PARENTAL DISCIPLINE AND PARENTS DESIRE FOR CHILDRENS SCHOOL SUCCESS

Rachel Pasternak
ABSTRACT
Purpose This chapter presents a new model for the classication of parental discipline styles (PDS), constructed in an attempt to understand the relationship between parenting and childrens school success. The model includes six PDSs, based on four criteria: making demands, enforcement, punishment, and responsiveness to childrens requests. Methodology Methodology includes quantitative research based on self-report questionnaire. Finding The ndings indicate that (1) PDS has a crucial effect on a childs academic achievement even after controlling for parents and childrens demographic characteristics; (2) The progressive authoritative style has the greatest effect on academic achievement, whereas the punitive style has the smallest effect; and (3) punishment has a negative effect on academic achievement, whereas responsiveness to childrens requests has the greatest positive effect.

Economic Stress and the Family Contemporary Perspectives in Family Research, Volume 6, 123146 Copyright r 2012 by Emerald Group Publishing Limited All rights of reproduction in any form reserved ISSN: 1530-3535/doi:10.1108/S1530-3535(2012)0000006008

123

124

RACHEL PASTERNAK

Originality/value PDS is distinguished from the broader concept parenting style in its reference to the daily behaviors that comprise the exercise of discipline. Practical implications Awareness of the salience of discipline for improving academic achievement can inuence patterns of parenting in general, and PDS in particular. Social implications PDS indicates the quality of the education and socialization being transmitted. It has a crucial impact on childrens school success that is crucial for occupational and economic success. Keywords: Parental discipline style; parenting styles; parental authority; academic achievement; occupational success; authoritative style

INTRODUCTION
Childrens school success has been the subject of intensive research in the past two decades since academic achievements are necessary conditions for professional standing and economic success. In a capitalist economy that is based on a wide participation of citizens in the labor force, academic credentials are both in the interest of individuals and of society. There is evidence that academic achievements, even during childhood and adolescence, are a key determinant of future occupational success (Dubow, Boxer, & Huesmann, 2009; Flashman, 2012). International comparative test results in science, mathematics, and reading comprehension, based on responses from elementary school students, indicate mediocre achievement among this age group in some Western democracies such as the United States and the United Kingdom when compared with Far Eastern countries such as Singapore, Hong Kong, and Japan or Finland (PISA, 2011). These data, which indicate a growing threat to sustaining a stable economy in capitalist countries, have motivated research on ways in which to improve childrens academic achievements. Although this issue represented the main focus of research primarily by education and learning experts in the past, current research is interdisciplinary in character, involving sociologists, economists, psychologists, and even philosophers. Scholars are now delving into the sources for this situation as well as attempting to develop tools for

Parental Discipline and Desire for Childrens School Success

125

its reversal. One result of this change in direction is the increased attention been paid to the family as a factor contributing to childrens school success. The current chapter discusses parents contributions to childrens school success from a perspective previously neglected in the literature. Parents are considered as an agent of socialization and, in their ordinary practice, are the subjects of acts of construction of the social and cultural reproduction (Nash, 1990). This study examines the effect of what we call Parental Discipline Style (PDS) on achievement, that is, it investigates whether parental imposition of discipline as a part of the socialization process supports their childrens learning. Our subject is positive discipline (Devall, 2004), directed at the child within an educational process meant to prepare the foundations for learning. We assume that the absence of positive discipline undermines the childs proper functioning in school. It is worth noting that positive discipline can be implemented in every family, irrespective of its socioeconomic status.

Parenting Style and Discipline The claim that parents play a meaningful role in the inculcation of discipline and academic achievement as a valued goal has been intensively studied under the rubric parenting style. parenting style is composed of a range of components, including parents general behavior, much of which entails the exercise of parental authority, interpreted here as the imposition of discipline. A critical, analytical reading of the scores of studies examining the inuence of parenting style on childrens and adolescents education and socialization indicates that parenting style is dened and measured by several elements. An analysis of the components comprising the criteria for determining parenting style indicates their distribution into two main categories. The rst refers to family characteristics, expressed in the home environment, parental involvement (Hickman, Greenwood, & Miller, 1995; Steinberg, Lamborn, Dornbusch, & Darling, 1992) and family cohesion (Hern & Lewko, 1994) as well as parental control, discipline strategies, warmth, and authoritativeness (Steinberg, Lamborn, Darling, Mounts, & Dornbusch, 1994; Steinberg et al., 1992; Steinberg, Mounts, Lambon, & Dornbusch, 1991). The second pertains to elements related to parental behavior toward their children: parentchild interaction and communication, emotional attachment to their children, and level of involvement in their childrens lives. Taken together, these components represent aspects of educating ones offspring.

126

RACHEL PASTERNAK

Baumrind, whose research has inspired numerous studies, examined the parenting style according to components characterizing the exercise of discipline but within a wide sphere of reference. Her research led to the recognition of variation in parenting style according to the balance achieved between measures of authoritativeness and those expressing warmth and support. In her studies, Baumrind (1966, 1967, 1971, 1991) made use of components such as authority, communication, control, and authoritativeness. She used the dimensions of control/demandingness (C) and warmth/ responsiveness (W) to derive a fourfold classication of parenting styles: the authoritarian (high C, low W), the authoritative (high C, high W), the permissive (low C, high W), and the neglecting (low C, low W). In her later studies, Baumrind (1996, 2005) determined parenting style on the basis of an imbalance in parents demandingness/responsiveness ratio. Doing so allowed her to add four additional styles: authoritarian/directive, nonauthoritarian/directive, democratic, and neglecting/rejecting. A review of these styles indicates that the pivotal component determining parenting style tends to be the demandingness/responsiveness ratio as expressed in behavior. This means that the main components of parenting style tend to be demandingness and responsiveness. The models constructed on the basis of Baumrinds research can be differentiated by the degree of authoritativeness exercised by parents toward their children. Research investigating the relationship between parenting style and educational achievement has generally found a positive correlation between authoritativeness and academic achievement (Baumrind, 1991; Chao, 2001; Dornbusch, 1987; Hickman, Toews, & Andrews, 2001; Turner, Chandler, & Heffer, 2009; Yang, 2009). Alternatively, the exercise of excessive authority, as expressed in the Authoritarian style, has been found to be negatively correlated with academic achievement (Baumrind, 1991; Dornbusch, 1987).

