|
Summer 2004
|
from Parents
part 2
Thoughts and Reflections of Craig H. Hart
From the time he was a university student–taking a child
development class to learn something about the baby he and his wife, Kerstine,
had just had–until now, Professor Craig H. Hart has been studying children,
parents, and families from both an academic and a personal perspective. His
research has included time spent systematically observing children interact
with peers on numerous playgrounds, including the BYU Child and Family Studies
Laboratory (a preschool). He has published numerous studies from parent-child
interaction data gathered in China, Russia, Australia, Japan, and various parts
of the United States. An internationally recognized scholar and the father of
four children, Professor Hart is chair of Marriage, Family, and Human
Development at Brigham Young University. Marriage & Families
recently discussed issues of parenting, families, discipline, and schooling
with Professor Hart, from which the following observations are drawn. (Part 1
was featured in the Spring 2004 issue of Marriage & Families
and is available online at marriageandfamilies.byu.edu.)
 ollowing up on our earlier discussion of practical ways to harmonize love,
limits, and latitude in parenting children and teens that are supported by
research in Spring 2004, Marriage & Families [available online at
marriageandfamilies.byu.edu], let’s consider a few more ideas. In approaching
the topics of disciplining our children and helping young children get a good
start in their formal schooling, I would quote Brigham Young once again, when
he encouraged parents to “study their [children’s] dispositions and their
temperaments and deal with them accordingly.”1 That suggests to me the guidance
of a loving, attentive parent who will seek to understand each child and find
their interests, understand their approach to learning and seek strategies that
can enhance their talents. It also suggests a willingness to correct
misbehavior with a loving and long-term approach, rather than simply negatively
reacting to the inconvenience of age-expectable behaviors or being quick to
censure or criticize. As discussed earlier, there are many techniques that
parents can use to help children overcome less-than-complete attributes and to
help build upon their strengths. One size does not fit all.
Reasoning with Children
Some time ago, I came across a statement by President Joseph F. Smith that
intrigued me. “Use no lash and no violence. . . but approach them with reason,
with persuasion and love unfeigned. . . The man who will be angry at his boy,
and try to correct him while he is in anger, is in the greatest fault. . . You
can only correct your children by love, in kindness, by love unfeigned, by
persuasion, and reason.”2
This quote had particular meaning once when one of my daughters was around two
years of age. She had developed a habit of standing up in her booster chair at
the dinner table. Despite our consistent efforts to reason with her about
falling down and getting hurt, we realized how important it was to strap her in
the chair for her own protection. One day she fell off a short step in front of
our house and came screaming and wailing into the house. We kissed her little
“bo bo” and put a bandage on her knee (even though there was no blood) to help
her feel better. That evening, as she went to stand up in her booster chair, an
odd thing happened. Half way up she paused and sat down quickly while saying
“don’t want ‘owie’.” We never had to strap her in again. Apparently, her
experience, coupled with our reasoning had finally paid off.
 With an understanding of the importance of reasoning, with young children to
prepare them to understand and more willingly comply, I have focused some of my
research on the e f fects of reasoning with young children.3 My colleagues and
I have found that children learn to develop internal control (learning to make
their own wise choices and controlling their own actions accordingly) as they
learn to reason through the consequences of their actions, rather than simply
being afraid to do something because they’re going to get yelled at or slapped
by a parent (external control). Let me hasten to add that this doesn’t mean we
should not punish or reprove (see D&C 121:43-44). Rather, reasoning can be
a helpful tool for limit setting and helping children understand the reasons
behind rules of social engagement.
As an example, let’s consider a mother who has been observing how her son
interacts with his playmates and has seen a few tendencies that can lead to
conflict. She might say something like, “Sam, I’m happy that Jimmy can come
over to play with you this morning. Remember we have had problems when one
person has to have things his own way? If you always do what you want to do and
not what he wants to do, he might not want to come over and play with you very
often.” Or she may say something like, “It doesn’t feel very good when someone
calls you names. Friends help friends feel good about themselves.”
