconomic s t r a t a of Burnaby, B r i t i s h Columbia who were required to have a c h i l d attend-ing grade 8 at Alpha Secondary School. The c h i l -dren of these parents ranged from 13 to 15 years i n age. 2. The sample was comprised of volunteers who resided i n Burnaby and could attend the group on the des-ignated time and day. 3. The sample-. (n=ll) was small but adequate to perform the necessary s t a t i s t i c a l procedures. I t may not have been t r u l y representative of the population. 4 . Most of the volunteers were mothers. No assess-ment was made of the impact of STEP on fathers, single parents, or couples. 5. There i s a low l e v e l of external v a l i d i t y and thus limi t e d g e n e r a l i z a b i l i t y due to the r e s t r i c t i o n of the sample of parents to volunteers from one school only. 6 . A v i o l a t i o n i n randomization i s a p o s s i b i l i t y due to the procedure used i n assigning some members to the control group. Thus g e n e r a l i z a b i l i t y i s reduced. 7. Most res u l t s (Hypothesis 1-5) were obtained through s e l f - r e p o r t instruments. Thus perceived and 6 7 i n f e r r e d family interactions may have been meas-ured and perhaps not the actual family i n t e r a c t i o n . Changes i n parent attitudes, family environment and parent-child communication were probably not reported by unbiased observers. 8. The research investigated changes i n the target c h i l d only, other children of the family were ex-cluded . 9 . Some of the subjects i n the control group may have read parent-child materials, received counselling, attended lectures on c h i l d t r a i n i n g techniques, etc., during the treatment period. 10. Perhaps the instruments chosen i n t h i s study were not sensitive enough to measure changes due to the treatment. 11. Possibly other variables could have been measured, which might have shown s i g n i f i c a n t changes as the r e s u l t of'treatment. Implications and Suggestions f o r Further Research The Adlerian viewpoint, as stated previously i n Chapter I, maintains that behaviour changes i n children can be most e f f e c t i v e l y brought about by working with the s i g n i f i c a n t a d u l t , i n t h e i r l i v e s . Further, behaviour toward children i s 68 the product of adult perceptions of the children and the s i t -uation. Adult perception and behaviour, correct or incorrect, influence the chil d ' s behaviour i n the d i r e c t i o n of the ad-u l t ' s expectations. The results of this study pose some in t e r e s t i n g ques-tions regarding the v a l i d i t y of these statements. The authors of STEP suggest, from t h e i r research, s i g n i f i c a n t changes i n mothers' perceptions of children'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 Adlerian-based parent study group (Dinkmeyer and McKay, 1976). They are one of the few Adlerian parent group studies which report s i g n i f i c a n t changes. Thus the following questions are asked: Is the STEP Adlerian pro-gram more e f f e c t i v e than other Adlerian parent study group programs? What changes can be measured and are these changes s i g n i f i c a n t ? The present research i s the only study besides Dinkmeyer's and McKay's, to the best of t h i s investigator's knowledge, that has attempted to measure the effects of the STEP program. This study, as well as others, involved a comparison of the effects of an Adlerian-based parent study group to an equiv-alent control 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 participants perceptions of the i r children's behaviour. No s i g n i f i c a n t differences i n parental attitudes, family environment, parent-child com-munication and teacher perceptions of c h i l d behaviour were reported. The r e s u l t s of t h i s research seem, to indicate that perhaps STEP i s not as v a l i d a program i n terms of 69 helping parents r e l a t e more p o s i t i v e l y with t h e i r c h i l d r e n as Dinkmeyer's and McKay's research seems to suggest. I t should be noted that this investigator had received posit i v e feedback from participants of the STEP group and from other parents interested i n the study/discussion method of parent education. A p o s i t i v e aspect of the STEP group was that parents experienced a f e e l i n g of r e l i e f when they d i s -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 also reported f e e l -ing more confident i n t h e i r role as parents, and that c h i l -dren, behaved more responsibly and cooperatively. There was a high degree of i n t e r a c t i o n among group members. Parents seemed eager to share experiences and offered a wide range of views regarding the information i n the text. I t i s t h i s researcher's opinion that the parent became conscious of, and evaluated his or her r e l a t i o n s h i p with t h e i r children. Regardless of other aspects of the program, the parent may undergo change due to a self-evaluation and concentrated self-improvement approach to enhancing the parent-child r e l a t i o n s h i p . This view i s supported by Steed (1971) who suggests that, regardless of any measured out-comes, the study/discussion method may make i t s greatest contribution i n making the parent more aware of the parent-c h i l d r e l a t i o n s h i p . The informational component of the group process seems to play an important r o l e . Being able to c l a r i f y and r e l a t e 70 structured material through sharing and discussion may en-courage parents to try new methods of dealing with t h e i r children. In t h i s researcher's experience, parents f r e e l y expressing t h e i r b e l i e f s and practices related to c h i l d -rearing become an extensive, creative and sometimes humorous experience. The STEP program provided an opportunity to build a new cooperative partnership between parents and educators. Parents expressed a common complaint that ten group sessions was i n s u f f i c i e n t . Both parent participants and t h i s investigator f e e l that the STEP program, as i t presently ex-i s t s , packs too much material into too short a period of time. Chapters IV and V on communication o f f e r " a good ex-ample. I t i s f e l t that parents never did e f f e c t i v e l y learn the communication s k i l l s outlined i n these chapters. I t i s recommended that the STEP program increase the number of sessions to a minimum of twelve. The tapes were more appropriate f o r parents of element-ary school children. Thus, i t i s recommended that the tapes be adapted to cover the range of situations more pertinent to parents of adolescents. The investigator recommends the reader remember the small n (11) when considering the r e s u l t s . A study involving larger numbers of subjects would be i n order. The program should be tested with d i f f e r e n t populations such as couples, minority groups or parents of preschoolers. I t would be i n t e r e s t i n g to explore the effects of the parent procedures 71 on various age groups of younger children. I t i s strongly suggested that the schools encourage spouses to attend the sessions together. I t seems that i n using a team approach when applying new parenting p r i n c i p l e s and techniques gives support and confidence to both parents. STEP could be tested f o r use i n study groups f o r teachers as well as i n high school preparation f o r parenthood classes. The effects of STEP on a l l childr e n i n the family needs to be investigated. In addition to measuring the children's behaviour, the parents' behaviour could be observed and rated. Parents' r e s u l t s were obtained through s e l f - r e p o r t i n s t r u -ments and the chance of bias r a t i n g i s extremely high with this procedure. An unbiased observers' ratings of parental behaviour and family environment could be investigated. A major question raised by t h i s investigator i s whether s i g n i f