Parental Authority, Discipline, and Academic Achievement Authority is the ability to impose discipline. As such, it is one of the tools at the parents disposal when socializing and educating their children. Historically, parental authority became the subject of empirical study primarily after its deterioration (Baumrind, 2005; De Forest, 2009; Steutel & Spiecker, 2000). The imposition of discipline on children is expressed by the ability to place boundaries between the permitted and the prohibited, to inculcate

Parental Discipline and Desire for Childrens School Success

127

appropriate social behavior and learning habits. This imposition might have some difculties when parentchild relations become too liberal (Lee & Tseng, 2008; Williamson, Bondy, Langley, & Mayne, 2005). In the current research we distinguish this type of authority from that exercised by teachers while focusing on the necessity of its exercise in the education of children, the consolidation of self-identity (Berzonsky, 2004), the internalization of discipline and mental health (Dwairy, 2004), the legitimation of authority and its implications for parentchild conicts (Darling, Cumsille, & Pena-Alampay, 2005) as well as childrens attitudes toward authority (Daddis, 2008; Smetana, 2000; Smetana, Crean, & Campione-Barr, 2005). Several of the studies that examined authority from a cultural perspective have found that youngsters from societies as desperate as that of the Chinese (Zhang & Fuligni, 2006), the Brazilian (MilnitskySapiro, Turiel, & Nucci, 2006), and the Vietnamese minority in the United States (Nguyen, 2008) are dissatised with the broad scope of authority wielded by their parents. The Western worlds interest in the correlation between parental authority and academic achievement was stimulated by international test results. One explanation was the weakening of parental authority. Yet, despite the wealth of studies conducted with parental authority and its effect on children in numerous spheres, the research literature was initially rather meager with respect to academic achievement. The few studies conducted on the subject did nd a direct and positive correlation between parental authority and academic achievement or motivation (Frey, Ruchkin, Martin, & Schwab-Stone, 2009); its effect was in fact found to be stronger on homework completion among girls (Chan & Chan, 2007). Baumrinds (1991, 2005) classic model, which has been studied in numerous cultures, spawned the now burgeoning research on the impact of an authoritative parenting style on academic achievement. It is interesting to note that an absolute majority of studies have found a signicant and positive correlation between the two sets of behavior in a broad assortment of cultural groups: the Chinese (Pearson & Rao, 2003; Wei, Den, & Zhou, 2009), Afro-Americans (Mandara, 2006), and Caribbean immigrants to the United States (Roopnarine, Krishnakumar, Metindogam, & Evans, 2006), collectivist and individualist cultures (Sorkhabi, 2005) as well as students of college age (Abar, Carter, & Winsler, 2009; Turner et al., 2009) and those attending middle school (Suldo, Mihalas, Powell, & French, 2008). We can therefore conclude that the exercise of authority over children contributes to their academic achievement. This being said, the issue of whether authoritativeness is the only salient feature of parenting has remained open.

128

RACHEL PASTERNAK

The positive and supportive role played by the exercise of authority in affecting childrens achievements has raised questions as to the precise character of those parental behaviors that express authority. Which parental behaviors are included in the exercise of authority? What components of parenting style determine the exercise of authority? Whereas authority is dened as the parents power to dictate and model appropriate behavior, discipline is dened as the practical, daily exercise of authority in the varied spheres comprising childrens lives. The specication and analytic focus of these activities is likely to contribute to theoretical and practical knowledge about the inuence parents exert on their childrens education and learning potential. In the current research, the concept authority was conceptualized as behavior that expresses the exercise of discipline. Instead of examining the discipline as a component of parental authority or of an authoritative parenting style, we focused on the concept PDS. PDS was distinguished from the broader concept parenting style in its reference to the daily behaviors that comprise the exercise of discipline. PDS was likewise based on the components demandingness and responsiveness, but again, contrary to parenting style, the component behaviors were directed solely at parents attempts to inculcate discipline. The concept PDS has received little attention in the literature. When mentioned, the authors have generally referred to it as an overall parental behavior aimed at imposing discipline rather than as a structured behavior pattern culminating in parenting style (Gallagher & Cartwright-Hatton, 2008). In order to investigate this style, we constructed a new, targeted questionnaire (the PDS questionnaire or PDSQ), based on available questionnaires devised to identify the parenting style but with the addition of new criteria as described below.

Parental Discipline Style and Its Components As a concept, PDS relates to the approach taken by parents when imposing discipline on their children. It refers to the degree to which parents exercise their authority regarding the imposition of discipline and inculcation of appropriate social behavior. We offer four new components comprising this style: making demands, enforcing, punishing, and responsiveness to the childs requests. These components were selected on the basis of theoretical and empirical arguments originating in theories from the elds of education, learning, and the sociology of education.