Those kinds of suggestions from parents help children develop internal control
as they start reasoning through the consequences of their actions. In fact, our
studies have shown that children whose parents help them learn to reason
through the consequences of their behaviors are not only more sociable and more
prosocial with their peers in terms of helping, sharing, and comforting others,
but they’re also more accepted by their peers. They are also more likely to
think about how their actions will impact relationships with others for good or
for ill. (As noted in the Spring 2004 issue, p. 16, parents would do well to
remember that “consultant parenting” works better with adolescents and older
children.) By contrast, the children of parents who used harsh, punitive, and
arbitrary control–– either by psychologically controlling means such as love
withdrawal or guilt trips, or through coercive, verbal and physical
control––tend to be more aggressive when observed on playgrounds in their
interactions with their peers.4 They also tend to think that being mean will
help them get what they want.
Spanking
There has been a long-standing debate on whether spanking is a useful form of
discipline. Here, I’m not talking about the kind of spanking that either
borders on or goes beyond the line of abuse, but spanking where the parent is
in control and trying to accentuate a point of discipline. A recent study that
looked at data from several decades came to the conclusion that while
“normative spanking” may help to stop a behavior, it also increases the
likelihood of more oppositional and defiant behavior.5
Brigham Young observed that “kind words and loving actions towards children will
subdue their uneducated nature a great deal better than the rod, or, in other
words, than physical punishment.6 On another occasion he added, “Let the child
have a mild training until it has judgment and sense to guide it. I differ with
Solomon’s recorded saying as to spoiling the child by sparing the rod.”7 In
making this bold statement of truth, Brigham Young was not in line with the
thinking and practices of the 19th century. There are still many today who
interpret Proverbs 13:24 as advocating corporal punishment.
On one occasion, a colleague and I were working on a book chapter that, in part,
addressed the issue of whether to use or “spare” the rod. Although neither of
us is a Hebrew scholar, we used several concordances to look at how and where
the word rod is used in the Old Testament. We then double-checked our findings
with a Hebrew scholar. We found in Micah 6:9 and Isaiah 11:4, for example, that
the exact same word for rod in Hebrew was referred to as “the word of God” just
as we read in first Nephi 15:23-24 where the rod is referred to as the “word of
God.”
We also looked at what a good shepherd uses a rod for. The shepherd’s rod is
never used for beating sheep. Instead, it is used to ward off intruders; to
count sheep as they “pass under the rod” (Lev. 27:32; Ezek. 20:37); to part the
wool to examine for defects, disease, or wounds; and to nudge sheep gently from
going in the wrong direction. The rod is viewed as a protection. In perhaps the
most memorable reference to a rod in the scriptures, David, who was once a
shepherd himself, said, “thy rod and thy staff they comfort me” (Ps. 23:4;
italics added), a passage we would never confuse with any kind of harsh
punishment or beating.
As we continued our study, we decided to substitute “word of God” wherever the
Old Testament says “rod,” and we checked the Hebrew to make sure it was the
same word. There are numerous examples, but here are a few to consider.
Proverbs 23:13-14 states, “Withhold not correction from the child: for if thou
beatest him with the rod, he shall not die. Thou shalt beat him with the rod,
and shalt deliver his soul from hell.” That sounds pretty straightforward, but
here’s a viable, alternative translation: “Withhold not correction from a
child, for if you regulate him with the word of God, he will not die. Regulate
him with the word of God, and you will deliver his soul from hell.” That
conveys a whole different meaning.
Or consider Proverbs 22:15: “Foolishness is bound in the heart of a child; but
the rod of correction shall drive it far from him.” This could be translated as
“Foolishness is bound in the heart of a child, but the word of God drives it
far from him.” Finally, the most oftenquoted verse in Proverbs 13:24 which
reads “He that spareth his rod hateth his son; but he that loveth him
chasteneth him betimes” could just as well be read, “He who withholds the word
of God hateth his son: he who loveth his son, corrects (or teaches) him early
on (when he is young).”