i c a n t changes i n the•treatment group might be shown possibly s i x months toaa year following p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n the STEP program? That i s , i f the experimental group were sur-veyed once again six months l a t e r , what changes, i n c h i l d behaviour, parent-adolescent communication, family atmosphere, and parental attitudes would be reported by the parent, teacher and c h i l d . I t must be remembered that changes i n children's behaviour are not l i k e l y to occur immediately f o l -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 attitudes are changed, the positive effects upon t h e i r children may not be evident u n t i l sometime a f t e r . A follow-up study needs to be conducted several months af t e r 72 the conclusion of the treatment to determine any changes over time. I t i s hoped that a follow-up to this study can he car-r i e d out i n the future. I t should again he noted that the normative data i s pre-sently being co l l e c t e d by the authors of the APACBS and the ATCRS. I t i s suggested that before a s i m i l a r study i s r e p l i -cated, the researchers be able to u t i l i z e standard s t a t i s t i c a l information related to the APACBS and ATCRS. Another modification would include a r e p l i c a t i o n of the present study with the use of a novice rather than an experi-enced counsellor. I t i s f e l t that when an expert i s present i n the discussion group, group members assume less responsi-b i l i t y f o r t h e i r own t r a i n i n g and depend more on the expert to show them- the way. In t h i s study, the d i s t i n c t i o n between the leader as expert and the leader as f a c i l i t a t o r had to be made clear. I t was emphasized that f a c i l i t a t i n g the group process was the leaders prime function i n the group. An inves t i g a t i o n of the effects of a STEP group led by leaders of varying s k i l l l e v e l s could be undertaken. F i n a l l y , more research on parent education i s needed. Obon (1976) states that great strides have been made i n the l a s t decade, but that new research i s constantly needed. This researcher f e e l s that whenever possible the use of a cognitive c r i t e r i a w i l l allow more d i r e c t and meaningful con-clusions to be drawn. 73 Conclusion The purpose of t h i s study 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) 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 c h i l d - r e a r i n g as perceived by the p a r t i c i p a n t s and 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 , (2) f a m i l y 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 t a r g e t c h i l d and measured by the Family Environment  Scal e , (3) parent-adolescent communication as perceived by the p a r t i c i p a n t s , and measured by the Parent- Adolescent Communication Inventory, (4) parent-adolescent communication as perceived by the t a r g e t c h i l d and measured by the Parent- Adolescent Communication Inventory, (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 p a r t i c i p a n t and 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 Sca l e , (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 and measured by 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 . The s u b j e c t s were p a r e n t s of grade 8 s t u d e n t s who v o l -u n t e e r e d t o p a r t i c i p a t e i n the STEP program. The c o n t r o l group was c o m p r i s e d o f p a r e n t s who v o l u n t e e r e d as w e l l , b u t were unable t o p a r t i c i p a t e a t the time of the program. The 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 used i n t h i s r e -s e a r c h . A t - t e s t was c a l c u l a t e d on mean p r e t e s t s c o r e s between the STEP group and the c o n t r o l group and p o s t t e s t s c o r e s between the STEP group and the c o n t r o l group. The r e s u l t s 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 changes i n t h e i r a t t i t u d e s , 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 communication and t h e i r t a r g e t c h i l d ' s b e h a v i o u r . The t a r g e t c h i l d r e n a l s o r e p o r t e d no s i g n i f i c a n t changes i n t h e i r f a m i l y c l i m a t e and p a r e n t -a d o l e s c e n t communication. F i n a l l y , the t e a c h e r s of the t a r -g e t c h i l d r e n r e p o r t e d no s i g n i f i c a n t changes i n the t a r g e t c h i l d ' s b e h a v i o u r i n c l a s s a f t e r t h e i r p a r e n t s p a r t i c i p a t e d i n STEP. The r e s u l t s o f t h i s s t u d y suggest t h a t "the .STEP program i s not an e f f e c t i v e method i n p r o m o t i n g change 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 . Perhaps the s m a l l n of 11 was too s m a l l and 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 . F u r t h e r m o r e , the i n s t r u m e n t s chosen i n t h e s t u d y may not have been s e n s i t i v e enough t o measure changes due t o the t r e a t m e n t . A l t h o u g h McKay (1976) recommends the use of STEP w i t h p a r e n t s of a d o l e s c e n t s , i t i s t h i s i n v e s t i -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 t o meet the needs of p a r e n t s o f c h i l d r e n a t the e l e m e n t a r y 7 5 s c h o o l l e v e l . I t i s a l s o t h i s i n v e s t i g a t o r s o p i n i o n t h a t STEP i s a w e l l p l a n n e d and c l e a r l y p r e s e n t e d approach t o the c h a l l e n g e s of p a r e n t i n g . Group s e s s i o n s a re p r e s e n t e d i n such an u n d e r s t a n d i n g and l o g i c a l manner t h a t i n s i g h t s and i n f o r m a t i o n a r e a c q u i r e d i n a s t i m u l a t i n g and n o n t h r e a t e n i n g way. 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 under-s t a n d i n g of the importance of p a r e n t e d u c a t i o n i n the s c h o o l s e t t i n g . 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 a l t e r i n g of the c o n t e n t f o r m a t of STEP t o more a p p r o p r i a t e l y meet the i n t e r e s t s o f r e a l l i f e s i t u a t i o n s o f p a r e n t s of a d o l e s c e n t s . As the program e x i s t s , STEP seems more a p p l i c a b l e to p a r e n t s of c h i l d r e n a t the el e m e n t a r y s c h o o l age. The c a r i c a t u r e s and problem s i t u a t i o n s need to be p r e s e n t e d i n a more mature f a s h i o n t o 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 . S p e c i f i c a l l y , the p a r t i c i p a n t s need t o be p r o v i d e d w i t h m a t e r i a l w h i c h r e l a t e s more to t h e i r p r e s e n t s i t u a t i o n a t home. I t i s a l s o s u g g e s t e d t h a t the v o i c e s of young c h i l d r e n on the tapes be r e p l a c e d w i t h v o i c e s of a d o l e s c e n t s and t h a t the problem 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 of p a r e n t s of a d o l e s c e n t s . G e n e r a l l y , i t i s t h i s i n v e s t i g a t o r s o p i n i o n , t h a t the p r i n c i p l e s o r co n c e p t s p r e s e n t e d i n STEP seem v e r y a p p r o p r i a t e f o r use a t the e l e m e n t a r y s c h o o l l e v e l b u t t h e r e i s a need f o r a thorough r e - e x a m i n a t i o n of STEP to p r o v i d e a program w h i c h would more s u i t a b l y meet the needs of p a r e n t s o f a d o l e s c e n t s . I t i s a l s o recommended t h a t the suggested t e n group s e s s i o n s be i n c r e a s e d t o a minimum of 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 b e t t e r g r a s p the p r i n c i p l e s p r e s e n t e d i n t h e program. I t i s s u g g e s t e d t h a t the husbands as w e l l as w i v e s a t t e n d the s e s s i o n s t o g e t h e r whenever pos-s i b l e . Other recommendations r e l a t e d t o f u t u r e r e s e a r c h o f STEP were: to d e v i s e s t u d i e s t o d etermine the form of p a r t i -c i p a n t change produced by the t r e a t m e n t and t o a s c e r t a i n the l o n g term impact of the program 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 of p a r t i c i p a n t s ; t o d e v i s e 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 and randomized comparison groups; t o improve and r e f i n e the approaches t o the measurement of changes i n p a r e n t a l behav-i o u r and f a m i l y environment as s u g g e s t e d t h r o u g h th e use of an u n b i a s e d o b s e r v e r ; to s u r v e y the 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 ; and t o examine the use o f STEP by l e a d e r s o f d i f f e r e n t s k i l l l e v e l s . F i n a l l y , i t was i n d i c a t e d t h a t more r e s e a r c h i n p a r e n t e d u c a t i o n i s needed w i t h the o b j e c t i v e o f c o n s t r u c t i n g e d u c a t i o n a l programs aimed a t i m p r o v i n g the q u a l i t y of f a m i l y l i f e . 