Family day care: Discrepancies between intended and observed caregiving practices

Eheart, Brenda Krause

doi:10.1016/s0885-2006(89)90155-5

Cited by 26 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Now, in the decade of the 1990s, the majority of preschool-age children, like those described above, are cared for outside of the home in group settings (Eheart & Leavitt, 1989). Seventy-six percent of infants and toddlers and 58% of preschoolers who are attending centers because their mothers work, spend 35 hours or more each week in supplemental care (Wilier, 1992).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The influence of an inservice music education program on young children's responses to music

Nichols

Honig

1995

Early Child Development and Care

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The influence of an inservice music education program on young children's responses to music

Nichols

Honig

1995

Early Child Development and Care

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…In centers, compared to both types of home-based settings, children have multiple caregivers; child-to-adult ratios and group sizes are larger; children are often grouped with same-aged peers; activities are more structured, educationally-oriented, and adult-directed; and caregivers have more education and training. Centers typically offer more space, toys, and materials to children than do other settings, and there is usually a more structured educational curriculum and a physical environment designed for children (Eheart & Leavitt, 1989;Fuller et al, 2004;Kisker, Hofferth, Phillips, & Farquhar, 1991;Kontos, Hsu, & Dunn, 1994; NICHD ECCRN, 2004;Pence & Goelman, 1987). The predictable daily routine, structured academic curriculum, exposure to a large group of peers, and other features of center care may provide a different experience for children than that received in family child care homes or relative settings, even when caregivers are equally nurturant and attentive.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…there is usually a more structured educational curriculum and a physical environment designed for children (Eheart & Leavitt, 1989;Fuller et al, 2004;Kisker, Hofferth, Phillips, & Farquhar, 1991;Kontos, Hsu, & Dunn, 1994;NICHD ECCRN, 2004;Pence & Goelman, 1987). The predictable daily routine, structured academic curriculum, exposure to a large group of peers, and other features of center care may provide a different experience for children than that received in family child care homes or relative settings, even when caregivers are equally nurturant and attentive.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Structural and process features in three types of child care for children from high and low income families

Dowsett

Huston

Imes

et al. 2008

Early Childhood Research Quarterly

223

122

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We use observations from the NICHD Study of Early Child Care and Youth Development (SECCYD) to compare structural and process characteristics of child care centers, family child care homes (nonrelative care in a home setting) and care by relatives for 2, 3-and 4 ½-year-old children. Type of care differences in structural and caregiver characteristics were consistent across ages: centers had higher child-to-adult ratios and bigger groups; centers had caregivers with better education, more training in early childhood, and less traditional beliefs about child rearing. Children in centers experienced more cognitive stimulation, less frequent language interactions with adults, less frequent negative interactions with adults, and less television viewing than did those in other types of care. In centers and family child care homes compared to relative settings, children engaged in more positive and negative interactions with peers and spent more time in transition and unoccupied. Curvilinear associations were found between structural features of care and family income, particularly for caregiver education and training. In contrast, process measures of caregiving rose monotonically with family income. Children from high-income families experienced more sensitive care, more cognitive stimulation, and fewer negative interactions with adults than did those from low-income families. We interpret the findings by linking the structural features and caregiver training to the cognitive and social processes observed in different types of care. Future research designed to understand the influences of child care on children's behavior might benefit from using this more nuanced description of child care experiences.Child care quality is a well-documented predictor of children's intellectual and social development, but recent evidence indicates that type of care may be important independently of "global" ratings of quality. A recurrent finding in the literature is that children who participate in center-based arrangements-including Head Start-during their infant and preschool years perform better on cognitive and language development and show better preacademic skills than children who spend an equivalent amount of time in child care homes or relative care of comparable quality (Garces, Thomas, & Currie, 2002; NICHD Early Child Care Research Network [ECCRN], 2000a; NICHD ECCRN & Duncan, 2003).The relations of type of care to children's social behavior are more uncertain. Two longitudinal studies of large, national samples have shown that children with more center care experience were rated by caregivers and elementary school teachers as having more behavior problems and less self control than those who had not experienced center care (Magnuson, Ruhm, & Waldfogel, 2007; NICHD 2002;2003a). Most longitudinal investigations of children from Contact author Chantelle Dowsett, Human Development & Family Sciences, University of Texas at Austin, 1 University Station/A2700, Austin, TX 78712; 512-471-3141; E-mail: dowsettcj@mail.utexa...

show abstract

“…Teachers, particularly when they care for infants and toddlers, or if they are family daycare providers, often believe that they are to serve as second mothers (Eheart & Leavitt, 1989). For these young children, child care teachers' play more than a teaching role.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Children's Relationships with Child Care Teachers: Stability and Concordance with Parental Attachments

Howes¹,

Hamilton²

1992

Child Development

178

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In order to examine caregiving relationships of children enrolled in childcare, two longitudinal samples of children, n = 72 and n = 106, were followed from infancy through preschool. Maternal attachment as assessed by the Strange Situation, 4-year-old reunion behavior, and by the Attachment Q-Set tended to be stable across time. Children's teacher-child relationship quality, as measured by the Attachment Q-Set, was stable if the teacher remained the same. When the teacher changed, teacher-child relationship quality tended to be unstable until the children were 30 months old. After 30 months, relationship quality with teachers tended to be stable regardless of whether or not the teacher changed. Maternal and teacher relationships were nonconcordant. There were few interactions between adult caregiver relationship quality and age of entry into child care or intensity of child care.

show abstract

Family day care: Discrepancies between intended and observed caregiving practices

Cited by 26 publications

References 3 publications

The influence of an inservice music education program on young children's responses to music

The influence of an inservice music education program on young children's responses to music

Structural and process features in three types of child care for children from high and low income families

Children's Relationships with Child Care Teachers: Stability and Concordance with Parental Attachments

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About