Among the experts, there appear to be two camps in this issue of physical
discipline. One line of research suggests that if physical punishment is used
with a child between the ages of 2 and 6––meaning a nonabusive, mild slap on
the buttocks in the context of a warm and nurturing relationship–– it can
probably do some good. It gets a child’s attention. However, another body of
research says that even mild physical punishment can lead some children to be
more oppositional and defiant later on because of the external controls that
are placed on them.8
The debate continues in light of evidence for both sides, with new data
supporting one side or the other emerging on a regular basis.9 Given the
controversy surrounding all this, I have tried to err on the side of less
physical punishm e n t in light of prophetic counsel. President Gordon B.
Hinckley, for example, echoing the words of Brigham Young stated, “I have never
accepted the principle of ‘spare the rod and spoil the child’... Children don’t
need beating. They need love and encouragement.”
When I present these principles and research findings, some parents respond,
“Okay, if my child runs out in the street, am I just supposed to let him go?”
In this situation, my experience is that a firm reproof, coupled with picking
up the child and bringing him back to the sidewalk, definitely sends the same
message without the hitting part. The greater and more powerful part of
discipline is not the spank, it is the quick, consistent follow through that
removes a child from a dangerous situation or teaches a child how to more
effectively handle a challenging situation and a clear directive that helps
children to realize that the parent has their best interest at heart.
Sometimes, the way a parent disciplines his or her children has more to do with
the parent’s needs, convenience or even vanity, than with the child’s actions.
To quote Brigham Young again––a religious and political leader who had strongly
held views on almost every issue, ranging from settling the West to raising
responsible children––“I have seen more parents who were unable to control
themselves than I ever saw who were unable to control their children.”10 The
research clearly shows that anger is more likely associated with tendencies
toward coercion, venting, and hostility, meaning it’s easier for parents to
lose control if they’re more inclined to use coercive or authoritarian forms of
discipline (i.e., yelling, demeaning, unreasonably harsh consequences, etc).11
This is one area, in particular, where the example we set as parents will likely
have longlasting effects. Our ability to act as disciples of Christ, showing
forth long-suffering, gentleness, meekness and love unfeigned (see D&C
121:41), will teach our children by example these principles of successful
family relationships. President David O. McKay said, “Children are more
influenced by the sermons you act than by the sermons you preach.”12 From what
we can glean in our research, children pick up a lot in terms of the way they
interact with peers by the way they see their parents interacting with family
members in the home setting. When negative patterns of coercive behavior are
used frequently, these patterns can carry forward from one generation to the
next as learned behavior.
“Showing forth afterwards an increase of love” will help ensure that when
children need correction, the message that we love them will not be lost. We
have many positive tools at our disposal, such as reasoning, setting limits,
following through with the consequences we’ve outlined ahead of time, giving
rewards, letting our children know when we’re pleased with their behavior.
Perhaps, we even surprise them occasionally by taking them out for an ice cream
cone when they’ve completed their chores––and having that connection time. We
can use the “rod” or word of God as the scriptures teach by helping children
understand the principles of the gospel and exemplifying those same important
human relationship skills in our interactions with them.
Apologizing
I know from my own experience as a parent that it’s so easy to fall into the
coercive mode. Every parent probably does to some degree. Some days are better
than others. And when we know we’ve stepped over the line, it is appropriate
that we use principles of repentance and forgiving by learning to apologize to
our children when we make mistakes.
 As parents, we can become frazzled in our responsibilities. There’s a lot of
stress in our lives. Sometimes, we forget to keep our family as our highest
priority. Sometimes we don’t think ahead. Perhaps, we don’t do what we need to
in the way that we should. Every time I’ve been coercive with my children, I’m
left with an empty feeling and the influence of the Spirit is diminished.
Though I may have felt justified at the moment, when I step back, get away from
it and have some time to reflect, I always think, “You know, there are much
better ways I could have handled that.” And that’s the time to apologize.
There are some parents who feel that apologizing to their children weakens their
role as the parent. It actually tends to strengthen the relationship to learn
how to work together–– loving, forgiving and understanding each other. Children
realize that we’re human and that we have frailties. They can learn to
appreciate that we are sincerely doing the best we can. Apologizing shows that
we’re trying to do better. It’s important for children to see that we’re trying
to improve, just as we expect them to.