77 REFERENCES Agati, G.J. and Iovino, J.W. Implementation of a parent counselling program. School Counsellor, November, 1 9 7 4 , 2 2 ( 2 ) , 1 2 6 - 1 2 9 . Alder, A. The Individual Psychology of A l f r e d Alder. H.L. & R.R. Ansbache (eds). New York: Basic Books, 1 9 5 6 . Aldous, J. and Dahl, H. International Bibliography of Research i n Marriage and the Family 1 9 6 5 - 1 9 7 2 . Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 197k, Vol. I I . Aldous, J. and H i l l , R. International Bibliography of Research i n Marriage and the Family 1 9 0 0 - 1 9 6 4 . Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, I 9 6 7 , Vol. I~! Auerback, A.B. Parents Learn Through Discussion: P r i n c i p l e s  and Practices of Parent Group Education. New York: John Wilus and Sons, Inc., 1 9 6 8 . Berrett, R.D. Adlerian mother study groups: An evaluation. Journal of Individual Psychology, 1 9 7 5 , 21, 1 7 9 - 1 8 2 . Bienvenu, M.J. "Parent-Adolescent Communication and S e l f -Esteem." Journal 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 Publica-tions, 1 9 6 9 . Brim, 0 . Education for Child Reading. New York: Runnell Saze Foundation, 1 9 5 9 . Campbell, D.T. and Stanley, J.C. Experimental and Quasi  Experimental Designs f o r Research. Chicago: Rand McNally, 1966. Carkhuff, R.R. and -Bierman, R. Training as preferred mode of treatment of parents of emotionally disturbed children. Journal of Counselling Psychology, 1 9 7 0 , 17_, 1 5 7 - 1 6 1 . Christensen, O.C. Family education: A model f o r consulta-t i o n . Elementary School Guidance and Counselling. 1 9 7 2 , 2 ( 2 ) , 1 2 1 - 1 2 9 . Croake, J.W. and Hinkle, D.E. Attitudes Toward Child Rear- ing Scale. Unpublished text, Virgina Polytechnic Institute and State University, 1 9 7 6 . 78 Cullen, J.S. The effectiveness of parent discussion groups: A follow-up study. Mental Hygiene, 1968, $2, 590-599-DeLaurer, A.M. An investigation of the e f f e c t of Adlerian parent study groups upon children's reading achievement. Doctoral d i s s e r t a t i o n , University of Oregon, 1975-D i s s e r t a t i o n Abstracts International, 1976, 4 2 5 4 A . Dinkmeyer, D. The Basics of Adult-Teen Relationships. Coral Springs, F l o r i a : CMTI Press, 1 9 7 6 . Dinkmeyer, D. A study of Adlerian c h i l d guidance counselling as measured by c h i l d and mother responses to problem inventories. Doctoral d i s s e r t a t i o n , Michigan State University, 1 9 5 8 . D i s s e r t a t i o n 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 School Guidance and Counselling, 1974, 9 ( 2 ) , 108 -115. Dinkmeyer, D. and McKay, G. Raising a Responsible C h i l d . New York: Simon and Hehurter, 1973-Dinkmeyer,DD.aandMMcKay, G. Systematic Training f o r E f f e c - t i v e Parenting. C i r c l e Pines, Minn.: American Guidance Service, M.C, 1975-Dinkmeyer, D. and Munro, J.- Group Counselling: Theory and  Practise. Itasca, 1 1 1 . : F.E. Peacock, 1971• Dreikurs, R. The Challenge of Parenthood. New York: Meredith Press, 1 9 5 8 . Dreikurs, R. and Soltz, V. Children: The Challenge. New York: Hawthorn Books IncTj 1 9 6 4 . Eastlack, K. The Wesley Family Education Center. A study i n behaviour and attitude changes. Paper submitted at the University of Minnisota, January 12 , 1 9 7 0 . Fears, S.L. Adlerian parent study groups. The School  Counsellor, 1976, 2^3, 320-330. Frazier, F. and Matthes, W. Parent education: A comparison of Adlerian and behavioural approaches. Elementary School  Guidance and Counselling, 1975, 10 ( 1 ) , 3 1 - 3 8 . Freeman, C.S. Adlerian mother study groups: Effects on attitudes and behaviour. Journal of M a l i r i d u a l Psychology, May 1975, 21(1) , 37-50. 79 Glass, G.V. and Stanley, J.C. S t a t i s t i c a l Methods i n Educa- t i o n and Psychology. Prentice-Hall Inc., 1970. Gordon, T. Parent Effectiveness Training. New York: Peter H. Wyden Inc., 1970. Goula, J.R. The e f f e c t of Adlerian parent study groups with and without communication t r a i n i n g on the behaviour of parents and children. Doctoral d i s s e r t a t i o n , University of Arizona, 1976 . D i s s e r t a t i o n Abstracts International, 1977, 21> 1985A-198SA -: Haley, J. Research on Family Patterns: An Instrument  Measurement. Family Process, 1964, J3, 41 - 6 5 . Haley, T.F. Multiple counselling with mother i n a public secondary school. Doctoral d i s s e r t a t i o n , University of Oregon, 1 9 6 3 . D i s s e r t a t i o n Abstracts International, 1 9 6 3 , 24, 3422-3423. Hays, W.L. S t a t i s t i c s . New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1 9 6 3 . Hereford, G.F. Changing Parental Attitudes Through Group  Discussion. Austin, Texas: University of Texas Press, 1 9 6 T Hillman, B.W. The parent-teacher education center: A sup-plement to elementary school counselling. Elementary  School Guidance and Counselling, December I 9 6 8 , 2.(2), 111-117. Hillman, B.W. and McKay, G. The Adlerian Parental Assess- ment of Child Behaviour Scale. Unpublished measuring instrument. The University of Arizona, 1 9 7 6 . Hillman, B.W. and Perry, T. The parent teacher education center: An evaluation of a program fo r improving family r e l a t i o n s . Journal of Family Counselling, 1975 , 2, 1 1 - 1 6 . Kamali, R.M. The effectiveness of counselling i n a community parent teacher education center. The Family Coordinator, October 1969, 401-402. Krumboltz, J. and Krumboltz, H. Changing Children's Behav- iour. Englewood C l i f f s , N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1 9 7 2 . Laine, C.R. A study of the impact of the Dreikurs parent study group method on parental attitudes toward and behav-i o u r a l i n t e r a c t i o n with the school. Doctoral d i s s e r t a t i o n , University of Pittsburgh, 1 9 7 3 . D i s s e r t a t i o n Abstracts  International, 1974, ^ 4 , 6386A. 80 Mahoney, K.F. The e f f e c t of Adlerian groups on the author-i a r i a n c h i l d - r e a r i n g practices of parents. Doctoral d i s s e r t a t i o n , University of Wyoming, 1974. D i s s e r t a t i o n  Abstracts International, 1975, 2 5 , 4 l 6 l A . McDonough, J.J. J r . Approaches to Adlerian family education research. Journal of Individual Psychology, 1976, 31, 224-231. Moos, R. Family Environment Scale Preliminary Manual. PaikxAlto.ygCglif.