Parental Discipline and Desire for Childrens School Success

129

Two behavioral patterns requisite for good parenting support and control have received particular stress (Maccoby & Martin, 1983). Control is expressed in making demands, enforcing them, and punishing children for failing to comply. These three components likewise represent the foundations of learning and behavior formation as conceptualized by sociological and behavioral theorists (Bandura, 1977; Pasternak, 2002; Rollins & Thomas, 1979). Alternatively, support, as expressed in responsiveness to the childs requests, represents an equilibrating component. Support causes children to feel at ease and relaxed in relations with their parents, to be readily accepted, and to effortlessly express their wishes and needs. Supportive behavior expresses warmth, sensitivity, and acceptance (Coplan, Hastings, Lagace-Seguin, & Moulton, 2002; Rothbaum & Weisz, 1994). The related empirical arguments evolved from the fact that these concepts have already been researched as components of teacher and parent behavior and correlated with academic achievement. We believe that the incorporation of the four components into one conceptual framework can facilitate the modeling of parental behavior focused on the exercise of discipline, that is, a PDS. We next describe these factors and their relationship to discipline. Making Demands Making demands refers to the claims parents make on children to become integrated into society, transmitted through behavior regulation, direct confrontation and maturity demands (behavioral control) in addition to supervision of childrens activities (monitoring) (Baumrind, 2005, p. 61). Such behavior expresses the degree to which parents require that their children complete a variety of the daily tasks deemed necessary for proper socialization and learning. Making demands represents a key concept in the education eld, although, beyond its inclusion as a component of parenting style (Baumrind, 1991, 2005; Steinberg et al., 1991, 1994), it is usually examined as either a distinct variable (Howland, Anderson, Smiley, & Abbott, 2006) or as an educational policy (Kissel, 2009; Reback, 2008). Enforcement Enforcement relates to the degree to which parents effectively monitor fulllment of their demands. This component is especially important in the exercise of discipline because making demands is ineffective without it. Enforcement has generally been investigated as a component of punishment rather than as a distinct concept.

130

RACHEL PASTERNAK

Punishment Punishment and its effect on childrens normative behavior as well as academic achievement have been widely discussed in the literature. This rich body of research has focused on the punishment meted out by teachers and its negative inuence on academic achievement, especially in the form of corporal punishment (Docan, 2006; Guskey, 2004; Little & Akin-Little, 2008). Alternatively, research on the effect of parental punishment is relatively poor. We should note here that our subject is not corporal or physical punishment but educational punishment, which includes denial of rewards or gratications (Devall, 2004). Sociological theories on the inculcation of social norms and the acquisition of social roles and learning, such as behavior formation theories, explain the emergence of behavioral patterns through reward (for good behavior) and punishment (for deviant behavior) (Pasternak, 2002, 2003). We therefore consider punishment to be a response to childrens noncompliance with parental demands, expressed in the denial of rewards such as watching television, access to computers, purchase of a desired object, going out, and so forth. Although responsiveness appears in Baumrinds (2005) model, she makes no mention of punishment. In order to complete our analysis of PDS, we suggest focusing specically on the punishment due to its role in social learning as supported by theory. Responsiveness to the Childs Requests Responsiveness refers to the extent to which parents acquiesce to childrens requests. Baumrind (1991, 2005) includes responsiveness in her model of parenting style while stressing its sensitivity to the child and honoring his or her requests, characteristics that bear witness to the parents warmth, support of the childs autonomy, and reasoned communication. This particular behavior, other than its inclusion as a component of parenting, is rarely mentioned in the research literature. A wealth of research does exist in reference to a broader concept, warmth (Bronstein-Burrows, 1981; Meteyer & Perry-Jenkins, 2009; Shanahan, McHale, Crouter, & Osgood, 2007). We nonetheless argue that children need responsiveness; this quality should therefore be included among the components of a PDS. Parental responsiveness to the childs requests introduces reciprocity into parentchild relations: responsiveness to a childs request provides a measure of legitimation to parental demands at the same time that it helps impose discipline. The message children receive is: I demand and expect you to comply; at the same time, you request and I respond. For these

Parental Discipline and Desire for Childrens School Success

131

reasons, responsiveness to a childs request is included as a component in PDS. The combination of these four components, outgrowths of parental authority, as opposed to the behavior associated with individual components, therefore encompasses what we have termed the PDS, a style quite different from the classic parental style described in the literature. Based on the preceding literature review, three hypotheses were formulated: 1. The PDS that best contributes to academic achievement involves making demands together with their strict enforcement, low levels of punishment, and high levels of responsiveness to a childs request. The style that least contributes to achievement involves high levels of punishment in addition to little or no demands, weak enforcement of the demands made, and little responding to a childs request. 2. PDS will most powerfully affect achievements in arithmetic. 3. The effect of PDS is not related to sociodemographic variables.

METHOD
The current research consequently delves into the impact of Parental Discipline Style on the academic achievements of children aged 811 and explores two new analytic directions: First, the proposed model, which emerged from empirical data, provides the range of criteria necessary for identifying diverse PDSs. Although based on Baumrinds (1991, 2005) classic model, the new model offers six different styles: authoritarian, authoritative, progressive authoritative, permissive, neglectful, and punitive. Its main construct, PDS, is itself dened according to the four criteria previously described: making demands, enforcement, punishment, and responsiveness to the childs requests. Second, we examine the inuence of each of the six PDSs on academic achievement in four subjects arithmetic, English as a foreign language, Hebrew language skills (grammar and reading comprehension), and science. More precisely, we examine which components of parental behavior making demands, enforcement, punishment, and responsiveness to childrens requests exert the greatest positive (or negative) inuence on each of four academic subjects.

