This article was downloaded by: [McGill University Library]On: 20 November 2014, At: 11:04Publisher: Taylor & FrancisInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House,37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Journal of Early Childhood Teacher EducationPublication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/ujec20

Preservice teachers’ perceived control over negativecaregiving outcomes: Implications for early‐childhoodteacher preparationJacqueline Guzell‐Roe a & Sharon A. Stringer b

a Bowling Green State University , 402 Johnston Hall, Bowling Green, OH, 43403, USA Phone:+1 419 372 7827 E-mail:b Youngstown State University , Youngstown, OH, USAPublished online: 25 Apr 2008.

To cite this article: Jacqueline Guzell‐Roe & Sharon A. Stringer (2005) Preservice teachers’ perceived control over negativecaregiving outcomes: Implications for early‐childhood teacher preparation, Journal of Early Childhood Teacher Education,25:4, 321-330, DOI: 10.1080/1090102050250406

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1090102050250406

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained in thepublications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representationsor warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Anyopinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not theviews of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should beindependently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses,actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoevercaused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematicreproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in anyform to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

ELSEVIER Journal of Early Childhood Teacher Education 25 (2005) 321-330

Journal of Early

ChildhoodTeacher

Education

Preservice teachers' perceived control overnegative caregiving outcomes:

Implications for early-childhood teacher preparation

Jacqueline Guzell-Roea,*, Sharon A. Stringerb

a Bowling Green State University, 402 Johnston Hall, Bowling Green, OH 43403, USAb Youngstown State University, Youngstown, OH, USA

Accepted 23 July 2005

Abstract

This study is focused on preservice early-childhood teachers' attributions about control and responsibility fornegative caregiving outcomes. Prior research has linked low perceived control over failed outcomes with harsh care-giving behavior. In this sample of 81 preservice teachers in a pre-kindergarten, Associate-degree program, bivariatecorrelations revealed associations between preservice teachers' perceived control over caregiving outcomes, theparenting styles they experienced during childhood, and the complexity of their reasoning about children's devel-opment. When entered into regression analyses, low perceived control over negative caregiving outcomes waspredicted by ratings of high parental permissiveness experienced as a child, as well as by categorical, rather thancomplex, conceptions of development. Implications of findings for university preparation of preservice teachersare discussed.© 2005 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Early childhood; Teacher preparation; Perceived control; Caregiving strategies; Pre-kindergarten

1. Introduction

Research suggests that teachers' classroom prac-tices are associated with their beliefs about theirability to influence children's behavior and devel-opment (Charlesworth, Hart, Burts, & Hernandez,1991; Raths, 2001; Stipek & Byler, 1997). Teach-ers with low self-efficacy, for example, appear moreinclined toward criticizing children for their mis-takes, whereas teachers with high self-efficacy aremore likely to reinforce positive child behavior(Emmer & Hickman, 1991). In high quality early-childhood teacher-preparation programs, preservice

* Corresponding author. Tel: +1 419 372 7827.E-mail address: jguzell@bgnet.bgsu.edu (J. Guzell-

Roe).

teachers learn effective, non-coercive discipline meth-ods and skills for caring for young children. Theylearn how to structure the classroom environment, setappropriate limits, reinforce positive behavior, antici-pate and pre-correct problem behavior, and guide chil-dren toward greater self-control. However, teachingself-efficacy derives from more than teachers' knowl-edge or teaching ability. It also involves teachers'beliefs that their efforts to influence child outcomeswill not be superseded by external influences, such asthe child's personality or the child's home and fam-ily background. Just as children's perceptions thattheir efforts can influence outcomes should be nur-tured (Nelsen, Lott, & Glenn, 2000), teachers alsobenefit from the perception that they can control mean-ingful outcomes through their efforts. Both childrenand teachers need to leam that, even when negative

1090-1027/$ - see front matter © 2005 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved,doi: 10.1016/j.jecte.2005.07.002

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

McG

ill U

nive

rsity

Lib

rary

] at

11:

04 2

0 N

ovem

ber

2014

322 J. Guzell-Roe, S.A. Stringer / Journal of Early Childhood Teacher Education 25 (2005) 321-330

outcomes are beyond their control, they can controltheir personal reactions to the outcome and the actionsthey take in response to them. Nelsen et al. (2000)refer to this as an "accountability mentality", in whichpersonal responsibility is accepted, in contrast with a"victim mentality", in which others are automaticallyblamed.

Pre-kindergarten teachers' beliefs about their con-trol over caregiving outcomes are powerful becausebeliefs act as a cognitive filter that can distort the wayteachers view children's behavior and influence theircausal attributions about negative behavioral outcomes(Kagan, 1992). Caregivers with low perceived con-trol over negative caregiving outcomes tend to holdchildren primarily responsible when things go wrongand respond to challenging caregiving situations withharshness and over-controlling behavior (Bugental &Shennum, 1984; Joiner & Wagner, 1996). This para-doxical response is regarded as an attempt at powerrepair because they feel both powerless and blamelesscompared to the children who "caused" the outcome(Bugental & Happaney, 2000). Caregivers who feelpowerless to influence caregiving outcomes frequentlyinterpret even ambiguous child behavior as negative,which can lead them to "pre-correct" for the care-giving problems they anticipate (Bugental & Lewis,1999). Their interpretations of the reasons for nega-tive outcomes are also affected by their tendency tonotice children's negative, rather than positive, behav-iors and to recall children's negative, rather than pos-itive, past actions (Hong, Chiu, Dweck, & Sacks,1997).

