Kristen E. Darling, Deborah Seok, Patti Banghart, Kerensa Nagle, Marybeth Todd and Nadia S. Orfali
The purpose of this paper is to examine Conscious Discipline’s (CD) Parenting Education Curriculum (CD PEC), the parenting component of CD’s research-based social and emotional…
Abstract
Purpose
The purpose of this paper is to examine Conscious Discipline’s (CD) Parenting Education Curriculum (CD PEC), the parenting component of CD’s research-based social and emotional learning program. CD aims to change child behavior by changing how adults understand and manage their own behaviors and emotions. Researchers explored CD PEC’s association with improved parenting skills, parent–child relationships and child behavior and emotion management.
Design/methodology/approach
During pre- and post-site visits, parents in four Head Start programs completed the Attentive Parenting Survey (n=25) and interviews (n=19); and 20 staff were also interviewed.
Findings
Parents reported that CD PEC shifted their perspectives and practices for managing children’s challenging behaviors, improved parent–child relationships and resulted in decreased child behavior problems.
Research limitations/implications
The study was correlational, based on self-report, and had a small sample with no comparison group.
Practical implications
This study supports CD PEC as a means of shifting parenting practices, relationships and child behavior by focusing on adult social-emotional skills and self-regulation.
Social implications
This study provides preliminary evidence that addressing the social-emotional needs of adults is a viable step to helping children improve their social skills, emotion regulation and general behavior, which have all been linked to later academic and life success.
Originality/value
The paper studies improvements in parents’ emotion recognition and self-regulation before disciplining their children.
Details
Keywords
Seok Tyug Tan, Seok Shin Tan and Chin Xuan Tan
This study aims to investigate the relationships among screen time-based sedentary behaviour, eating self-regulatory skills and weight status among private university students…
Abstract
Purpose
This study aims to investigate the relationships among screen time-based sedentary behaviour, eating self-regulatory skills and weight status among private university students during the Movement Control Order (MCO).
Design/methodology/approach
A total of 186 private university students was enrolled in this cross-sectional study using a combination of snowball and purposive sampling approaches. Anthropometric measurements, including body height, body weight before and during the MCO enforcement were self-reported by the respondents. Screen-time based sedentary behaviour sedentary behaviour was evaluated using HELENA sedentary behaviour questionnaire, whereas the Self-Regulation of Eating Behaviour Questionnaire (SREBQ) was used to determine the eating self-regulatory skills in MCO.
Findings
Respondents spent most of the time on the internet for non-study purposes (148 ± 77.7 min). It is also noted that 64.5% of the respondents had medium eating self-regulatory skill during the MCO, with an average score of 3.0 ± 0.5. Findings from path analysis confirmed that poor eating self-regulation significantly contributed to the weight gain during home confinement (ß = −0.24, p = 0.01). In conclusion, eating self-regulation, but not total screen time, emerged as the determinant for weight gain during the COVID-19 lockdown.
Originality/value
According to the authors’ knowledge, this study was among the few that investigated sedentary behaviour, eating self-regulatory skills and weight status of university students during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Details
Keywords
To understand how parents make the decision to implant their deaf young children with cochlear implants, focusing specifically on the concepts of normality, medicalization, and…
Abstract
Purpose
To understand how parents make the decision to implant their deaf young children with cochlear implants, focusing specifically on the concepts of normality, medicalization, and stigma.
Methodology/Approach
I conducted 33 semi-structured interviews with the hearing parents or parent of children with cochlear implants. In all but two families I interviewed the primary caretaker which in all cases was a mother. In the remaining two interviews, I interviewed both parents together. Because of the relative scarcity of families with children with cochlear implants, and the difficulty in connecting with these families, I used a convenience sample, and I did not stratify it in any way. The only requirement for parents to be interviewed is that they had at least one deaf child who had been implanted with at least one cochlear implant. Although this is a small sample, the findings are transferable to other families with the same sociodemographic characteristics as those in my study.