Being Reasonable
If children start taking advantage of your use of reasoning and your gentle
reminders, which some children do, parents may need a little firmer hand with
more consequences. This is part of studying children’s dispositions and
recognizing what appropriate degree of influence a child may require to guide
his actions. For example, a parent may try to reason with a child, “Come on,
Katelyn, let’s think about how Natalie feels when you hit her or when you take
her toys.” If the child just keeps repeating a behavior and it is getting worse
and worse, it may be an indication that the reasoning will need to be
accompanied by a little stronger form of regulation (or discipline). For
example, when Katelyn does share, compliment her. When she doesn’t, provide
reminders and a warning that the disputed toys may be put away for a while on a
closet shelf. Let her try again the next day, so she learns that there are
consequences to poor choices and that you will follow through with the
reasonable consequences that were calmly explained to her.
Again, you have to know your child well. While giving choices to children is
important in light of my earlier comments on providing latitude (see Spring
2004 Marriage & Families), I’ve seen parents who really go overboard.
Instead of choosing between a red and blue toothbrush, the parents have 40
toothbrushes for the child to choose between. Then the child can spend all
night manipulating the parent, turning that whole strategy around on the parent
and controlling the parent rather than the parent being able to provide
guidance to the child by using a choice-giving approach.
Sometimes creativity can only go so far, and a parent needs inspiration. In
fact, that is the most important principle of parenting. Years ago, when one of
my daughters was going through a difficult period in her life and couldn’t
sleep, after prayerful consideration, my wife got the idea one night to start
playing the be-thankful game. So when she rocked our daughter before she went
to bed, they would come up with five things that she was thankful for. That
just seemed to calm her right down, and they did that for months, every night.
Now I don’t think I could have gone to a parenting book and found that idea, so
we need to be open to inspiration.
Principle-based Parenting
Since children have unique needs and styles and parents often must be creative
to be successful in their parenting, I advocate a principle-based kind of
parenting, rather than an adherence to rigid rules and formulas. Let’s suppose
that your teenager does something unusual for him or her and stays out late one
night without letting you know his/her whereabouts, so you follow through with
consequences and take the car away for a week. If the situation is unusual, it
would be appropriate to discuss with the teenager the reason for the infraction
before the consequences are imposed. There is little chance in a rigid
adherence to rules and consequences for understanding needs and applying
parental inspiration and creativity. Perhaps there’s an unfulfilled need or
some other issue that just taking the car away doesn’t address. Especially in
cases where the misbehavior is new or not typical, it is helpful to find out
what is motivating the infraction.
 Perhaps a child is going through a stage of growth that is affecting his
behavior, like a 14- year-old who seems to be going through the wonderful twos
all over again as a result of all the hormonal changes that are taking place
and natural strivings for more autonomy. Maybe a child who has loved to go to
school and all of a sudden just won’t go is being bullied at school. In those
cases, a punishment wouldn’t be the most appropriate way to deal with the
issue. Or maybe there’s an unfulfilled need as simple as the child being tired
or hungry. A good night’s sleep may be better than making a youngster sit in
the corner.
Or maybe a child doesn’t know any better, like the child who comes home and
utters a swear word at the dinner table that you haven’t heard for years. But
then you realize, as you see the innocent look on your child’s face, that she
just doesn’t know any better, so it’s a good teaching opportunity. Maybe the
child has a mood or a thought disorder that requires professional intervention
and help. All the punishment in the world would not solve such a problem––it
would only make it worse.
Research shows that parents who provide moral training and development in the
home, particularly in a religious or spiritual context, help children learn to
regulate themselves from within. 13 Such guidance gives children a moral and
ethical foundation so that even if they come into the world with propensities
that may be less than desirable, their weaknesses actually can become
strengths. And it can’t be forced. With regard to rearing teenagers, Robert D.