Because early childhood teachers face many chal-lenging situations, perceived control over caregivingoutcomes would seem to be an important disposi-tional characteristic of those who work professionallywith children (Brophy & McCaslin, 1992; Brophy &Rohrkemper, 1981). It is especially critical for theappropriate care and teaching of children with emo-tional and behavioral difficulties in regular classrooms(Poulou & Norwich, 2000). Prior research suggeststhat teachers who believe they can influence outcomesexhibit greater flexibility and more creative caregiv-ing strategies when dealing with difficult children(Charlesworth. Hart, Burts, & Hernandez, 1991). Incontrast, teachers with low perceived control overoutcomes may be particularly vulnerable to misin-terpreting and overreacting to children's challengingclassroom behavior (Bugental, Lewis, Lin, Lyon. &Kopeikin, 1999).

With causal attribution theory as a conceptualframework, we sought to identify the relative influenceof several possible contributors to pre-kindergartenpreservice teachers' perceptions of control and respon-sibility for caregiving outcomes. We first consideredthe effect of parenting styles experienced by the pre-

service teachers when they were children, becauseindividuals with low perceived control over negativecaregiving outcomes are believed to draw heavily fromnegative early caregiving experiences (Bugental, Blue,& Lewis, 1990; Bugental & Johnston, 2000). Afterexploring the role of preservice teachers' early expe-riences as children, we assessed the influence of theirexperience with children as parents or professionals.Finally, we sought to know if either their knowl-edge of children's development or the complexity oftheir reasoning about children's development mightinfluence their perception of control over outcomes.Complexity of reasoning is a construct that reflectsa caregiver's perspective-taking ability and awarenessof the multiple potential causes for developmental andbehavioral outcomes (Sameroff & Feil, 1985). Knowl-edge of child development and complexity of reason-ing about development were specifically selected forthis study because they are stated objectives of high-quality, early-childhood teacher-preparation programsand are often cited as important teacher-quality indi-cators (Charlesworth, Hart, Burt, & De Wolf, 1993;Lubeck, 1996). After our review of literature and thepresentation of our methods and results, we discuss theimplications of our study for early-childhood teachereducators.

1.1. Potential predictors of perceived control inpreservice teachers

1.1.1. Parenting style experienced as a child andadolescent

Caregivers with low perceived control over nega-tive caregiving outcomes are believed to draw dispro-portionately from negative, early-relationship mem-ories that alter their future beliefs about caregivingrelationships (Bugental et al., 1990; Bugental et al.,1993; Bugental & Johnston, 2000). Early experience isimportant because it imposes expectations upon every-thing that follows. Because early relationships withparents are emotionally intense, they usually have amore consistent and pervasive influence compared torelationships with siblings, teachers, or other adults(Schaffer, 2000). Although there are many potentialinfluences on the development of beliefs about care-giving control, it seems logical that adults who haveexperienced less than optimal parenting in childhoodwould be more likely to hold negative perceptionsabout social interactions in general, and about interac-tions with children in particular. In the parenting litera-ture, parenting styles tending either toward authoritar-ian or permissive extremes have been linked to lowerlevels of self-efficacy in children (Smetana & Daddis,2002). An important question is whether experiencingextremely high permissiveness or authoritarianism asa child would predict low perceived control over neg-

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

McG

ill U

nive

rsity

Lib

rary

] at

11:

04 2

0 N

ovem

ber

2014

J. Cuzell-Roe, S.A. Stringer / Journal of Early Childhood Teacher Education 25 (2005) 321-330 323

ative caregiving outcomes in preservice teachers ofyoung children.

1.1.2. Preservice teachers' parental statusBecause the transition to parenting is believed to

trigger a re-examination of early experiences withone's own parents, it is important to include parentinga child as a potential predictor of perceived control(Belsky & Kelly, 1994). Parents who spend consid-erable amounts of time with their children may gainincreased understanding of children's ability, or lack ofability, to comply with requests and this might influ-ence their perception of control over negative care-giving outcomes. It seems important to consider theinfluence of parental status compared with other poten-tial predictors of low perceived control.

1.1.3. Prior professional experience withchildren

Caregivers with low perceived control appear to beespecially reactive to children's difficult behavior, overwhich they believe they have no influence (Bugentalet al., 1990). In challenging early childhood settings,where they may be especially quick to interpret chil-dren's undesirable behavior as deliberate, perceivednegative intentionality could provide the rationale fora harsh response. However, we should also considerthat experience with children might mitigate their feel-ings of powerlessness. Teachers with more experiencemight feel more control over outcomes because theyhave learned to discern intentional from unintentionalbehavior. Because teachers' perceptions of controlover classroom outcomes have important implicationsfor their classroom practices, it would seem importantto determine if preservice teachers' prior professionalexperience with children is associated with their per-ceived control over caregiving.