132

RACHEL PASTERNAK

Participants Participating in the research were 129 women from middle upper social class, between the ages of 30 and 50 (most were aged 3545). We referred to women since they are mostly more involved with the socialization process. The majority (91%) were married and had acquired a high school or academic education (about 85%). Among participants with an academic education, the majority (91.5%) had earned at least a masters degree. The women in the sample generally earned average or above-average incomes (95.7%); the majority were Jewish (91.5%), with about half identifying themselves as secular (54%); a bit more than half were of European origin (59.2%). The participants were asked to report about aspects of their behavior toward those of their children who were in the 2nd to 6th grade and aged 811 (about 85% of their children were in the 4th to 5th grade, aged 811). The majority of these children were boys (57.4%); none were reported as diagnosed for learning disabilities. If we compare this sample to national-level statistics, we see that only 55.6% of the citizens are part of the civilian labor force compared to Sweden (64%), Holland (65%), and United States (66%) (Landa & Even, 2009). Also, in Israel, nearly 78.3% of the women are in the labor force (men, 77.7%), and they are better educated than men in all the levels of education, and more than a third of them have academic degrees. So, the sample is similar to more than a third of the women in Israel (Statistical Abstract of Israel, 2011). Participants were recruited by means of convenience (students 77.5%) and snowball sampling (others 22.5%). The majority of the women completed the questionnaire during a class session held in the academic institution where they were students. Completion of the questionnaire was voluntary and not part of the course requirements. Data Collection Data were collected over a period of three months. Each participant in the research received a structured, anonymous self-completion questionnaire, to be returned upon its completion. The questionnaire included items on PDS in addition to items on their childrens educational achievements. The mothers were given denition of each of these components in the questionnaire. The sociodemographic portion of the questionnaire contained items such as the childs gender, parental behavior, family income, and so forth.

Parental Discipline and Desire for Childrens School Success

133

The response rate for the structured and anonymous self-completion questionnaire was 90%.

The Research Variables and Their Measurement The research focused on one main dependent variable: academic achievement. The data on academic achievement were collected by means of mothers reports of their childrens grades for each of the four selected subjects arithmetic, Hebrew language skills, English as a foreign language, and science as they appeared on report cards transmitted at the end of the school year. (Grades are given on an annual basis in Israel.) The responses were scored on a four-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (poor mastery) to 4 (complete mastery), exactly as they appeared in the report cards. The questionnaire was completed about a week after their transmission. These variables were then coded as four dummy variables: mastery of a subject (complete mastery and mastery, each of which received a value of 1) and no mastery (partial and no mastery, each of which received a value of 0). The Israeli education system is divided into three stages: primary school 1st to 6th grade, junior high 7th to 9th grade, and high school 10th to 12th grade. In so called good schools or in schools of the middle upper class, parents are involved in school (Pasternak, 2004). The academic performance in mathematics and science, as reected in the scores achieved in international comparative tests such as PISA is not satisfactory. By 2009 Israel was ranked 41st out of 64 in mathematics, 36th in reading comprehension and reading, and 41st in science, with scores of 2049 points below the average of all the countries participating in the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) (PISA, 2011). These achievements are a threat to the occupational possibilities and the economic situation in Israel. Because of this situation, the Israeli government allocates a big budget for reforms in order to improve the academic achievements. The main independent variable, PDS, was measured by means of a questionnaire specially developed by the author for the current research. The questionnaire contained 40 items aimed to identify parents specic PDS by means of the four behavioral components: making demands, enforcement, punishment, and responsiveness to the childs requests. Ten items were assigned to each dimension and described common behaviors taken from the daily routines of children aged 811: brushing teeth, washing, watching television, permitted computer time, coming home on time, preparation of homework at xed hours, arranging their room,

134

RACHEL PASTERNAK

removing dishes from the table, taking down laundry, and politeness when conversing with parents. The behaviors were selected on the basis of a pilot study. Fifteen mothers (other than those participating in the research) of children aged 811 were asked to list 15 daily behaviors that raised issues of compliance. To prevent cultural bias (given that the research was conducted in Israel) and ensure the questionnaires universality, three mothers each were chosen from ve countries: Israel, France, England, Canada, and the United States. The mothers were randomly selected as part of a convenience sample based on indirect acquaintance. Ten behaviors were selected from the list compiled. The criterion for selection was a behaviors mention by mothers from at least three countries. The 129 mothers participating in the research were asked to rank three of the four PDS components on separate Likert scales: how often they made demands, ranging from 1 (never demanded) to 5 (always demanded), their level of enforcement, ranging from 1 (never enforced) to 5 (always enforced), and their level of punishment (educational, not corporal) meted out for noncompliance, ranging from 1 (never punished) to 5 (always punished). Ten items were then provided that expressed the fourth component, responsiveness to their childrens requests: purchasing clothes, purchasing shoes, purchasing toys, purchasing games, purchasing other expensive items, purchasing favorite foods, subscribing to a sports club (gym), trips abroad, family outings, and release from chores. For each of these items, the mothers were asked to describe their responses on a Likert scale ranging from 1 (never) to 5 (always). Although some of these requests require nancial outlays, the majority of the mothers reported average or aboveaverage incomes, a fact that neutralized the potential socioeconomic bias. Sociodemographic background data were collected in order to control for their inuence on the dependent variable and thus enable isolation of the effect of PDS on the achievements. The data were obtained by means of additional questions directed at the mothers age, childs gender, family status (married/divorced, etc.), education, average family income, religiosity, nationality, and ethnicity. In addition to their childrens grades, parents were asked whether their children had been diagnosed for learning disabilities; if so, at what age and whether the child was receiving treatment. (In Israel learning disabilities include a range of diagnoses such as ADHD, ADS, Conduct disorder, and other mental disabilities); if so, at what age and whether the child was receiving treatment. With the exception of age, which is a continuous variable, all the other responses were coded as dummy variables: childs gender (1 male; 0 female); marital status (1 married;

Parental Discipline and Desire for Childrens School Success

135

0 all others); education (1 academic; 0 non-academic); and religiosity (1 observant; 0 secular).

Tools The 58-item Questionnaire included 40 statements for the purpose of identifying PDS, 5 questions regarding academic achievement, and 13 questions referring to intervening sociodemographic variables. The empirical validity of the questionnaire was determined by means of a principle components analysis. This analysis indicated that each of the four posited components of PDS obtained Eigenvalues of at least 1.0. making demands was found to explain 86% of the variance with an internal reliability coefcient of a .98; enforcement was found to explain 84.6% of the variance, with a .98; punishment explained about 87.7% of the variance, with a .98; responsiveness explained about 72.4% of the variance, with a .95. Total explained variance reached 86.4%.