Hales reminded us that we should:
Act with faith; don’t react with fear. When our teenagers begin testing family
values, parents need to go to the Lord for guidance on the specific needs of
each family member. This is the time for added love and support and to
reinforce your teachings on how to make choices. It is frightening to allow our
children to learn from the mistakes th e y may make, but their willingness to
choose the Lord’s way and family values is greater when the choice comes from
within than when we attempt to force those values upon them. The Lord’s way of
love and acceptance is better than Satan’s way of force and coercion,
especially in rearing teenagers.14
Young Children and Formal Education
I have also had the opportunity to conduct research studies that provide insight
into how parents can help children get off to a good start in formal
schooling.15 While obvious to most, in all the research I’ve conducted around
early childhood education, it is quite clear that parents have to make very
conscious decisions about their children and their education. One thing we’ve
found is that where parents push young children too hard and too early to excel
academically, the children can end up disengaged and disinterested. Now, these
are statistical probabilities. There are some children who have the temperament
and the resilience and the interest to do well even when pushed by parents,
but, again, we need to know and be sensitive to our children’s needs and
abilities.
As an example, I was visiting a kindergarten class a number of years ago, at a
time when state core standards required that by the end of kindergarten the
children should be able to tell time. From the developmental data, we know that
5- to 6-year-old children are in the preoperational stage of development,
meaning they are limited in their abilities to think abstractly. They’re more
concrete and hands-on; in simple addition and subtraction problems, they are
accurate with the real objects in front of them, but are often not as accurate
if given the story problem verbally.16
 So, here was a kindergarten teacher who was becoming very frustrated because she
had being going over the concept of time for weeks. She would ask them,
“Where’s 12:15 on the clock? Where’s 12:45?” (How many fiveyear- olds do you
know who can count to 45, by the way?) At that age, kids have tendencies to
center on one aspect of a problem, so if you have the big hand going around,
they’re going to focus on that; and they don’t differentiate between it and the
small hand. These kids were just being pushed and pushed and pushed, and they
were also laying their heads on the desks and yawning and just totally checked
out of this teacher’s presentation. Children’s minds are wired in ways during
the early years that help them learn foundational principles about their
physical and social world, but which preclude temporarily some concepts that
adults find easy. Much educational effort and time can be wasted if teachers
and parents are not tuned into the divinelyordained process of development.
Providing developmentally appropriate educational experiences, on the other
hand, keep children eager, active and engaged in developing knowledge, skills
and dispositions that will help them throughout their lives.
When very young children are pushed into lots of workbook and abstract worksheet
activities in school classrooms or even at home––flashcards, drills,
memorization––there may be some success. However, research shows that for many
children, this dampens their natural motivation toward learning, as well as
their curiosity.
Education needs to be developmentally appropriate in order to meet age group and
individual child abilit i e s . I remember observing in the BYU Child and
Family Studies laboratories some time ago, and the teacher had a real fish
lying there on a platter for the children to examine. This teacher had
masterfully constructed the learning environment. One of the kids was trying to
use a toothpick to pick up the gill and look inside. Another kid was starting
to count the scales, and then said, “There’s more here than I can count.” That
led to discussions of how fish breathe in the water, and then the students went
over to the aquarium and looked in the tank and saw how the fish were breathing
and then went back and looked at the fish. That lead to children dictating
stories about fish that the teacher wrote down for all the children to observe
how their thoughts could be translated to paper. This teacher had created a
nice mix of math and literacy and biology all intertwined into one activity
that the kids were so engaged in and so excited about. And that’s the kind of
hands-on learning that’s quite developmentally appropriate for very young
children––more foundational, experiential-based learning that prepares them so
that later on when they’re exposed to the words about fish in writing and
reading, they’ve got a more comprehensive understanding of what might otherwise
be just an abstract concept.
 In the early childhood years, we should be doing more of that. What our research
shows is that children who are exposed to highly structured, rote, lockstep
approaches to learning are less likely to do well later on in school. In a
recent study just completed with colleagues in Louisiana, we followed a large
group of children from kindergarten through the third grade. Results showed
that students in the more highly rote, structured early childhood classes are
doing worse on average over time in elementary school on achievement tests
(particularly boys), and are displaying more hyperactive/ distractible and
aggressive/ hostile behavior with teachers and peers.