1.1.4. Preservice teachers' knowledge of childdevelopment

Knowledge about children's development is afamiliar construct in research on teachers' beliefsabout child outcomes. Elkind (1998) regards child-development knowledge as the foundation of curric-ular, assessment, and teaching skills. It is essentialfor the implementation of "developmentally appro-priate practice," and is known to facilitate warm,caring relationships between teachers and children(Bredekamp & Copple, 1997; Lally et al., 1997).Specifically, teachers appear to be more responsiveand sensitive toward children when they have more,rather than less, academic preparation in child devel-opment (Howes, Galinsky, & Kontos, 1998). Gradu-ates of teacher-preparation programs themselves oftencite their child-development knowledge as a criti-cally important outcome of their specialized edu-

cation (Lubeck, 1996). However, although child-development knowledge appears to be associated withquality caregiving, it is also important to know if itis associated with perceived control over caregivingoutcomes.

1.1.5. Preservice teachers' complexity ofreasoning about development

Research findings highlight the complexity of pre-kindergarten classrooms and the cognitive demandsmade on teachers' decision making (Jones & Vesilind,1995). Because the causes of caregiving outcomes arecomplex, the ability to understand the multiple influ-ences upon children's behavior and development is animportant teacher characteristic. Without the ability toreason in complex ways about children's development,teachers are prone to focus on a single environmen-tal or constitutional influence. In educational settingscomplexity of reasoning is important because teach-ers' desire and need to exert reasonable control overthe children in their care increases as the complex-ity of the classroom environment increases (Jones &Vesilind, 1995). Teachers with low perceived con-trol over outcomes may react to classroom challengeswith intrusive and over-controlling behavior becausethey slip into negative stereotypical interpretations forclassroom problems. In contrast, teachers with per-ceived control over outcomes would seem more likelyto consider multiple explanations, including their ownrole, in failed outcomes, and would be more likely toexplore and implement a variety of corrective strate-gies (Zvolensky, Heffner, Eifert, Spira, & Feldner,2001). In prior research, low perceived control overnegative caregiving outcomes has been linked withcaregivers' simplistic or categorical, rather than com-plex, conceptions of development (Guzell & Vernon-Feagans, 2004). Although complex reasoning aboutdevelopment would seem to be related to best prac-tices with children, we do not know to what extentit might modify the attributional processes that resultfrom, and contribute to, the perceptions of control overcaregiving outcomes.

1.2. Summary and research hypotheses

Preservice teachers' personal and backgroundcharacteristics potentially influence their beliefs aboutoutcomes during interactions with children. Implicitbeliefs about control over caregiving outcomes areespecially relevant for pre-kindergarten caregiversbecause early childhood caregiving environments areoften quite challenging, requiring quick decisions andthe implementation of effective behavior managementstrategies. Research on origins of preservice teach-ers' perceived control over caregiving outcomes wouldextend our understanding of control beliefs among

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

McG

ill U

nive

rsity

Lib

rary

] at

11:

04 2

0 N

ovem

ber

2014

324 / Guzell-Roe, S.A. Stringer / Journal of Early Childhood Teacher Education 25 (2005) 321-330

those who plan to work professionally with children. Itwould also contribute to our understanding of teacherdispositions and the behavior management styles ofearly childhood teacher-caregivers. Based upon ourreview of the literature, we posed several hypothesesin this study:

1. Preservice teachers who experienced a highdegree of either authoritarian or permissive par-enting would have lower perceived control overnegative caregiving outcomes.

2. Preservice teachers who had direct experi-ence with children, either as a parent orthrough employment in a pre-kindergarten set-ting, would have higher perceived control thanother participants.

3. Preservice teachers with more child-development knowledge would exhibitgreater, rather than less, perceived control overcaregiving.

4. Preservice teachers exhibiting complex rea-soning about development would also exhibithigher perceived control over negative care-giving outcomes than those with less complexreasoning about children's development.

2. Methods

2.1. Sample

This study is the second of two studies thatwere conducted at a Mid-Western, urban universityto explore characteristics of university students plan-ning to work with pre-kindergarten children. It wasdesigned to replicate and extend findings from Study1 (Guzell & Stringer, 2004). Data for Study 2 werecollected from 81 students in an Associate-degree, pre-kindergarten program who were primarily Caucasian(67/81), with an average age of 24 years. Approx-imately one-fourth of the participants were parents(21/81) and over half of them had had professionalexperience with children prior to their enrollment inearly childhood courses (46/81).

2.2. Procedure

After providing written informed consent, studentsresponded to a questionnaire about their work expe-rience and socio-demographic characteristics. Partici-pants then completed standardized measures designedto assess their perceptions of control over caregivingoutcomes, the parenting behaviors they experiencedas children, their knowledge of child development andtheir complexity of reasoning about children's devel-opment.

2.3. Measures

Preservice teachers' socioeconomic status, or that.of their parents if they were living in their parents'home, was assessed with the Hollingshead Four-FactorIndex (Hollingshead, 1975), which assigned numer-ical scores to the income levels and occupations ofthe heads of each household. The Hollingshead SESscores ranged from 20 (low) to 60 (high), with a meanof 37 and standard deviation of 8.6.

Preservice teachers' parental status was deter-mined by asking if they had had direct parentingexperience with one or more children. We did not dis-tinguish between biological parenthood and adoptiveparenthood.

Preservice teachers' prior experience with childrenwas measured by asking students about the numberof months they had engaged in paid work in a pre-kindergarten setting, as well as the number of hoursper month, that they had been employed in these posi-tions. The total hours of employment were convertedto months of full-time employment, with 160 hoursof employment recorded as a month of full-time paidexperience. Students were rated as having no experi-ence (0), fewer than 12 months of full-time experience(1), or 12 or more months of experience (2).