Findings The research was able to identify six PDSs: authoritarian, authoritative, progressive authoritative, permissive, neglectful, and punitive. Four of these styles Authoritarian, Authoritative, Permissive, and Neglectful are found in the literature; the remaining two styles Progressive Authoritative and Punitive are newly identied and represent an innovative contribution of the research. PDSs were found to be distinguished by different combinations of the four posited components (i.e., making demands, enforcement, punishment, and responding to the childs requests). Each parent in the sample was assigned a standardized score for each of the four components based on the PCA conducted earlier. Based on each components distribution, values for high, medium, and low levels were calculated: making demands: low (.68 and below), medium (.67 to .76), and high (.77 and above); enforcement: low (.62 and below), medium (.61 to .64), and high (.65 and above); punishment: low (.37 and below), medium (.36 to .65), and high (.66 and above); responsiveness: low (.59 and below), medium (.58 to .54), and high (.55 and above). Table 1 describes the six PDSs in terms of the weights of the four components.

136

RACHEL PASTERNAK

Table 1 shows how the different PDSs diverge from one another according to the weight, or stress, given to each factor. For example, the progressive authoritative style is distinguished from the Authoritarian style by the stress placed on punishment; whereas the Authoritative style involves making demands, enforcing those demands, responding to a childs request, and inicting severe punishment for infractions. Adoption of a progressive authoritative style requires making high demands, enforcing them, responding to the childs requests but inicting only a good measure of punishment. Table 1 also indicates the distribution of the various PDSs, with the most common being Authoritative (33.3% of the sample), followed by, in descending order, Neglectful (17.8%), Authoritarian (14.7%), Progressive Authoritative (13.2%), Punitive (11.6%), and Permissive (4.7%). A corollary hypothesis investigated (No. 1) was that PDS is correlated to childrens achievement in a range of subjects. Table 2 shows the distribution of childrens level of mastery in the four subjects examined: arithmetic, Hebrew language skills, English as a foreign language, and science for each PDS. Table 2 reveals a clear trend indicating that specic PDSs appear to increase childrens chances for success in their studies. Among the six styles, children of parents adopting the Authoritative and the Progressive Authoritative PDSs show higher levels of mastery in every school subject investigated. Children of parents adopting the Authoritarian style showed partial success in all four subjects; in the majority of subjects, about onefourth of these children exhibited little or no mastery. It appears that twothirds of the children of parents adopting a Permissive or Neglectful style did not achieve mastery in any of the subjects tested. The PDS associated with least mastery of the subject matter was the punitive style: Between 73% and 93% of the children with parents adopting this style achieved no Table 1. Parental Discipline Style Components.
Authoritarian Authoritative Progressive Neglectful Permissive Punitive Total Authoritative High High Low High 4.7% Low Low Low Low 17.8% Low Low Low High 13.2% Low Low High Low 11.6%

Making demands Enforcement Punishment Responsiveness % of sample

High High High Low 14.7%

High High High High 33.3%

100%

Parental Discipline and Desire for Childrens School Success

Table 2.
Subject

Distribution of Childs Level of Mastery in the Four Subjects for Each Parenting Style.
Parental Discipline Style Authoritarian (n 19) B.P. G.P. 68.4% 73.7% 78.9% 73.7% Authoritative (n 43) B.P. 0% 3% 0% 0% G.P. 100% 97.7% 100% 100% Permissive (n 6) B.P. 66.7% 66.7% 83.3% 83.3% G.P. 33.3% 33.3% 16.7% 16.7% Neglectful (n 23) B.P. 65.2% 52.2% 69.6% 34.8% G.P. 34.8% 47.8% 30.4% 65.2% Progressive Authoritative (n 17) B.P. 0% 0% 0% 0% G.P. 100% 100% 100% 100% Punitive (n 15)

B.P. 80% 73.3% 93.3% 53.3%

G.P. 20% 26.7% 6.7% 46.7%

Arithmetic English as a foreign language Science Hebrew language skills

31.6% 26.3% 21.1% 26.3%

Note: pr.05; pr.01. B.P., Low mastery; G.P., High mastery.

137

138

RACHEL PASTERNAK

mastery in arithmetic, English as a foreign language, or science, whereas only about 50% achieved mastery over Hebrew language skills. The data shown in Table 3 support these ndings. In order to identify which of the four components of PDS (making demands, enforcement, punishment, and responsiveness to requests) best explains a childs achievement in each of the subjects examined while controlling for sociodemographic or background variables, we performed a linear regression analysis for each academic subject separately. The regression model included sociodemographic variables together with the four components of PDS. Calculation of the regression was performed in order to (1) assess the contribution of each PDS to the prediction of academic achievement while controlling the contribution made by sociodemographic variables, and (2) estimate the contributions of each sociodemographic variable as compared with the contributions of the components of PDS to predicting achievement in each subject. The results of the linear regression analysis can be seen in Table 3. The results of the regression analysis indicated that the predictive power of the model was relatively strong for arithmetic (55.7%), science (60.3%), and English as a foreign language (45%) but relatively weak for Hebrew language skills (32.2%). That is, we found that three of the four components of PDS do affect achievement in each subject beyond the effect exerted by parental background variables. Responsiveness was found to be the only component affecting achievement in all four academic subjects: arithmetic (b .313), English (b .259), language (b .225), and science (b .277). Alternatively, punishment had no predictive value regarding success in the four subjects tested. This nding supports previous results indicating that children of parents adopting a punitive style achieve the least in all school subjects. The other two components had a range of effects on achievement, by academic subject: enforcement had a positive effect on achievement in English (b .497) and science (b .469), while making demands had a positive effect on achievement in arithmetic (b .146) and the Hebrew language (b .491). The ndings conrm the second research hypothesis. An additional interesting nding obtained by the regression analysis is the very poor contribution of the social-demographic variables to the explained variance. The sociodemographic variables contributed a signicant effect only in the model predicting achievement in arithmetic (Religiosity: b .16; Education: b .146). These ndings appear to support the argument that PDS components have a greater effect on achievement than do sociodemographic variables. Stated differently, after controlling for background,

Parental Discipline and Desire for Childrens School Success

Table 3.
Variable B

Predicting Academic Achievement: Regression Analysis Results.