We have also found in several systematic observational studies that children in
more highly structured preschool and kindergarten classes exhibit almost twice
the levels of stress behavior (e.g., auto-manipulation of clothing, body parts)
when compared to children in more developmentally appropriate environments, and
that early stress levels factor into how children adjust to elementary school.
So when parents are trying to make decisions about what kinds of educational
experiences to provide for their children in their early years, it is helpful
to know that the best early childhood curriculums balance child self-guided
experiential learning with direct instructional approaches that are tailored to
individual child and age-group developmental needs. Alter-native one-size-fits
all curriculum practices appear likely to do more harm than good.
A Final Thought
When we’re talking about any aspect of family life–– whether it is discipline or
education or anything else––it’s important to remember that many families are
not in ideal situations. There are economic struggles. There are those single
parents who have dealt with a death or divorce and who have to juggle by
themselves all the day-to-day demands that having children brings. There are
families who face extreme challenges in their lives, such as a child with a
disability or a father who is unemployed that can bring a great deal of ongoing
stress into one’s life. But I think despite whatever circumstances we find
ourselves in, if we think about how we are helping them learn in ways
appropriate to their developmental level, and applying the appropriate doses of
love, limits, and latitude that are tailored to the individual temperaments of
our children, those principles can be a guiding force for increasing the
likelihood that they will be happy, well-adjusted adults–– the ultimate hope of
every parent.
References
1 Brigham Young (1998), Discourses of Brigham Young, ed. John A. Widstoe (Salt
Lake City: Deseret Book), 207.
2 Joseph F. Smith (1963), Gospel Doctrine (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book),
316-317.
3 See Hart, C.H., DeWolf, D.M., and Burts, D.C. “Linkages among preschoolers’
playground behavior, outcome expectations, and parental disciplinary
strategies.” Early Education and Development, 3 (4): 265-282. C.H. Hart, G.W.
Ladd, and B.R. Burleson, “Children’s expectations of the outcomes of social
strategies: relations with sociometric status and maternal disciplinary
styles.” Child Development, 61 (1990): 127- 137.
4 See Yang, C., Hart, C.H., Nelson, D.A., Porter, C.L., Olsen, S.F., Robinson,
and C.C., Jin, S. (2004). “Fathering in Bejing, Chinese Sample: associations
with boys’ and girls’ negative emotionality and aggression. In R.D. Day and
M.E. Lamb (Eds.). Conceptualizing and Measuring Father Involvement (pp.
185-215). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Hart, C.H., Nelson, D.A.,
Robinson, C.C., Olsen, S.F., and McNeilly-Choque, M.K. (1998) “Overt and
relational aggression in Russian nursery-school-age children: parenting style
and marital linkages.” Developmental Psychology, 34 (4), 687-697.
5 See Gershoff, E.T. (2002). “Corporal punishment by parents and associated
child behaviors and experiences: a meta-analytic and theoretical review”.
Psychological Bulletin, 128 (4), 539-479.
6 Deseret News Weekly, Dec. 7, 1864, 2.
7 Journal of Discourses, 9:195-96.
8 Hart, C. H., Newell, L.D., and Olsen, S. F. (2003). Parenting skills and
social-communicative competence in childhood. In J. O. Greene & B. R.
Burleson (Eds.). Handbook of Communication and Social Interaction Skills (pp.
753-800). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
9 Larzelere, R.E., Kuhn, and B.R., Johnson, B. (2004). “The intervention
selection bias: an underrecognized confound in intervention research”.
Psychological Bulletin, 130 (2), 289-303.
10 Deseret News Semi-Weekly, July 12, 1870, 2.
11 Hart, Newell, Olsen, op. cit.
12 In Conference Report, April 1955, p. 26.
13 Hart, Newell, Olsen, op. cit.
14 Strengthening families: Our sacred duty, Ensign 29 (5), (May 1999), 34.
15 Hart, C.H., Burts, D.C., and Charlesworth, R. (1997). Integrated Curriculum
and Developmentally Appropriate Practice: birth to age eight. Albany, NY: State
University of New York Press.
16 Supportive research can be found in Integrated Curriculum, ibid.
|