Preservice teachers' perceived control over care-giving outcomes was measured by the Parent Attribu-tion Test (PAT: Bugental, Blue. & Cruzcosa, 1989),which has been utilized to appraise teaching attri-butions in prior research. A student version of thePAT measures the attributions of undergraduate stu-dents who are not necessarily parents. We used thisstudent PAT to assess the degree to which preser-vice teachers would hold children primarily respon-sible for a negative caregiving outcome. Bugental andother researchers have found a consistent associationbetween PAT scores and harsh or over-controllingbehavior during challenging situations with children.In this measure, a brief hypothetical scenario is pre-sented: "Suppose you took care of a neighbor's childone afternoon and the two of you did not get alongwell. How important do you believe the followingfactors would be as possible reasons for such an expe-rience?" Preservice teachers were then asked to ratethe importance of each of 13 possible reasons for theirunhappy experience with the child, using a seven-pointrating scale ranging from one (not at all important) toseven (very important). The Child Control over Fail-ure (CCF) subscale consisted of the seven items thatassessed participants' perceptions of the child's con-trol over the caregiving outcome, such as "the extentto which the child was stubborn," and "how little effortthe child made." The Adult Control over Failure ( ACF)subscale contained the six items that assessed par-ticipants' perceptions of the adult's control over the

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

McG

ill U

nive

rsity

Lib

rary

] at

11:

04 2

0 N

ovem

ber

2014

J. Guzell-Roe, SA. Stringer / Journal of Early Childhood Teacher Education 25 (2005) 321-330 325

caregiving outcome. ACF items included "whetheryou used the wrong approach with this child" and"whether or not you really enjoy children that much."Items in the CCF subscale were summed and then allitems in the (ACF) subscale were summed (appropri-ate items were reverse-coded). Scored as a continuousvariable, the final PCF score was computed by sub-tracting the total CCF score from the total ACF score.In the present study, the alpha coefficient for observedPCF scores is .73.

The degree of authoritarian, authoritative, or per-missive parenting experienced by preservice teacherswas determined by their ratings of their mothers' andfathers' caregiving behavior on the Parental Author-ity Questionnaire (PAQ: Bun, 1991.) Thirty state-ments for mothers and thirty statements for fatherswere completed using a five-point Likert scale, rang-ing from one (strongly agree) to five (strongly agree).Mothers' and fathers' scores for each subscale weresummed to produce three total subscale scores on thedegree of parental authoritarianism, authoritativeness,and permissiveness. Examples of authoritarian state-ments included "when my mother (or father) askedme to do something, she (he) expected me to do itimmediately", and "my mother (father) would get veryupset if I tried to disagree with her (him)." Examples ofauthoritative statements included "my mother (father)always encouraged verbal give and take wheneverI felt that family rules and restrictions were unrea-sonable" and "my mother (father) gave me directionfor my behaviors and activities but was also under-standing when I disagreed." Examples of permissivestatements included "my mother (father) seldom gave

• me expectations and guidelines for my behavior," and"my mother (father) did not view herself (himself)as responsible for directing and guiding my. behav-ior as I was growing up." Subscale scores on each ofthe three parenting style subscales can range from 10(strongly disagree) to 50 (strongly agree), with higherscores on a subscale representing a greater degreeof that trait. In the present study, alpha coefficientsfor the subscales were .77 (preservice teachers' rat-ings of their mothers' parenting) and .78 (preserviceteachers' ratings of their fathers' parenting) for per-missiveness, .76 (mothers) and .83 (fathers) for author-itarianism, and .80 (mothers) and .83 (fathers) forauthoritativeness.

Preservice teachers' child-development knowl-edge was measured by the Knowledge of Child Devel-opment Inventory (KCDI: MacPhee & Fabio, 1993),which consisted of 58 items measuring physical,social, language, and cognitive development of chil-dren from birth through five years of age. Preserviceteachers were presented statements about children'sdevelopment, including: "A 1-year-old knows rightfrom wrong." and " 18-month-olds often cooperate and

share when they play together." Items were scored ascorrect or incorrect and were summed to achieve aKCDI total score. In this study, the alpha coefficientfor the total KCDI score was .83.

Preservice teachers' complexity of reasoning aboutdevelopment was assessed by The Concepts of Devel-opment Questionnaire (CODQ; Sameroff & Feil,1985). The questionnaire is one of the several meth-ods developed by Sameroff and Feil to assess adults'ability to reason in complex ways about children'sdevelopment. The scale consisted of 20 items dividedinto two subscales, perspectivistic and categorical.Perspectivistic statements reflected complex, multidi-mensional reasons for children's developmental out-comes. Ten perspectivistic statements included suchitems as "The mischief that 2-year-olds get into ispart of a passing stage they'll grow out o f and "Chil-dren's problems seldom have one cause." Ten categor-ical items provided single explanations of behaviorbased on either environmental or temperamental fac-tors alone. Sample items included "Babies have to betaught to behave themselves or they will be bad lateron" and "Fathers cannot raise their children as well asmothers." The 20 statements were rated on a four-pointLikert scale ranging from zero (strongly disagree) tothree (strongly agree). The final complex reasoningscore was computed by summing the perspectivisticsubscale score and the categorical subscale (ratingsreverse-scored) score. The alpha coefficient for theCODQ was .86.