Arithmetic SE B .07 .06 .05 .06 .06 .06 .08 .04 .03 .00 16.57 55.7 b B English SE B .01 .07 .06 .07 .07 .07 .09 .05 .04 .01 10.79 45 b B Hebrew Language SE B .01 .07 .06 .07 .07 .07 .09 .05 .04 .01 6.29 32.2 b B Science SE B .01 .06 .06 .06 .06 .06 .08 .04 .04 .01 17.9 60.3 b

Parents age Family status Religiosity Ethnicity Childs gender Education Requirements Enforcement Punishment Responsiveness F % of explained variance Note: pr.05; pr.01.

.03 .08 .14 .11 .14 .20 .04 .02 .14 .03

.03 .08 .16 .12 .02 .14 .44 .01 .01 .31

.01 .02 .08 .02 .05 .02 .22 .05 .11 .00

.01 .02 .09 .02 .00 .06 .05 .49 .12 .26

.00 .02 .00 .13 .08 .20 .04 .01 .09 .00

.02 .03 .00 .16 .01 .09 .49 .10 .01 .22

.00 .02 .02 .01 .12 .06 .22 .03 .13 .00

.01 .02 .02 .01 .03 .12 .13 .47 .05 .28

139

140

RACHEL PASTERNAK

PDS components had a signicant effect on academic achievement in all four subjects. Those ndings also conrm the third research hypothesis. We can therefore conclude that the research ndings conrm all three research hypotheses.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

This research has shed additional light on the concept PDS by describing six such styles, each of which was differentiated according to four components: making demands, enforcement of demands, punishment for noncompliance with those demands, and responsiveness to a childs request. These components were constructed on the basis of behaviors commonly observed among children aged 811. The research found that PDS does indeed exert a meaningful inuence on childrens academic achievements beyond what can be explained by sociodemographic background variables such as the mothers education, family income, ethnic origin, and the childs gender. The research hypotheses, that were all conrmed by the data, are also outgrowths of the two theories sociological and learningbehavior formation (Bandura, 1977; Maccoby & Martin, 1983; Pasternak, 2002, 2003; Rollins & Thomas, 1979). The PDS found to contribute the most to academic achievement was the progressive authoritative style, which involves high levels of making demands, enforcement as well as responsiveness to a childs request, together with low levels of punishment. The inuence of this parenting style ts the theory on the inculcation of social norms and social roles through rewards for good behavior and punishment for deviant behavior (Pasternak, 2002, 2003). This nding somewhat deviates from that commonly found in the research literature on parenting styles (Abar, Carter, & Winsler, 2009; Suldo et al., 2008; Turner et al., 2009). Whereas the Authoritative style was previously considered to have the greatest inuence on achievement (Baumrind, 1991; Chao, 2001; Dornbusch, 1987; Hickman et al., 2001; Turner et al., 2009; Yang, 2009), the current research identied an essentially new style, that of the progressive authoritative style, which represents a specic combination of components belonging to the broader category of PDS. We can therefore conclude that high levels of punishment do not contribute to a childs success in school. This nding supports the ndings obtained in the research on punishment in the education system (Docan, 2006; Guskey, 2004; Little & Akin-Little, 2008). The Authoritative style was also found to contribute to academic achievement although less so than did the progressive authoritative style.

Parental Discipline and Desire for Childrens School Success

141

The Permissive, like the Neglectful PDS, contributed little to a childs achievement, with the clear majority (about two-thirds) of the children with parents practicing this parenting style demonstrating low levels of academic success. The punitive style, which entails high levels of punishment, contributed least to success in school, with the majority of children of such parents failing to show any mastery in any subject area. These ndings likewise support the main research hypothesis. The corollary hypothesis was also conrmed: The greatest impact of PDS was observed in arithmetic; the most inuential component has been making demands. It appears that the higher the level of demands made, the greater the academic achievement the child will attain. Arithmetic is a subject that demands control, practice, and the preparation of homework; parents play a central role in motivating young children aged 811 to complete these tasks. Importantly, the ndings indicated that this inuence was not affected by the childs gender. Based on these ndings, we can now reach a number of conclusions about the relationship between childrens academic achievements and parental behavior as expressed in PDS. First, high levels of punishment clearly do not support childrens academic achievement. Parents tend to think that they can force children to invest in their studies through punitive actions. The ndings indicate that such behavior is superuous or ineffectual. A polar behavior, responsiveness to a childs request during childhood, appears to be the component contributing most to creating a positive relationship between parents and children while inspiring children to succeed in their studies. Second, making demands of children is necessary for childrens success in school. Its effect is felt most strongly in the acquisition of arithmetic and Hebrew language skills. When few demands are made, such as in the Permissive and the Neglectful styles, very low levels of academic achievement can be anticipated. Third, enforcement of the demands was the parental behavior found to contribute to achievement especially in English as a foreign language and in science. The ndings therefore do support the theoretical argument underlying the research. Parents do exert a meaningful inuence on their childrens success in school. Our research corroborates the literature in showing that one of the crucial factors in this process is what we have called PDS, a broader pattern of behavior including components such as making demands, enforcing demands, punishing, and responding to a childs request. Importantly, it is the different combinations of these four components that