•: Psychologists Press, 1974. Nobel, R.D. An evaluation of parent effectiveness t r a i n i n g and Adlerian parent groups: Changing c h i l d rearing attitudes. Doctoral d i s s e r t a t i o n , Indiana University, 1976. D i s s e r t a t i o n Abstracts International, 1977, 37, 4869A. Nordal, K.C. The effects of Adlerian parent t r a i n i n g and c h i l d counselling on learner self-concept and behaviour of preschool children. Doctoral d i s s e r t a t i o n , University 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. Lake M i l l s , Iowa: Graphic Pub., l o . Inc., 1976. Peterson, B. Parent effectiveness t r a i n i n g . School Counsel- l o r , 1969, 16(5). P i a t t , J.M. E f f i c i e n c y of the Adlerian model i n elementary school counselling. Elementary School Guidance and  Counselling, December 1971, 6(2), 86-91. Pless, I.B. and Satterwhite, B. A measure of family function-ing and i t s a p p l i c a t i o n . S o c i a l Science and Medicine, 1973, 1, 613-621. Robinson, H.B. and P e t t i l , M.L. A Study Designed to Improve  the Relationship. Runyan, A.J. Parent education with families of children with extreme reading problems. Doctoral d i s s e r t a t i o n , University of Oregon, 1972. D i s s e r t a t i o n Abstracts  International, 1973, 22» 5499A-5500A. S a n t i l l i , M. The Effects of Parent Communication Training  on Child Behaviour. Shaw, M.C. The f e a s i b i l i t y of parent group counselling i n elementary schools. Elementary School Guidance and  Counselling, 1969, 4 ( 1 ) , 43-53-81 Shaw, M.C. and Tuel, J.D. A focus f o r p u b l i c school guidance programs: A model and p r o p o s a l . Personnel and Guidance  J o u r n a l , 1966, 45, 824-830. S o l t z , V. Study Group Leaders Manual. Chicago: A l f r e d A d l e r I n s t i t u t e , 1967. Steed, S.P. The Influence of F a m i l i a l Adjustment. 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 , 1971. 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 , 1 9 7 1 • 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 school adapta-t i o n and l e v e l of adjustment r e c e i v e d by parents. 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. 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 , 1970, ^1, 2118A - 2 1 1 9 A . T e n d a l l , J . M i d d l e / J u n i o r high school c o u n s e l l o r s ' corner. Elementary School Guidance and C o u n s e l l i n g , December 1974, 2(2), 159-164. Walker, H.M. Walker Problem Behaviour I d e n t i f i c a t i o n Check- l i s t . Los Angeles, C a l i f . : Western .Psychological S e r v i c e s , 1976. Weiss, C.H. E v a l u a t i n g A c t i o n Programs: Readings i n S o c i a l  A c t i o n and Education. Boston, Mass.: A l l y n and Bacon, 1972. Winter, 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. Palo A l t o , C a l i f . : Science and Behaviour 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 parent study groups using 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 w i t h s e l f - i n s t r u c t i o n a l m a t e r i a l . D o c t o r a l 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. 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 , 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 Depart-ment at Alpha Secondary School w i l l he offering a parent study group program for parents of Grade 8 students enrolled at our school. What are parent study groups? Parent study groups offer a program in which 10-15 parents meet periodially (once a week for two hours is usual) for nine to ten weeks and partake in a self-help approach to the challenge of parenthood. Who attends? Parents like you. Parents interested in learning new, practical steps concerning the problems of child-raising (particularly those relating to children in their early teens), parents interested in promoting more harmony and cooperation in everyday living, parents willing to lend mutual support to others, parents wanting to understand their children better and have fun while learning. Although i t is not necessary, both parents are encouraged to attend. How much does i t cost? Participants pay only for the texts. A parentis hand-book which contains readings and exercises in principles of democratic parent-child relations ($3«50) and a booklet entitled "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 for attending the meetings, reading assignments, discussing subject matter relating real l i f e experiences as they feel i t applies to the text. The group is the collec-tive expert. Learning more effective ways of relating 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 principles and techniques at home 84 - 2 - January 2 4 , 1978 with your family .... patience f o r the time i t takes to d i s -courage your children's once-effective misbehaviour patterns In our modern society we have come to expect "instant" r e s u l t s , "instant" success, "instant" everything! But any-thing of r e a l value takes time. Take the very f i r s t step now! Please f i l l out the bottom half of t h i s l e t t e r and return i t to one of the counsellors. Thank you. If you wish further information, please c a l l me. Yours sincerely, AF/vh Aerock Fox, Counsellor. PARENT STUDY GROUP  ALPHA SECONDARY SCHOOL Check one! I am d e f i n i t e l y interested 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 , 1978, 7 : 0 0 - 9 : 0 0 p.m. I am interested i n p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n a parent study group, but not at the time l i s t e d above I am not interested i n a parent study group. (Telephone number) (Parent's signature) APPENDIX B ADLERIAN PARENTAL ASSESSMENT OF CHILD BEHAVIOUR SCALE (APACBS) 86 ADLERIAN PARENTAL ASSESSMENT OF CHILD  BEHAVIOUR SCALE (APACBS) DIRECTIONS: Please c i r c l e the number f o r each item*which 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 you see i t . Please t r y to respond to every item . (Re p r i n t e d by permission of the autilbr-) 1" Your i d e n t i f i e d c h i l d : > K Ul O O 3 2 Ul o I h-): I CO 6 6 o o g g 2 S3 11". Argues w i t h you 2 2 2 1. Has to be c a l l e d more than once 1 to get out of bed i n the morning. 2. Gets dressed f o r s c h o o l without 1 being reminded. 3. Remembers to take lunch money, 1 books, e t c . to s c h o o l . 4-„ Leaves f o r s c h o o l without being 1 reminded. 5» Makes h e l p f u l s uggestions d u r i n g 1 2 f a m i l y d i s c u s s i o n s . 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 1 2 arguments w i t h 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). 7. Does chores w i t h o u t . b e i n g reminded. 1 2 8. F i g u r e s out s o l u t i o n to h i s / h e r 1 .2 own problems. 9 . Changes behaviour when t o l d t h a t i t bothers you. 10. Puts d i r t y c l o t h e s i n hamper without being reminded. 3 4 5 3 4 5 3 4 5 3 4 5 3 4 5 3 4 5 3 4 5 3 4 5 3 4 5 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 7 7 7 7 7 7 3 4 5 6 7 3 4 5 6 7 7 7 7 87 <! t d Ul w o K 3 > M LW o O 1-3 H > £g K Ul 2 3 W M 2 e y ^  12. Leaves belongings s c a t t e r e d 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 around the house. 13- I n t e r r u p t s you a t i n a p p r o p r i a t e 12 3 4-567 times. 14. Is on time f o r meals. 12 3 4-567 15. Eats most food o f f e r e d without 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 being coaxed. 16. Has t a b l e manners which are 1 2 3 4-5 6 7 a c c e p t a b l e to you. 17. T a t t l e s on other c h i l d r e n ( f o r 1 2 3 4-5 6 7 examplec. s 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). 18. Throws temper tantrums. 1 2 3 4-5 6 7 19. Shares problems she/he can do 1234-567 independently. 20. Is c o n s i d e r a t e of your f e e l i n g s . 12 3 4 5 6 7 21. Requests help on tasks she/he 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 can do independently. 22. Cleans up a f t e r snacking without 12 3 4 5 6 7 being reminded. 23- Behaves i n such a way t h a t you 12 3 4 5 6 7 f i n d y o u r s e l f f e e l i n g h u r t . 24. Behaves i n such a way t h a t you 12 3 4 5 6 7 f i n d y o u r s e l f f e e l i n g annoyed. 25• Behaves i n such a way t h a t you 12 3 4 5 6 7 f i n d y o u r s e l f 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. 88 26. Behaves i n such a way that you 1 2 3 ^ 5 • 6 7 f i n d yourself f e e l i n g angry. 27. Stays with d i f f i c u l t tasks u n t i l 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 they are completed. 28. Disturbs you when you are dr i v i n g . 12 3 4 5 6 7 29. Remembers where she/he puts 1 2 3 ^ 5 6 7 belongings. 