3. Results

3.1. Analytical strategy

Zero-order correlations were used to summarizethe bivariate relationships between perceived controlover caregiving outcomes and the constructs underinvestigation. Hierarchical regression analyses werethen used to test the hypotheses about the relationshipbetween predictor variables and perceived control overcaregiving. After the hierarchical regression analyseswere completed, general linear testing was done toassess the extent to which variables explained variancein perceived control.

3.2. Findings

3.2.1. Bivariate correlationsTable 1 presents bivariate correlations conducted

among all of the variables in this study: perceivedcontrol over negative caregiving outcomes, socioe-conomic status of the preservice teachers' familiesof origin, parenting styles experienced as children,parental status, professional experience with children,

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

McG

ill U

nive

rsity

Lib

rary

] at

11:

04 2

0 N

ovem

ber

2014

326 J. Guzell-Roe, S.A. Stringer / Journal of Early Childhood Teacher Education 25 (2005) 321-330

Table 1Descriptive statistics related to preservice teachers' background, experience, and characteristics (n = 81 )

Variable Range Mean SD 1

1. Participants' perceived control -2.95/1.21 - .85 .93 1.002. Participants' socioeconomic status 22/603. Parents' level of permissiveness 10/414. Parents' level of authoritativeness 10/435. Parents' level of authoritarianism 8/406. Participant is parent 0/17. Participant's work with children 0/28. Participants' child-development

knowledge 43/88 74.92 8.619. Participants'complex reasoning 2.00/3.60 3.01 .26

35.65 8.57 .04 1.0023.40 6.79 - . 4 2 " .05 1.0029.46 7.26 .20* .22* - .12 1.0024.51 8.68 - . 3 5 " - .08 - .28* -.22* 1.00.25 .43 .08 .04 - .12 .09 - .07 1.00

.06 .11 - .04 -.05 - .01 .20* 1.00.91 .81

.21* .14 - .08 .01 - .15 .19* .08 1.00

.46" .04 -.34** .24* - .21* • .11 .14 .16

*p<-05.•* /x.Ol.

child-development knowledge, and complexity of rea-soning about development.

Socioeconomic status of preservice teachers' fami-lies of origin was not associated with preservice teach-ers' perceived control over negative caregiving out-comes. Additionally, preservice teachers' parental sta-tus and work experience were not associated with theirlevel of perceived control. Perceived control was nega-tively correlated with both permissive parenting expe-rienced as a child (r= —.42,-/7 < .01) and authoritarianparenting experienced as a child (r=— .38. p<.01).There was also a positive correlation between pre-service teachers' perceived control and complexity ofreasoning (r = .46, p < .01 ). Although the positive asso-ciation between perceived control and authoritativeparenting was not statistically significant, there wasa trend in the expected direction (r=-.2O, p<.01).There was also a trend toward statistical significancein the association between preservice teachers' per-ceived control and their knowledge of child develop-ment (r= - . 2 1 , p<. 06).

3.2.2. Hierarchical regression analysesRegression analyses were conducted with theoret-

ically important variables that were correlated withperceived control at the p<. 10 level of statistical sig-nificance or greater. Results of hierarchical regressionanalyses are presented in Table 2. In the first block, wetested the hypothesis that students' ratings of the par-enting styles they expe'rienced during childhood wouldpredict perceived control. The data partially supportedthis hypothesis. Higher scores on the permissive sub-scale of the PAQ predicted lower perceived controlover caregiving, whereas higher scores on the author-itative subscale of the PAQ predicted higher perceivedcontrol. There was no statistically significant relation-ship between scores on the authoritarian subscale ofthe PAQ and perceived control over caregiving. In thesecond block, knowledge of child development wasentered. Students' knowledge of child developmentdid not predict greater perceived control over care-giving outcomes. In the final block, complexity ofreasoning about development was entered. Complex-

Table 2

Perceived control regressed on preservice teachers' background and characteristics (n = 81)

Perceived control over caregiving outcomes

Preservice teachers' characteristicsParents' level of permissivenessParents' level of authoritarianismParents' level of authoritativenessPreservice teachers' child-development knowledgePreservice teachers' complexity of reasoningR2

FAD.f.

Block 1- . 3 4 "- .23*.11

.26

.248.28"(3.77)

Block 2- . 3 2 "- .21*.11.19*

.29

.033.45*(1.76)

Block 3-.23*-.19*.06.14.30".35.078.51"(1,75)

* p<.05.*•/><.01.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

McG

ill U

nive

rsity

Lib

rary

] at

11:

04 2

0 N

ovem

ber

2014

J. Guzell-Roe, S.A. Stringer / Journal of Early Childhood Teacher Education 25 (2005) 321-330 327

ity of reasoning about development was a statisticallysignificant predictor of perceived control.

The statistical significance of the change in vari-ance between each of the above blocks of variables wastested (see Table 2). When the three parenting styleswere entered together into block 1, they accounted forapproximately 24% of the variance in low perceivedcontrol over caregiving outcomes. The increment toR2 between block 1 (authoritarian, authoritative andpermissive parenting) and block 2 (child-developmentknowledge) was not statistically significant, with onlya 2% increase in variance explained by preserviceteachers' factual knowledge of child development.When the final regression model, block 3, was com-pared with block 2, a statistically significant differencein variance was explained, approximately 8%. Thetotal amount of variance in perceived control explainedby the final model was 35%.