142

RACHEL PASTERNAK

structure the various PDSs and inuence childrens achievements in the indicated directions. For instance, we found that about 61% of the parents in our sample made high demands but also strictly enforced those demands, while about 60% inicted punishment and about 50% responded to their childrens requests. making demands, enforcing them, and responding to a childs request were found to be the most meaningful and statistically signicant variables. Nonetheless, the determining factor for academic achievement was the degree to which each of these components was expressed in behavior. These results deserve special attention because they are based on information submitted by parents (mothers in the current research) themselves. Although it could be argued that the mothers participating in the research geared their responses to the researchers expectations because they were anxious to be socially acceptable, we would respond that such motivation may have inuenced the strength of the reported behaviors but not the trends themselves or their direction. However, the results of this study should be regarded with caution. The families were well educated and had middle to high incomes. Thus, extrapolating from these results and conclusions to other social-cultural contexts may be limited. On the basis of these limitations, future studies are recommended, such as referring to younger children or teenagers, fathers, and families from different levels of income and education. The research ndings also have practical implications. Awareness of the salience of discipline for improving academic achievement can inuence patterns of parenting in general, and PDS in particular. When viewed from a broader social perspective, we can conclude that PDS indicates the quality of the education and socialization being transmitted; hence, it has a crucial impact on childrens school success that is crucial for occupational and economic success.

REFERENCES
Abar, B., Carter, K. L., & Winsler, A. (2009). The effects of maternal parenting style and religious commitment on self-regulation, academic achievement, and risk behavior among African-American parochial college students. Journal of Adolescence, 32(2), 259273. Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. New York, NY: Prentice-Hall Inc. Baumrind, D. (1966). Effects of authoritative parental control on child behavior. Child Development, 37(4), 887907. Baumrind, D. (1967). Child care practices anteceding three patterns of preschool behavior. Genetic Psychology Monographs, 75(1), 4388.

Parental Discipline and Desire for Childrens School Success

143

Baumrind, D. (1971). Current patterns of parental authority. Developmental Psychology Monograph, 4(1, Pt 2), 1103. Baumrind, D. (1991). The inuence of parenting style on adolescent competence and substance abuse. Journal of Early Adolescence, 11(1), 5695. Baumrind, D. (1996). The discipline controversy revisited. Family Relations, 4(4), 405414. Baumrind, D. (2005). Patterns of parental authority and adolescent autonomy. New Directions for Child and Adolescent Development, 108, 6169. Berzonsky, M. D. (2004). Identity style, parental authority and identity commitment. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 33(3), 213220. Bronstein-Burrows, P. (1981). Patterns of parent behavior: A cross-cultural study. MerrillPalmer Quarterly, 27(2), 129143. Chan, K.-W., & Chan, S.-M. (2007). Hong Kong teacher education, students goal orientations and their relationship to perceived parenting styles. Educational Psychology, 27(2), 157172. Chao, R. K. (2001). Extending research on the consequences of parenting style for Chinese American and European Americans. Child Development, 72(6), 18321843. Coplan, R. J., Hastings, P. D., Lagace-Seguin, D. G., & Moulton, C. E. (2002). Authoritative and authoritarian mothers parenting goals, attributions and emotions across different childrearing contexts. Parenting: Science and Practice, 2, 126. Daddis, C. (2008). Similarity between early and middle adolescent close friends beliefs about personal jurisdiction. Social Development, 17(4), 10191038. Darling, N., Cumsille, P., & Pena-Alampay, L. (2005). Rules, legitimacy of parental authority and obligation to obey in Chile, the Philippines and the United States. New Directions for Child and Adolescent Development, 108, 4760. De Forest, J. (2009). Tilting at windmills? Judge Justine Wise Polier and the history of justice and education in New York City. History of Education Quarterly, 49(1), 6888. Devall, E. L. (2004). Positive parenting for high-risk families. Journal of Family and Consumer Science, 96(4), 2228. Docan, T. N. (2006). Positive and negative incentives in the classroom: An analysis of grading systems and student motivation. Journal of Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 6(2), 2140. Dornbusch, S. M. (1987). The relation of parenting style to adolescent school performance. Child Development, 58(5), 12441257. Dubow, E. F., Boxer, P., & Huesmann, L. R. (2009). Long-term effects of parents education on childrens educational and occupational success: Mediation by family interactions, child aggression and teenage aspirations. Journal of Developmental Psychology, 55(3), 224249. Dwairy, M. (2004). Parenting styles and mental health of Arab gifted adolescents. Gifted Child Quarterly, 48(4), 275286. Flashman, J. (2012). Academic achievement and its impact on friend dynamics. Sociology of Education, 85(1), 6180. Frey, A., Ruchkin, V., Martin, A., & Schwab-Stone, M. (2009). Adolescents in transition: School and family characteristics in the development of violent behaviors entering high school. Child Psychiatry and Human Development, 40(1), 113. Gallagher, B., & Cartwright-Hatton, S. (2008). The relationship between parenting factors and trait anxiety: Mediating role of cognitive errors and meta-cognition. Journal of Anxiety Disorders, 22(4), 722733.