30. Has to be to l d more than once to 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 go to bed. 31. Is quiet a f t e r going to bed. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 32. Involves you i n resolving physical 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 f i g h t s with other children (for example: brothers or s i s t e r s , or children i n the neighborhood). < Ul 0 K g > O 0 i-3 s: H > g K Ul 3 4 2 3 4 < W W 3 6 B ^ O O M g g w APPENDIX C ATTITUDES TOWARD CHILD REARING SCALE 90 ATTITUDES TOWARD CHILD REARING SCALE Croake and Hinkle For each of the following statements please indicate on the IBM sheet the extent to which you agree or disgree with the statements by blackening SA (strongly agree), A (agree), U (undecided), D (disagree), or SD (strongly disagree). 1. Withholding 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 parent-teacher conferences. 3. A parent should remind a c h i l d to say "please" and "thank-you" when he forgets. 4. A parent should regularly help the c h i l d with his homework. 5. I t i s he l p f u l to frequently remind a c h i l d of the rules at home. 6. A c h i l d should obey the wishes of his elders. 7. A c h i l d should be able to treat his playthings as he wishes, without fear of punishment. 8. In most quarrels between young children, adults should a r b i t r a t e . 9. A c h i l d should be able to choose how much of each food he wants at a meal. 10. A c h i l d should not be allowed to wear clothes that 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 decision about his bedtime. 12. Physical punishment i s often the only method of d i s c i p l i n e that w i l l work. 13. A parent should demand respect from his c h i l d . 14. The parent should make i t his r e s p o n s i b i l i t y to see how his c h i l d i s behaving i n school. 15• A parent should step i n i f the teacher seems to not under-stand the behaviour of his c h i l d . 91 16. A parent should not inte r f e r e i f an older c h i l d seems to he picking on a younger c h i l d . 17. A c h i l d of six can he he l p f u l i n deciding whether the family should buy a new car. 18. A c h i l d should not be allowed to go outside on a cold day without wearing warm clothing. 19. I f a parent r e a l l y does a good job rearing his c h i l d , the c h i l d w i l l turn out f i n e . 20. A parent should assume that 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 try to convince a f e a r f u l c h i l d that there i s nothing of which to be a f r a i d . 22. A parent who reminds a c h i l d several times to do a task i s t r a i n i n g the c h i l d i n disobedience. 23. A parent should remind a c h i l d when i t i s time to go to bed. 24. A l l members of a family regardless of age should agree on most family decisions. 25- A parent should praise his 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 his allowance as he chooses. 27. A parent should make sure a c h i l d looks r i g h t i n his dress. 28. A c h i l d should be paid f o r doing extra chores around the house. 29- I t i s best f o r the parent not to become involved when the c h i l d i s misbehaving. 30. A parent should stop a f i g h t between two children i f i t looks as i f one of them w i l l get hurt. 31. Children need punishment i n order to learn proper behaviour. 32. A c h i l d should be responsible f o r putting away his own toys as soon as he learns to walk. 33* A c h i l d needs to be reminded regularly as to what's r i g h t and wrong. 34. A parent should step i n i f an adult neighbor seems to be u n f a i r l y reprimanding his c h i l d . 92 35- To c o r r e c t a c h i l d f o r something t h a t he a l r e a d y knows i s wrong i s not h e l p f u l t o t h e c h i l d . 36. A p a r e n t i s m o r a l l y r e s p o n s i b l e f o r how h i s c h i l d behaves. 37. A p a r e n t s h o u l d s t e p 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 . 3 8 . I f a c h i l d r e c e i v e s l o t s of l o v e and a f f e c t i o n he w i l l t u r n out f i n e . 39• A p a r e n t i s d i s r e s p e c t f u l of the c h i l d when -he does some-t h i n g the c h i l d can 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 p o i n t out a c h i l d ' s m i s t a k e s . APPENDIX D FAMILY ENVIRONMENT SCALE " Reproduced by special permission from The Family Environment Scale by Rudolf Moos, Ph.D. Copyright date, 1974 A SOCIAL C I J M A I T Published by Consulting Psychologists Press, Inc. R U D O L F II. M O O S 1st"> i t * . • ' I N S T R U C T I O N S ,. 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 " > • • ' 'i • i ' • ' < » ' , - . . • * . : , • ' . v ' ' ' , ' ' • . ' >': "Remember,we.woijktlike to,know what your family seems like to yowl.So do not try, to figure out how other members see your s> " ' TanVilyy but do give us your general impression of your family .:• •, >for'each'$tat,6mcfit.' '• ; ."",' ,v> CONSULTING'-PS^CHOLOGISTS.PRESS; INC.; •••:,, < ••' 577 College.^v<L;-'?a'lo-:Alto;'.Cai(fornia'i94306(':>S'Vi .fk'Z-'-'u- '-'"" .» '••VJ !: k-/:c :- '•/••'•/' v.!>vV 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' 95 1. Family members really help and support one another. 2. Family members often keep their feelings to themselves. 3. We fight a lot in our family. 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 polit ical and social problems. 7. We spend most weekends and evenings at home. 8. Family members attend church, synagogue, or Sunday School fairly often. 9. Activit ies in our family are pretty carefully planned. 10. Family members are rarely ordered around. 1 1. We often seem to be ki l l ing time at home. 12. We say anything wc want lo around home. 13. Family members rarely be-come openly angry. 14. In our family , we are strongly encouraged to be independent. 15. Gett ing ahead in life is very important in our family . H i . We rarely go to lectures, plays or concerts. 17. Friends often come over for dinner or to visit. IS. We don't say prayers in our fa m i I y. 19. We are generally very neat and orderly. 20. There are very few rules to fol-low in our family. 21 . We put a lot of energy into what wc do at. home. 22. It's hard to " b l o w off s team" at home without upsetting somebody. 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. Noboby in our family is active ifi sports, Litt le 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 together-ness in our family. 32. We tell each other about our personal problems. 33. Family members hardly ever lose their tempers. 34. We come and go as we want to in our family. 35. We believe in compet i t ion and "may 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. 46. We rarely have intellectual discussions. 4 7. Fvcryone 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. 51. Family members really back each other up. 52. Someone usually gets upset if you complain in our family. 53. Family members sometimes hit each other. 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. 65. In our family, we don't try that hard to succeed. 66. Family members often go to the library. 67. 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. 69. Each person's duties arc clearly defined in our family. 70. We can do whatever we want to in our family. 71. We really get along well with each other; 72. We are usually careful about what we say to each other. 73. Family members often try lo one-up or out-do each other. 74. It's hard to be by yourself without hurting someone's feelings in our household. 75. "Work before play" is the rule in our family. 76. Watching T . V . is more important than reading in our family. 77. Family members go out a lot. 78. The Bible is a very important book in our home. 79. Money is not handled very carefully in our family. 80. Rules are pretty inflexible in our household. 81. There is plenty of time and at-tention for everyone in our family. 82. There are a lot of spontaneous discussions in our family. 