4. Discussion

Attribution theory provided the theoretical frame-work for this study, which tested hypotheses aboutpreservice teachers' perceived control over caregivingoutcomes and the parenting styles they experienced asa child, their parental status, their professional expe-rience with children, their child-development knowl-edge, and their complexity of reasoning about devel-opment. Findings here extend our prior research onpreservice teachers' knowledge and complexity of rea-soning about development by showing the extent towhich these factors are associated with preserviceteachers beliefs about their control over the outcomesof their interactions with children.

Our prediction that low perceived control would berelated to preservice teachers' recollections of havingexperienced either extremely permissive or authori-tarian parenting was only partially confirmed. Highratings of experienced parental authoritarianism didnot predict low perceived control. However, experi-enced parental permissiveness was linked with pre-service teachers' low perceived control over nega-tive caregiving outcomes. Parental permissiveness canbe manifested as either indulgence or disengagement(Smetana & Daddis, 2002). We believe it is signifi-cant that many PAQ items indicating permissive par-enting were also indicators of parental unresponsive-ness and a lack of limit setting and parental involve-ment. The absence of parental responsiveness hasbeen found to be important in the etiology of exter-nalizing behaviors (Baumrind, 1997). Although adultbehavior undoubtedly originates from multiple causes,our findings suggest that caregivers who place pri-mary responsibility for negative caregiving outcomesoutside of themselves are more likely to have par-

ents who themselves modeled low perceived controlover caregiving outcomes. Unresponsive, nondirec-tive parenting experienced during childhood may pre-dict feelings of caregiving powerlessness and height-ened reactivity to ambiguous and difficult caregivingconditions.

Our prediction that preservice teachers' prior expe-rience with children would be associated with higherperceived control over caregiving outcomes was alsonot confirmed. Neither experience as a parent nor pro-fessional experience with children predicted preser-vice teachers' perceptions of control over caregivingoutcomes. Beliefs about one's control over outcomesappear to originate early in life and remain robust, evenafter more immediate experiences with children.

Child-development knowledge, although animportant outcome of teacher preparation, also didnot predict perceived control. Our findings here areconsistent with those of prior studies examiningthe relationship between low perceived control overnegative caregiving outcomes, knowledge of childdevelopment, and complexity of reasoning aboutdevelopment (Guzell & Stringer, 2004; Guzell &Vemon-Feagans, 2004). They suggest that exposureto knowledge of children's development may notexert an equal influence upon all individuals studyingto work with children. That is, for caregivers withlow perceived control over negative caregivingoutcomes, factual child-development knowledge maybe insufficient to override previously establishedbeliefs about control over caregiving outcomes(Bugental et al., 1990; Bugental & Johnston, 2000).Preservice teachers with low perceived control mayinterpret information about children's developmentand behavior differently from the way in which it wasintended.

Unlike child-development knowledge, preserviceteachers' complexity of reasoning about developmentdid predict greater perceived control over negativecaregiving outcomes. This suggests that it is impor-tant to provide preservice teachers with opportunitiesto acquire more complex conceptions of children'sdevelopment, rather than to limit their preparation tothe memorization of de-contextualized developmentalmilestones and facts about children's "typical" growthand behavior. The emphasis on purely factual infor-mation can lead to a type of surface knowledge that isregarded as insufficient for self-empowerment, sophis-ticated reasoning, or the transfer of learning to newsituations (Entwistle, 1998).

The findings here have important implicationsfor early childhood teacher-preparation programs. Inour first study (Guzell & Stringer, 2004), we foundthat preservice teachers with greater complex rea-soning about development had taken more advancedearly childhood courses that focused on multi-faceted.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

McG

ill U

nive

rsity

Lib

rary

] at

11:

04 2

0 N

ovem

ber

2014

328 /. Guzell-Roe, S.A. Stringer / Journal of Early Childhood Teacher Education 25 (2005) 321-330

ecological influences upon development. Supervisionand guided self-reflection during pre-kindergartenpracticum courses and internships were also impor-tant contributors to die students' complex reasoningabout children' behavior and development. The find-ing of an association between perceived control overoutcomes and complexity of reasoning suggests thatquality teacher-preparation programs can influence thedevelopment of preservice teachers' perceptions ofcontrol over outcomes.

It might reasonably be argued that students can-not be expected to possess complex understandingof developmental issues. However, for many of thestudents in 2-year, early-childhood programs, theassociate degree will become their terminal degree.Although teacher educators have no influence over thechildhood experiences that trigger the beliefs of pre-service teachers, it appears that students' perception ofcontrol over outcomes may be influenced by course-work and supervised experiences that lead to complexreasoning about development. Because of this, earlychildhood educators have an obligation to nurturecomplex reasoning about children's development atthe earliest possible stage of their teacher-preparationprograms. The exploration of real-life dilemmas fromthe perspective of multiple stakeholders is one wayto encourage critical thinking about caregiving. Whenpreservice teachers are required to generate alternativeexplanations for outcomes, their solutions to the dilem-mas are more varied and specific to the issues at hand.Eventually, they come to recognize how much theprocess of searching for meaningful alternative expla-nations affects the quality of their decision-making andpractices in the classroom.