144

RACHEL PASTERNAK

Guskey, T. R. (2004). Are zeros your ultimate weapon? Education Digest: Essential Readings Condensed for Quick Review, 70(3), 3135. Hern, C., & Lewko, J. H. (1994). Gender differences in factors related to parenting style: A study of high performance science students. Journal of Adolescent Research, 9, 262281. Hickman, C. W., Greenwood, G., & Miller, M. D. (1995). High school parent involvement: Relationships with achievement, grade level, SES and gender. Journal of Research and Development in Education, 28, 125134. Hickman, G. P., Toews, M. L., & Andrews, D. W. (2001). The differential inuence of authoritative parenting on the initial adjustment of male and female traditional college freshmen. Journal of the First-Year Experience & Students in Transition, 13(1), 2346. Howland, A., Anderson, J. A., Smiley, A. D., & Abbott, D. J. (2006). School liaisons: Bridging the gap between home and school. The School Community Journal, 16(2), 4768. Kissel, A. (2009). Wasting away: Chicagos declining core. Academic Questions, 22(3), 298313. Landa, B., & Even, S. (2009). The Israeli economy in the era of globalization: Strategic implications. Israel: INSS, The Institute for National Studies, Tel-Aviv University. Lee, I. F., & Tseng, C. L. (2008). Cultural conicts of the child-centered approach to early childhood education in Taiwan. An International Journal of Research and Development, 28(2), 183196. Little, S. G., & Akin-Little, A. (2008). Psychologys contributions to classroom management. Psychology in Schools, 45(3), 227234. Maccoby, E. E., & Martin, J. A. (1983). Socialization in the context of the family: Parent-child interaction. In (4th ed., pp. 1101 P. H. Mussen & E. M. Hetherington (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology: Vol. 4. Socialization, personality, and social development (pp. 1101). New York, NY: Wiley. Mandara, J. (2006). The impact of family functioning on African American males academic achievement: A review and clarication of the empirical literature. Teacher College Record, 108(2), 206223. Meteyer, K. B., & Perry-Jenkins, M. (2009). Dyadic parenting and childrens externalizing symptoms. Family Relation, 58(3), 289302. Milnitsky-Sapiro, C., Turiel, E., & Nucci, L. (2006). Brazilian adolescents conceptions of autonomy and parental authority. Cognitive Development, 21(3), 317331. Nash, R. (1990). Bourdieu on education and social and cultural reproduction. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 11(4), 431447. Nguyen, P. V. (2008). Perceptions of Vietnamese fathers acculturation levels, parenting styles and mental health outcomes in Vietnamese American adolescents. Social Work, 53(4), 337346. Pasternak, R. (2002). The rst circle. Tel Aviv: Eitav (in Hebrew). Pasternak, R. (2003). The family as an educator. In R. Pasternak (Ed.), Sociology of education: Selected issues (Vol. 7, pp. 202252). Tel Aviv: The Open University of Israel (in Hebrew). Pasternak, R. (2004). The concept of community in education. In R. Pasternak (Ed.), Sociology of education: Selected issues (Vol. 4, pp. 269342) (in Hebrew). Tel-Aviv: The Open University of Israel. Pearson, E., & Rao, N. (2003). Socialization goals, parental practices and peer competence in Chinese and English preschoolers. Early Child Development and Care, 173(1), 131146. PISA. (2011). Data analysis manual: SPSS (2nd ed.). New York, NY.

Parental Discipline and Desire for Childrens School Success

145

Reback, R. (2008). Demand (and supply) in an inter-district public school choice program. Economics of Education Review, 27(4), 402416. Rollins, B. C., & Thomas, D. L. (1979). Parental support, power, and control techniques in the socialization of children. In W. R. Burre, R. Hill, F. I. Nye & I. L. Reiss (Eds.), Contemporary theories about the family: Research-based theories (pp. 317364). New York, NY: Free Press. Roopnarine, J. L., Krishnakumar, A., Metindogam, A., & Evans, M. (2006). Links between parental styles, parent-child academic interaction, parent-school interaction and early academic skills and social behaviors in young children of English-speaking Caribbean immigrants. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 21(2), 238252. Rothbaum, F., & Weisz, J. R. (1994). Parental caregiving and child externalizing behavior in nonclinical samples: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 116, 5574. Shanahan, L., McHale, S. M., Crouter, A. C., & Osgood, D. W. (2007). Warmth with mothers and fathers from middle childhood to late adolescence: Within- and between-family comparisons. Developmental Psychology, 43(3), 551563. Smetana, J. (2000). Middle-class African-American adolescents and parents conceptions of parental authority and parenting practices: A longitudinal investigation. Child Development, 71(6), 16721686. Smetana, J., Crean, H. F., & Campione-Barr, N. (2005). Adolescents and parents changing conceptions of parental authority. New Directions for Child and Adolescent Development, 108, 3146. Sorkhabi, N. (2005). Applicability of Baumrinds parent typology to collective cultures: Analysis of cultural explanations of parent socialization effects. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 29(6), 552563. Statistical Abstract of Israel. (2011). Statistical Abstract of Israel (Vol. 62, p. 554). Jerusalem, Israel: Central Bureau of Statistics. Steinberg, L., Lamborn, S. D., Darling, N., Mounts, N. S., & Dornbusch, S. M. (1994). Over-time changes in adjustment and competence among adolescents from authoritative, authoritarian, indulgent and neglectful families. Child Development, 65, 754770. Steinberg, L., Lamborn, S. D., Dornbusch, S. M., & Darling, N. (1992). Impact of parenting practices on adolescent achievement: Authoritative parenting, school involvement and encouragement to succeed. Child Development, 63, 12661281. Steinberg, L., Mounts, N. S., Lambon, S. D., & Dornbusch, S. M. (1991). Authoritative parenting and adolescent adjustment across varied ecological niches. Journal of Research on Adolescents, 1, 1936. Steutel, J., & Spiecker, B. (2000). Authority in educational relationships. Journal of Moral Education, 29(3), 323337. Suldo, S. M., Mihalas, S., Powell, H., & French, R. (2008). Ecological predictors of substance use in middle school students. School Psychology Quarterly, 23(3), 373388. Turner, E. A., Chandler, M., & Heffer, R. W. (2009). The inuence of parenting styles, achievement motivation and self-efcacy on academic performance in college students. Journal of College Student Development, 50(3), 337346. Wei, M., Den, B., & Zhou, Y. (2009). Teacher interpersonal behaviour and student achievement in English as a foreign language classrooms in China. Learning Environments Research, 12(3), 157174.

146

RACHEL PASTERNAK

Williamson, P., Bondy, E., Langley, L., & Mayne, D. (2005). Meeting the challenge of highstakes testing while remaining child-centered: The representations of two urban teachers. Childhood Education, 81(4), 190196. Yang, K. W. (2009). Discipline or punish? Some suggestions for school policy and teacher practice. Language Arts, 87(1), 4961. Zhang, W., & Fuligni, A. J. (2006). Authority, autonomy and family relationships among adolescents in urban and rural China. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 16(4), 527537.