83. In our family, wc believe you don't ever get anywhere by raising your voice. 84. We arc not really encouraged to speak up for ourselves in our family. 85. Family members are often compared with others as to how well they are doing at work or school. 86. Family members really like music, art and literature. 87. Our main form of entertain-ment is watching T . V . or listening to the radio. 88. Family members believe that if you sin you will be punished. 89. Dishes are usually done immediately after eating. 90. Y o u can't get away with much in our family. APPENDIX E PARENT-AD0LESCENT COMMUNICATION INVENTORY (FORM P) 99 Tota l Score FORM P PARENT-ADOLESCENT COMMUNICATION INVENTORY Developed by M I L L A R D J . B I E N V E N U , S R . W i t h this inventory you are offered an opportuni ty to make an objec-tive study of communicat ion between yoursel f and your teen-age son or daughter lo discover the good points in this re lat ionship and also where you may be hav ing problems. Y o u wi l l find i t both in terest ing and helpfu l to make this study. Be sure to keep the par t i cu la r chi ld under study here in mind ns you answer the questions below. DIRECTIONS 1. The Parent -Ado lescent Inventory is not n test. There are no r i g h t or wrong answers to i t . The most helpful answer to each question is your ind icat ion of the way you feel at the moment. Be sure to keep one particular son or daughter in mind as you complete th is f o r m . 2. Y o u r answers to this inventory arc confidential . Y o u are not asked to s ign your name or to ident i fy yoursel f in any way. Y o u can not receive a grade because al l of the answers you give are considered r i g h t answers for you. 3. Use the fo l lowing examples for pract ice. Put 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 your ways of re la t ing to the son or daughter . Y K S N O u a u n t l y M o m r l l m e a H e l l i o n * Does your son/daughter t ry to see your side of th ings? , Do you express your opinions to h i m / h e r ? . •1. The Y E S column is to be used when the question can be answered as happening most of the t ime or usual ly . The N O column is to be used when the question can be answered ns seldom or never. The middle column S O M E T I M E S should be marked when you defi -nitely can not answer 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 . Most parents are able to give a yes or no answer to these questions. 5. Read each question carefu l ly and mark your pernonal answer to i t . Re sure to answer every quest ion. Copyright I960 Millard P. Hienvenu, Sr. All rights renurvnd. I'rinwd in ihv United SluWi of America. I'ublinhod by FAMILY LIKE PUBLICATIONS, INC. Box 427, SnludB, N. C. 28773 100 V I M N O usually Roni r l lmel nrltlum 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 p l e a s a n t u l m e a l t i m e s ? . 2. 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 t h r o u g h t a l k i n g b e f o r e " h a v i n g y o u r 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 w h e n a c t u a l l y y o u h a v e t u n e d h i m / h e r o u t ? -1. D o e s y o u r s p o u s e t e n d to l e c t u r e a n d p r e a c h too m u c h to y o u r s o n / d a u g h t e r ? . 5. D o e s y o u r f a m i l y do t h i n g s as n g r o u p ? 6. D o e s y o u r s o n / d a u g h t e r s e e m to r e s p e c t y o u r o p i n i o n ? _____ 7. D o y o u e v e r l a u g h a t y o u r s o n / d n u g h t e r o r m a k e f u n o f h i m / h e r ? 8. D o y o u w i s h y o u r s o n / d a u g h t e r w e r e n d i f f e r e n t k i n d o f p e r s o n ? . 9. D o y o u fee l t h a t y o u r s o n / d a u g h t e r is b a d ? 10. D o e s y o u r f a m i l y t a l k t h i n g s o v e r w i t h e a c h o t h e r ? _ . 11. D o e s y o u r s o n / d a u g h t e r d i s c u s s p e r s o n a l p r o b l e m s w i t h y o u ? 12. D o e s y o u r s p o u s e w i s h y o u r s o n / d a u g h t e r w e r e a d i f f e r e n t k i n d o f p e r s o n ? . 13. 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 d i s r e s p e c t f u l m a n n e r ? . , D l . D o y o u s h o w a n i n t e r e s t i n y o u r s o n ' s / d a u g h t e r ' s i n t e r e s t s a n d a c t i v i t i e s ? 15. D o e s y o u r s o n / d a u g h t e r d i s c u s s p e r s o n a l p r o b l e m s w i t h y o u r s p o u s e ? . . . 10. D o e s y o u r s p o u s e p a y y o u r s o n / d a u g h t e r 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 t o h i m / h e r ? 17. D o y o u a s k y o u r s o n ' s / d a u g h t e r ' s o p i n i o n i n d e c i d i n g h o w m u c h s p e n d i n g m o n e y h e / s h e s h o u l d h a v e ? 18. D o y o u d i s c u s s m a t t e r s o f sex w i t h y o u r s o n / d a u g h t e r ? ____. _____ . 19. Is it e a s y f o r y o u r s p o u s e to t r u s t y o u r s o i l / d a u g h t e r ? . _„.._ 2 0 . D o e s y o u r s o n / d a u g h t e r h e l p 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 K H N O U H U a i l y aumrl lmvs Kcltlom 21. Do you pay compl iments or say nice th ings to your son/daughter? 22. Do you have confidence in his/her ab i l i t i es? 23. Is your son/daughter sarcast ic toward you? . 2- 1. Is it easy for you to t rust your son/daughter? ______ . 25. Does your spouse have confidence in your sou's/daughter 's ab i l i t i es? 2(3. When a difference ar ises are you and your son/daughter able to discuss it together ( in a ca lm m a n n e r ) ? _____ . . , 27. Do you consider your son's/daughter 's ideas in m a k i n g f a m i l y decis ions? _ 28. Do you cr i t ic i ze your son/daughter too much? . _____ 20. Does your spouse really t ry to see your son's/daughter 's side of th ings? . 30. Do you allow your son/daughter to get angry and blow off steam? . 31. Do you consider your son's/daughter 's opinion in m a k i n g decisions wh ich concern h i m / h e r ? , 32. Docs your spouse c r i t i c i ze your son/ daughter too much? 33. Du you find your son's/daughter 's voice i r r i t a t i n g ? . 3-1. Do you try to make your son/daughter fee! better when he/she is "down in the d u m p s ? " . . 35. Do you really t ry to see your son's/ daughter 's side of th ings? , 3(3. Do you encourage your son/daughter to tell you his/her problems? . .__ 37. Does your son/daughter really t ry to see your side of th ings? . 38. Do you tend to lecture and preach too much to your son/daughter? . . 39. Does your sou 'daughter accept your reasons for decisions you make concerning h i m / h e r ? , •10. Do you feel it hard to say what you feel in t a l k i n g wi th your son/daughter? APPENDIX F PARENT ADOLESCENT COMMUNICATION INVENTORY (FORM A) Tota 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 , S R . W i t h this inventory you are offered an opportuni ty to make an objec-t ive study of communicat ion between yoursel f and your parents to d i s -cover the good points in th is re lat ionship and also where you may be hav ing problems. Y o u w i l l find it both in terest ing and helpful to make this study. DIRECTIONS 1. The Parent -Ado lescent Inventory is not a test. There are no r i g h t or wrong answers to it. The most helpful answer to each question is your ind icat ion of the way you feel at the moment. 2. Y o u r answers to this inventory are conf ident ial . Y o u are not asked to s ign your name or to ident i f y yourself in any way. Y o u can not receive a grade because all of Die answers you give are considered r ight answers for you. 3. Use the fo l low ing examples for pract ice . P u t a check (J) in one of the three blanks on the r i g h t to show how the question applies to you and to your ways of re la t ing to your parents . V K S N O u s u a l l y • u m e t l m « » s e l d o m Do others t ry to see your side of th ings? Do you express your opinions to your parents? 