Perceptions of control over negative caregivingoutcomes are powerful enough to override factualknowledge about children's development. As teachereducators, we must provide situations that expose theillogical beliefs, inappropriate dispositions, and neg-ative causal attributions that some students harbor.This is best accomplished by incorporating a respect-ful and caring exploration of teaching and caregivingbeliefs into teacher-preparation content and practicumcourses. When students engage in case-study analysesand group discussions about complicated classroom-management situations, they expose, defend, andfinally assess their own beliefs. This is more power-ful than private self-reflection, because open discourseabout beliefs requires accommodation of the differ-ing views of others (Tetlock, 1985). As their complexreasoning about development increases, preserviceteachers with low perceived control may eventuallydecrease their use of simplistic child-focused explana-tions for negative outcomes, as well as their relianceupon highly controlling classroom-management prac-tices.

4.1. Limitations and suggestions for futureresearch

The sample in this study was small and purpo-sive, both of which limit the conclusions that canbe drawn about our findings. However, we believethat our results highlight the importance of includ-ing perceived control over negative caregiving out-comes in future studies on teacher characteristics andpreparation. Prior research suggests that conclusionsabout parenting styles and outcomes are often lim-ited by the specific outcomes that are being studied(Grigorenko & Stemberg, 1999). We suggest the useof a parenting-style measure that includes an assess-ment of parenting responsiveness, as this has beenshown to be an effective parenting-style and parenting-quality indicator. Also, rather than administering theCODQ, open-ended responses to Concepts of Devel-opment vignettes could be probed to decipher moreabout the thought processes of early childhood care-givers (Sameroff & Feil, 1985).

4.2. Implications for early childhood teachereducation

The current project underscores the value of fos-tering complex, rather than simplistic, reasoning aboutcauses of classroom outcomes in teacher-preparationprograms. While most teacher-preparation programspromote knowledge of child development, few incor-porate formal opportunities for reflection and reason-ing about children's behavioral and developmentaloutcomes into their program design. Rather, most pre-service teachers are fortunate if an occasional instruc-tor includes reflection about teaching dispositions andbeliefs into an already-demanding schedule of topics.Teachers-in-training require insight about how theirunique past experiences might influence and some-times distort their perceptions of classroom events(Nespor, 1987). Because preservice teachers are oftenconcerned about their ability to maintain classroomcontrol, they are eager to leam the methods of control.Few understand that having meaningful control overoutcomes requires the acceptance of responsibility foroutcomes. Our findings suggest that the nurturing ofcomplex reasoning about developmental and behav-ioral outcomes can increase future teachers' sense ofresponsibility and perceived control over classroomoutcomes and. ultimately, enhance their interactionswith children in their care.

References

Baumrind, D. (1997). The discipline encounter: Contem-porary issues. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 2(4),321-335.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

McG

ill U

nive

rsity

Lib

rary

] at

11:

04 2

0 N

ovem

ber

2014

J. Guzell-Roe, S.A. Stringer/ Journal of Early Childhood Teacher Education 25 (2005) 321-330 329

Belsky, J., & Kelly, J. (1994). The transition to parenthood.New York: Delacorte Press.

Bredekamp, S., & Copple, C. (1997). In S. Bredekamp & C.Copple (Eds.), Developmentally appropriate practice inearly childhood programs (Rev. ed.). Washington, DC:National Association for the Education of Young Chil-dren.

Brophy, J., & McCaslin, M. (1992). Teachers' reports of howthey perceive and cope with problem students. Elemen-tary School Journal, 93(1), 3-68.

Brophy, J., & Rohrkemper, M. (1981). The influence of prob-lem ownership on teachers' perceptions of and strategiesfor coping with problem students. Journal of EducationalPsychology, 73(3), 295-311.

Bugental, D. B., Blue, J., Cortez, V., Fleck, K., Kopeikin,J., Lewis, J. C., et al. (1993). Social cognitions as orga-nizers of autonomic and affective responses to socialchallenge. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,64(1), 94-103.

Bugental, D. B., Blue, J., & Cruzcosa, M. (1989). Perceivedcontrol over caregiving outcomes: Implications for childabuse. Developmental Psychology, 25, 532-539.

Bugental, D. B., Blue, J., & Lewis, J. (1990). Caregiver cog-nitions as moderators of affective reactions to "difficult"children. Developmental Psychology, 26, 631-638.

Bugental, D. B., & Happaney, K. (2000). Parent-child inter-action as a power contest. Journal of Applied Develop-mental Psychology, 21(3), 267-282.

Bugental, D. B., & Johnston, C. (2000). Parent and childcognitions in the context of the family. Annual Review ofPsychology, 51, 315-344.

Bugental, D. B., & Lewis, J. C. (1999). The paradoxical mis-use of power by those who see themselves as powerless:How does it happen? Journal of Social Issues, 55(1),51-64.

Bugental, D. B., Lewis, J. C., Lin, E., Lyon, J., & Kopeikin.H. (1999). In charge, but not in control: The managementof teaching relationships by adults with low perceivedpower. Developmental Psychology, 35(6), 1367-1378.

Bugental, D. B., & Shennum, W. A. (1984). "Difficult" chil-dren as elicitors and targets of adult communication pat-terns: An attributional-behavioral transactional analysis.Monographs of the society for research and child devel-opment, 1, Serial no. 205.

Buri, J. (1991). Parental authority questionnaire. Journal ofPersonality Assessment, 57(1), 110-119.