Findings
Parents in the study focused on three key concepts: normality, risk analysis, and being a good parent. Dispositional factors such as the need to be “normal” and the desire for material success for one's children appeared to moderate the cost-benefit calculus.
Research Limitations/Implications
Limitations
This interview project concentrated on hearing families who had implanted their deaf children with cochlear implants; it does not include culturally Deaf parents who choose to use American Sign Language (ASL) with their Deaf children. Understanding how Deaf families understand the concepts of normality, medicalization, and stigma would shed light on how a distinctly “abnormal” group (by a statistical conception of normal) – ASL-using Deaf people-explain normality in the face of using a non-typical communication method. One can learn a lot by studying the absence of a phenomena, in this case, not implanting children with cochlear implants. It is possible that the existential threat felt by some Deaf people, specifically the demographic problem presented by cochlear implants, led Deaf educators or parents to resist being the subject of research.
Overwhelmingly the sample was female, and white. Only two participants were male, and none of the participants were non-white. The lack of diversity in the sample does not necessarily reflect a lack of diversity of children receiving cochlear implants. Medicaid, which disproportionately covers families of color, covers cochlear implants in most cases, so low SES/racial intersectionality should not have affected the lack of diversity in the sample. However, the oral schools are all private pay, with few scholarships available, so low SES/racial intersectionality in the sampling universe (all children who attend oral schools), may have played a part in the lack of racial diversity within the sample.
Implications
Parents in this study were very specific about the fact that they believed cochlear implants would lead to academic, professional, and personal success. They weaved narratives of normality, medicalization, and stigma through their stories. Normality is an important lens from which to see stories about disability and ability, as well as medical correction. As medical science continues to advance, more and more conditions will become medicalized, leading to more and more people taking advanced medical treatments to address problems that were previously considered “problems with living” that are now considered “medical problems” that can be treated with advanced science.
Originality/Value of Paper
This chapter's contribution to the sociological cochlear implant literature is it's weaving of narratives about normality, stigma, and medicalization into parental stories about the cochlear implant decision-making process. Most literature about the cochlear implant decision-making process focus on cost-benefit analysis, and logical decision-making processes, whereas this paper focuses on decision-making factors stemming from bias, emotions, and values.
Details
Keywords
The purpose of this paper is to examine the question: What shall we measure? and offers preliminary answers. Data for innovation management and policy must be valid, reliable…
Abstract
Purpose
The purpose of this paper is to examine the question: What shall we measure? and offers preliminary answers. Data for innovation management and policy must be valid, reliable, relevant and actionable.
Design and approach
The paper examines trends within finance, environment and institutions and society, all with regard to innovation and technology. It examines how these trends interact with each other and with measurement of innovation and socio-technical change.
Findings
In the future, measurement for innovation policy must occur in markedly different ways – and on quite different scales – than is currently the practice. The paper concludes with a future-oriented list of items to be measured, with preliminary guidelines on how to organize to measure them.
Research limitations/implications
Foresight researchers must put new emphasis on measurement.
Practical implications
Local and national statistical agencies will have to measure new indicators and organize differently to measure them.
Social implications
Voters may be eager to embrace principles and goals, though they fail to find excitement in the more tedious issues of measurement. It is incumbent on us to pay more attention to measurement, to resist governments’ and lobbyists’ efforts to introduce special-interest bias into public statistics, and to carry the story to the public of the importance of measurement. Much of the policy change that is now needed is needed because of past and current harmful human behaviors. Nicholas Sarkozy (Press 2011) concisely stated the rationale for this paper: “We will not change our behavior unless we change the ways we measure”.
Originality/value
This concept paper goes beyond other indexes and proposals to identify new phenomena that must be measured. In contrast to other works which are oriented to measurement-push (toward policy), the present paper makes bold assertions about the trends needing to be addressed by policy, then proposes measurement based on policy-pull. It argues against premature worldwide statistical standards, and for Popperian “multiple engineering experiments”.The USA must “get back into the future business” – President Bill Clinton, at the Milken Institute Global Conference 2012.