4. The Y E S column is to be used when the question can be answered as happening most of the time or usually. The N O column is to be used when the question can be answered as seldom or never. The middle column S O M E T I M E S should be marked when you defi -n i te ly can not answer Y E 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 . Most young people are able to give a yes or a no answer to these questions. 5. Read each question carefu l l y and mark your personal answer to i t . Be sure to answer every question.. C o p y r i g h t M l l l n r d J . I l l r n v c n u , S r . A l l r l l l h t a r e n o r v o d . I ' r l n U ' d In 111. U n i t e d S t a t * , of A m e r i c a . P u b l i s h e d b y F A M I L Y L I F E 1 ' U H L I C A T I O N S , I N C . I l i . x <W_&. I J i i r h u m , N . C . 2 1 1 0 8 . O r i s I n - l l y 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). 104 Y E S N O 9 u s u a l l y - o m e t l m e s s e l d o m 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 p l e a s a n t a l m e a l s ? 2. D o y o u r p a r e n t s w a i t u n t i l y o u a r e t h r o u g h t a l k i n g b e f o r e " h a v i n g t h e i r 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 -e n t s w h e n a c t u a l l y y o u h a v e t u n e d t h e m o u t ? 4. D o y o u f e e l t h a t y o u r f a t h e r l e c t u r e s a n d p r e a c h e s to y o u too m u c h ? 5. D o e s y o u r f a m i l y do t h i n g s as a g r o u p ? 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 ? 7. D o t h e y l a u g h a t y o u o r m a k e f u n o f y o u ? 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 d i f f e r e n t k i n d o f p e r s o n ? 9. D o e i t h e r o f y o u r p a r e n t s b e l i e v e t h a t y o u a r e b a d ? 10. D o e s y o u r f a m i l y t a l k t h i n g s o v e r w i t h e a c h o t h e r ? 11. D o y o u d i s c u s s p e r s o n a l p r o b l e m s w i t h y o u r m o t h e r ? 12. D o y o u fee l y o u r f a t h e r w i s h e s y o u w e r e a d i f f e r e n t k i n d o f p e r s o n ? 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 w e r e m u c h y o u n g e r t h a n y o u a c t u a l l y a r e ? . 11. D o t h e y s h o w a n i n t e r e s t i n y o u r i n t e r e s t s a n d a c t i v i t i e s ? 15. D o y o u d i s c u s s p e r s o n a l p r o b l e m s w i t h y o u r f a t h e r ? 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. D o y o u r p a r e n t s a s k y o u r o p i n i o n i n d e c i d i n g h o w m u c h s p e n d i n g m o n e y y o u s h o u l d h a v e ? 18. D o y o u d i s c u s s m a t t e r s o f s e x w i t h e i t h e r o f y o u r p a r e n t s ? 1!). D o y o u f e e l t h a t y o u r f a t h e r t r u s t s y o u ? 2 0 . D o y o u h e l p y o u r p a r e n t s u n d e r s t a n d y o u b y s a y i n g h o w y o u t h i n k a n d f e e l ? 2 1 . D o e s y o u r m o t h e r p a y 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 ? 2 2 . 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 a b i l i t i e s ? 2 3 . A r e y o u r p a r e n t s s a r c a s t i c t o w a r d y o u ? 2 4 . D o y o u f e e l t h a t y o u r m o t h e r t r u s t s y o u ? 2 5 . D o e s y o u r f a t h e r h a v e c o n f i d e n c e i n y o u r a b i l i t i e s ? 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 e i t h e r o f y o u r p a r e n t s ? Y E S N O u - u a l l ? BometlineH _ l - _ m 2 7 . 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 b e c a u s e y o u b e l i e v e t h e y w i l l d e n y y o u r r e q u e s t s ? v . 2 8 . 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. 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 o f t h i n g s ? 3 0 . 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 g e t a n g r y a n d b l o w o H s t e a m ? 3 1 . D o e i t h e r o f y o u r p a r e n t s c o n s i d e r y o u r o p i n i o n 3 2 . D o e s y o u r f a t h e r c r i t i c i z e y o u too m u c h ? 3 3 . D o y o u f i n d y o u r m o t h e r ' s t o n e o f v o i c e i r r i t a t i n g ? 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 f e e l b e t t e r w h e n y o u a r e " d o w n i n t h e d u m p s ? " 3 5 . D o c s y o u r m o t h e r r e a l l y t r y to see y o u r s i d e o f t h i n g s ? 3C. D o y o u f ind y o u r f a t h e r ' s t o n e o f v o i c e i r r i t a t i n g ? 37 . D o e i t h e r o f y o u r p a r e n t s e x p l a i n t h e i r r e a s o n f o r n o t l e t t i n g y o u do s o m e t h i n g ? 3 8 . D o y o u f e e l t h a t y o u r m o t h e r l e c t u r e s a n d p r e a c h e s to y o u too m u c h ? 3 9 . D o y o u a s k y o u r p a r e n t s a b o u t t h e i r r e a s o n s f o r d e c i s i o n s t h e y m a k e 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 a t h o m e ? M A K E S U R E Y O U H A V E A N S W E R E D A L L T H E Q U E S T I O N S G E N E R A L I N F O R M A T I O N Y o u r A g o G r a d e . . S e x : M a l e F e m a l e Y e a r s M o n t h s ( C i r c l e O n e ) N A M E O F S C H O O L T o w n Y o u L i v e In , N o . o f C h i l d r e n L i v i n g a t H o m o ( n o t c o u n t i n g y o u r s e l f ) W h e r e D o Y o u F i t I n t o t h e F a m i l y ? ( C i r c l e O n e ) O l d e s t C h i l d I n t h e M i d d l e Y o u n g e s t C h i l d O n l y C h i l d A T H O M E 1 L I V E W I T H : Q R e a l M o t h e r f j R e a l F a t h e r • S t e p - M o t h e r • S t e p - F a t h e r O t h e r P l e a s e f i l l i n t h e n e x t p a g e 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 BOULEVARD LOS ANGELES, CALI fORNIA 90025 Name: A DIVISION OF MANSON WESTERN CORPORATION School: Address: Grade: Age:  Rated By: Sex: M Date: Position of Rater: Classroom: 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 state-ment describes behavior which is NOT present). Examples: Scales 1. Has temper tantrums 2. Has no friends 3. Refers to himself as dumb, stupid, or incapable . . . . 4. 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 W - 9 7 A Copyright c 1970. 1976 by WESTERN PSYCHOLOGICAL SERVICES Nut lo be ropicxlucod in wholo or pai l without written permission ol copyright owner All rights roserved. 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Printed in U S A . S C A L E 108 1. C o m p l a i n s a b o u t o t h e r s ' u n f a i r n e s s a n d / o r d i s c r i m i n a t i o n t o w a r d s h i m 2 . I i l i s t l e s s a n d c o n t i n u a l ! / t i r e d 3 . D o e s n o t e o n l o r m l o l i m i t s o n h i s o w n w i t h o u t c o n t r o l I r o m o t h e r s 4 . B e c o m e s h y s t e r i c a l , u p s e t o r a n g r y w h e n t h i n g s d o n o t g o h i s w a y 5 . C o m m e n t s t h a t n o o n e u n d e r s t a n d s h i m 6 . P e r f e c t i o n i s t i c ; M e t i c u l o u s a b o u t h a v i n g e v e r y t h i n g e x a c t l y , r i g h t 7 . W i l l d e s t r o y o r t a k e a p a i t s o m e t h i n g h e h a s m a d e r a t h e r t h a n s h o w It o r a s k t o h a v e It d i s p l a y e d . , 8 . O t h e r c h i l d r e n a c t a s i< h e w e r e t a b o o o r t a i n t e d 9 . H a s d i l l i c u l l y c o n c e n t r a t i n g l o r a n y l e n g t h o l l i m e 1 0 . Is o v e r a c t i v e , r e s t l e s s , a n d / o r c o n t i n u a l l y s h i l l i n g b o d y p o s i t i o n s . . . . 