Charlesworth, R., Hart, C. H., Burts, D. C. & DeWolf, M.(1993). The LSU studies: Building a research base fordevelopmentally appropriate practice. In S. Reifel (Ed.),Advances in early education and day care: Perspectives indevelopmentally appropriate practice (Vol. 5, pp. 3-28).Greenwich CT: JAI.

Charlesworth, R., Hart, C., Burts, D., & Hernandez, S. (1991).Kindergarten teachers' beliefs and practices. Early Devel-opment and Care, 70, 17-35.

Elkind, D. (1998). Educational research and the scienceof education. Educational Psychology Review, 11(3),271-287.

Emmer, E. T., & Hickman, J. (1991). Teacher efficacy inclassroom management and discipline. Educational andPsychological Measurement, 51, 755-765.

Entwistle, N. (1998). Approaches to learning and forms ofunderstanding. In B. Dart & G. Boulton-Lewis (Eds.),Teaching and learning in higher education (pp. 72-101).Camberwell, Vic.: Australian Council on EducationalResearch (ACER).

Grigorenko, E. L., & Sternberg, R. J. (1999). Elucidatingthe etiology and nature of beliefs about parenting styles.Developmental Science, 3(1), 93-112.

Guzell, J. R., & Stringer, S. A. (2004). Complexity of rea-soning about children's development: Links with teacher-preparation content courses and supervised laboratoryexperience. Journal of Early Childhood Teacher Educa-tion, 24(4), 227-235.

Guzell, J. R., & Vernon-Feagans, L. (2004). Parental per-ceived control over caregiving and its relationship toparent-infant interaction. Child Development, 75(1),134-146.

Hollingshead, A. B. (1975). Four-factor index of social sta-tus. Unpublished manuscript, Dept. of Sociology, YaleUniversity, New Haven, CT, USA.

Hong, Y., Chiu, C., Dweck, C. S., & Sacks, R. (1997).Implicit theories and evaluative processes in person cog-nition. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 33(3),296-323.

Howes, C., Galinsky, D., & Kontos, S. (1998). Child carecaregiver sensitivity and attachment. Social Develop-ment, 7(1), 25-36.

Joiner, T. E., & Wagner, K. D. (1996). Parental, child-centeredattributions and outcome: A meta-analytic review withconceptual and methodological implications. Journal ofAbnormal Child Psychology, 24(1), 37-52.

Jones, M. G., & Vesilind, E. (1995). Preservice teachers' cog-nitive frameworks for class management. Teaching andTeacher Education, 11(4), 313-330.

Kagan, D. (1992). Implications of research on teacher beliefs.Educational Psychologist, 27, 65-90.

Lally, J. R., Griffin, A., Fenichel, E., Segal, M., Szanton,E., & Weissbound, R. (1997). Developmentally appropri-ate practice for infants and toddlers. Washington, DC:National Association for the Education of Young Chil-dren.

Lubeck, S. (1996). Deconstructing "child-developmentknowledge" and "teacher preparation". Early ChildhoodResearch Quarterly, 11(2), 147-168.

MacPhee, D., & Fabio, C. (1993). A question of match:Knowledge of child development and age-appropriatestimulation. Paper presented at the annual conferenceof the American Psychological Association, Washington,DC.

Nelsen, J., Lott, L., & Glenn, H. (2000). Positive disciplinein the classroom. Rocklin, CA: Prima.

Nespor, J. (1987). The role of beliefs in the practice ofteaching. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 19(4), 317-328.

Poulou, M., & Norwich, B. (2000). Teachers' causal attri-butions, cognitive, emotional and behavioral responsesto students with emotional and behavioral difficulties.British Journal of Educational Psychology, 70, 559-581.

Raths, J. (2001). Teachers' beliefs and teaching beliefs. EarlyChildhood Research and Practice, 3(1).

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

McG

ill U

nive

rsity

Lib

rary

] at

11:

04 2

0 N

ovem

ber

2014

330 J. Cuzell-Roe, S.A. Stringer / Journal of Early Childhood Teacher Education 25 (2005) 321-330

Sameroff, A. J., & Feil, L. A. (1985). Parental con-ceptions of development. In I. Siegel (Ed.), Parentalbelief systems (pp. 83-105). Mahwah, NJ: LawrenceErlbaum.

Schaffer, H. R. (2000). The early experience assumption:Past, present and future. International Journal of Behav-ioral Development, 24, 5-24.

Smetana, J. G., & Daddis, C. (2002). Domain-specificantecedents of parental psychological control and moni-toring: The role of parenting beliefs and practices. ChildDevelopment, 73(2), 563-580.

Stipek, D., & Byler, P. (1997). Early childhood educationteachers: Do they practice what they preach? Early Child-hood Research Quarterly, 12, 305-325.

Tetlock, P. E. (1985). Explaining teacher explanations ofpupil performance: A self-presentation interpretation.Social Psychology Quarterly, 43(2), 53-60.

Zvolensky, M. J., Heffner, M., Eifert, G. H., Spira, A. P., &Feldner, M. T. (2001). Incremental validity of perceivedcontrol dimensions in the differential prediction of inter-pretive biases for threat. Journal of Psychopathology andBehavioral Assessment, 23, 75-83.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

McG

ill U

nive

rsity

Lib

rary

] at

11:

04 2

0 N

ovem

ber

2014