1 1 . A p o t o c i . e s r e p e a t e d l y l o r h i m s e t l a n d / o r h i s b e h a v i o r 1 2 . D i s t o r t s t h e t r u t h b y m a k i n g s t a t e m e n t s c o n t r a r y t o l a d 1.3. U n d e r a c h i e v i n g : P e r f o r m s b e l o w h i s d e m o n s t r a t e d a b i l i t y l e v e l H. D i s t u r b s o t h e r c h i l d r e n : t e a s i n g , p r o v o k i n g l i g h t s , i n t e r r u p t i n g o t h e r s 1 5 . T r i e s to a v o i d c a l l i n g a t t e n t i o n t o h i m s e l f 1 G . M a k e s d i s t r u s t f u l o r s u s p i c i o u s r e m a r k s a b o u t a c t i o n s o l o t h e r s t o w a r d h i m 1 7 . R e a c t s t o s t r e s s f u l s i t u a t i o n s o r c h a n g e s i n r o u t i n e w i t h g e n e i a l b o d y a c h e s , h e a d o r s t o m a c h a c h e s , n a u s e a 1 8 . A i g u e s a n d m u s t h a v e t h e l a s t w o r d In v e r b a l e x c h a n g e s 1 9 . A p p r o a c h e s n e w t a s k s a n d s i t u a t i o n s w i t h a n " I c a n ' t d o I I " r e s p o n s e 2 0 . H a s n e r v o u s t i c s : m u s c l e - t w i t c h i n g , e y e - b l i n k i n g , n a i l - b i t i n g , h a n d - w r i n g i n g 2 1 . H a b i t u a l l y r e j e c t s t h e s c h o o l e x p e r i e n c e t h r o u g h a c t i o n s o r c o m m e n t s 2 2 . H a s e n u r e s i s . ( W e t s b e d . ) 2 3 . U t t e r s n o n s e n s e s y l l a b l e s a n d / o r b a b b l e s t o h i m s e l f 2 4 . C o n t i n u a l l y s e e k s a t t e n t i o n 2 5 . C o m m e n t s t h a t n o b o d y l i k e s h i m 2 6 . R e p e a t s o n e i d e a , t h o u g h t , o r a c t i v i t y o v e r a n d o v e r 2 7 . H a s t e m p e r t a n t r u m s 2 8 . R e f e r s t o h i m s e l f a s d u m b , s t u p i d , o r i n c a p a b l e 2 9 . D o e s n o t e n g a g e i n g r o u p a c t i v i t i e s 3 0 . W h e n t e a s e d o r i r r i t a t e d b y o t h e r c h i l d r e n , t a k e s o u t h i s l i u s t r a t i o n ( s ) o n a n o t h e r I n a p p r o p r i a t e p e r s o n o r t h i n g 3 1 . H a s r a p i d m o o d s h i l t s : d e p r e s s e d o n e m o m e n t , m a n i c t h e n e x t 3 2 . D o e s n o t o b e y u n t i l t h r e a t e n e d w i t h p u n i s h m e n t 3 3 . C o m p l a i n s o l n i g h t m a r e s , b a d d r e a m s 3 4 . E x p r e s s e s c o n c e r n a b o u t b e i n g l o n e l y , u n h a p p y 3 5 . O p e n l y s t r i k e s b a c k w i t h a n g r y b e h a v i o r to l e a s i n g o l o t h e r c h i l d r e n 3 6 . L ' x p r e s s e s c o n c e r n a b o u t s o m e t h i n g t e r r i b l e o r h o r r i b l e h a p p e n i n g to h i m . 3 7 . H a s n o f r i e n d s 3 8 . M u s t h a v e a p p r o v a l l o r t a s k s a t t e m p t e d o r c o m p l e t e d 3 9 . D i s p l a y s p h y s i c a l a g g r e s s i o n t o w a r d o b j e c t s o r p e r s o n s 4 0 . Is h y p e r c r i t i c a l o l h i m s e l f 4 1 . D o e s n o t c o m p l e t e t a s k s a t t e m p t e d 4 2 . D o e s n ' t p r o t e s t w h e n o t h e r s h u r t , t e a s e , o r c r i t i c i z e h i m 4 3 . S h u n s o r a v o i d s h e t e r o s e x u a l a c t i v i t i e s 4 4 . S t e a l s t h i n g s I r o m o t h e r c h i l d r e n 4 5 . D o e s n o t I n i t i a t e r e l a t i o n s h i p s w i t h o t h e r c h i l d r e n 4 6 . R e a c t s w i t h d e l i a n c e t o i n s t r u c t i o n s o r c o m m a n d s 4 7 . W e e p s or c r i e s w i t h o u t p r o v o c a t i o n 4 8 . S t u t t e r s , s t a m m e r s , o r b l o c k s o n s a y i n g w o r d s 4 9 . E a s i l y d i s t r a c t e d a w a y I r o m t h e t a s k a t 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 m o v e m e n t s of o t h e r s , n o i s e s , e t c 5 0 . f r e q u e n t l y s t a r e s b l a n k l y i n t o s p a c e a n d i s u n a w a i e of h i s s u r r o u n d i n g s w h e n d o i n g s o . .1 .'.1 . . 3 S o l . 1 Scala 2 Seal* 3 S o l a 4 S o l o 5 Scora S c o n Scoft S c o n Scors APPENDIX H TELEPHONE INTERVIEW OUTLINE 110 OUTLINE OF THE TELEPHONE INTERVIEW BEFORE "STEP' 1. Introduce myself as the leader and thank parents f o r expressing an inte r e s t to p a r t i c i p a t e i n STEP. 2. Obtain an understanding regarding t h e i r objectives f o r joining STEP, e.g. desire to improve th 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. Describe need f o r attendance at classes and the need f o r information provided from the package of instruments. k. B r i e f l y describe the contents of the package. Explain that the directions f o r completion are given at the begin-ning of each instrument. The approximate time f o r com-p l e t i o n would be one hour. 5 . Explain c o n f i d e n t i a l i t y and anonymity. 6. Explain that the package w i l l be delivered personally and arrange a delivery time. 7. Obtain permission f o r c o l l e c t i n g information from t h e i r children. 8 . Mention that a $ 5 . 0 0 fee w i l l be c o l l e c t e d at the f i r s t session to cover the cost of the parents handbook and refreshments. 9. Answer questions. 1 0 . Thank parents f o r t h e i r cooperation. APPENDIX I CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION FORM 112 February 28, 1978 CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION Name: Address: Telephone No. Age: Sex: M a r i t a l Status: Sccttpation: R e l i g i o n : Highest Grade or Leve l of Education Completed: L i s t the Name, Age and Sex of your C h i l d r e n : 1. Age Sex 2. Age Sex 3. Age Sex l+. Age Sex 5. Age Sex 6. Age Sex Are any of your c h i l d r e n adopted, I f yes, please s p e c i f y : Please i n d i c a t e below whether you have p r e v i o u s l y p a r t i c i p a t e d i n a parent study group or read any m a t e r i a l "by e i t h e r A l f r e d A d l e r or Rudolf D r e i k u r s . APPENDIX J THANK Y 0 IT/FEED BACK LETTER 114 March 14, 1979 Dear Thank you f o r completing the family questionnaires which were dis t r i b u t e d to you recently. Preliminary review seems to indicate that the i n -formation provided w i l l prove extremely useful f o r the develop-ment of future parent education programs at our:-school. . Feedback regarding the questionnaires w i l l be available a f t e r the Easter Holidays. Your cooperation and assistance i s greatly appreci-ated. Sincerely, AF/bg Aerock Fox, Counsellor APPENDIX K OUTLINE FOR FIRST SESSION 116 OUTLINE FOR FIRST SESSION Session I: Understanding Children's Behaviour and Misbehaviour 1. Introduction: Begin the f i r s t session by introducing your-s e l f and stating the objectives of the program. Say: In the STEP program you w i l l : a) learn a p r a c t i c a l theory of human behaviour b) learn ways to est a b l i s h more e f f e c t i v e relationships with your children c) learn how to use encouragement d) develop s k i l l s f o r l i s t e n i n g , resolving c o n f l i c t s , and exploring alternatives with your childr e n e) improve communication between yourself and your children f) learn an approach to a d i s c i p l i n e c a l l e d "natural and l o g i c a l consequences" g) learn how to conduct e f f e c t i v e family meetings Do the exercise suggested to become better acquainted. Ask what the members expect to get from the meetings by saying: People come to parent study groups f o r various reasons. What do you hope to get from t h i s experience? Explain the Discussion Guide Cards. 1) stay on the topic 2) become involved i n the discussion 3) share the time 4) be patient--take one step at a time 5) encourage each other 6) be responsible f o r your own behaviour 2. Reading Assignment: Choose alternative A - Discussion of chapter one i n the parent's handbook 3. Display and Discuss Chart 1A: The Goals of Misbehaviour 4 . Presentation of Tape 1, Side B: Follow the tape with a b r i e f discussion at each b e l l tone. Include i n the discussion the questions outlined i n the STEP leaders manual. 11? 5 . Display and discuss Chart IB. The Goals of Positive Behaviour 6. Have parents read the problem s i t u a t i o n i n the handbook. Then discuss the questions. 7. Summary: What did you learn from the meeting? What do you think about the ideas presented i n this session? 8. A c t i v i t y f o r the week: For 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 four goals discussed i n the session. 9. Reading Assignment: Ask parents to read "Understanding More About Your Child and About Yourself as a Parent," chapter two i n the parent's handbook, before next week. Discuss the purpose f o r reading Shapter two. 10. Describe need f o r attendance at classes and c o l l e c t $£.00 book fee. 

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