Chapter 2 -- Child Care and Children's Development
Child Care for Low Income Families:
Directions for Research...
Chapter 2 -- Child Care and Children's
Development
The Issue in Brief
Research presented at the first two workshops on child care
for low-income families (Phillips, 1995) points to a relatively
small supply of care for infants and school-age children, for
children with disabilities and special health care needs, and for
parents with unconventional or shifting work hours. These
scarcities exacerbate other barriers that low-income families
experience in matching the type of care used with the features of
care that best meet their needs.
Moreover, the quality of care available to low-income families is
highly variable; quality matters because, as numerous
observational studies have demonstrated, variation in quality has
discernible effects on children s development, perhaps more so
for low-income children. A sizable minority of the care
arrangements available to low-income children falls into a range
of quality that some conclude may compromise development, and
there is a very limited supply of arrangements at the high end of
the quality spectrum. Children from low-income families who are
in home-based child care particularly those that are exclusively
dependent on maternal income are more likely to be enrolled in
poorer-quality arrangements than are their higher-income peers.
Inequities in access to quality do not appear to characterize
center-based care, in part because some low-income families have
access to part-day, center-based early intervention programs that
emphasize the delivery of comprehensive, high-quality care (e.g.,
Head Start) (Phillips, 1995).
Unstable child care affects all families, but poor and low-income
families are unduly affected by irregular and shifting work
schedules, marginal employment, and in some cases, the financial
necessity of relying on fragile and therefore unstable child care
arrangements. Instability of care is of special concern for
infants, a third of whom experience at least three different
arrangements in the first year of life (National Institute of
Child Health and Human Development, 1995).
This constellation of issues regarding equity of access to
stable, beneficial child care is an especially promising area for
further research given its significant implications for the
policy choices that must inevitably be made between using
subsidies to expand low-income families access to care or to
upgrade the quality and reliability of the care that already
exists. Are there cumulative effects, over time, that derive
from the modest but pervasive effects of poor-quality care on
children s social, language, health, and cognitive development?
What are the ripple or contagion effects associated with
poor-quality child care arrangements when, for example, the
behavioral problems of one or two children exposed to these
environments affect the dynamics of an entire classroom? What is
known about how children s home and child care environments
interact to affect development, particularly at the extremes of
quality? And what are the effects of variation in the quality
and continuity of care on the quality and consistency of
childrearing that parents are able to provide?
Directions for Research
Participants in the third workshop, in their discussions on the
effect of child care on children s development, addressed four
general areas: (1) the role of child care as an intervention in
the lives of low-income children; (2) the importance of capturing
the dynamics of children s child care experiences; (3) expansion
of the range of effects of child care examined in research beyond
outcomes for individual children to include families,
communities, peer groups, schools, and others (effects on
families work are addressed in Chapter 3); and (4) development
of a broader conception of child care quality that is relevant to
current policy issues.
Child Care as Intervention
Several participants noted that child care is often a focus of
research on low-income families because it is considered an
avenue of intervention in the lives of children from
disadvantaged backgrounds. This viewpoint highlights the
importance of narrowing the traditional divide between the
research on early intervention programs (those that are
specifically designed to compensate for perceived environmental
deficiencies, that typically operate on part-day schedules, and
that provide comprehensive services) and the research on full-day
child care that, until recently, has tended to be seen as not
providing the same potential for enrichment. High-quality child
care can provide children from disadvantaged backgrounds with
developmental screening, health assessments, and access to
educational materials; poor-quality care may compound the
potentially detrimental influences of other aspects of
disadvantaged environments.
The participants cautioned that an accurate portrayal of child
care requires that the influence of child care be examined in
conjunction with other influences on children s lives, such as
their home environments, neighborhoods, and access to health care
and other services; most research on child care has examined the
influence of child care apart from other influences on children s
lives. The major challenge to future research on these
questions, according to workshop participants, is that of
measuring the effects of child care not in isolation, but in
conjunction with other important influences on children s health
and development. In fact, one of the most basic challenges to
existing research that was raised at the workshop was the
question of the relative influence of child care in the broader
scheme of all influences on children s lives in affecting such
larger issues as child poverty, children s long-term development,
and family well-being.
Participants suggested that future research consider what short-
and long-term effects child care has on the lives of low-income
children and how much of an intervention is needed to make a
difference. They also noted the importance of addressing the
value-added effect on low-income children of components of some
child care arrangements, such as developmental screening, health
assessments, and access to educational materials. Several
participants suggested that studies should ask how child care and
home environments interact and how they modify, potentiate, or
compensate for each others influence (what happens, for example,
when children take part in high-quality child care for part of
the day, then spend the remainder of their time in unsupportive
home or child care environments?).
Capturing the Dynamics of Child Care Experiences for
Children
Child care is not a single intervention in children s lives.
Rather, children move in and out of different child care
arrangements and experience multiple arrangements simultaneously
over the course of their early childhood years. Growing evidence
that children experience more than one child care arrangement in
their childhood years poses challenges to the typical approach of
assessing one arrangement at one point in time and assuming that
this adequately captures the effects of child care on
development.
One workshop participant noted the need for research to identify
the variety of naturally occurring child care configurations,
such as the link between part-day Head Start and the child care
used for the rest of the day, or the blends of relative and
family day care that many families rely on, in order to better
capture the realities of families child care arrangements.
Another participant cited the need for studies that address the
processes that underlie parents child care choices over the
course of time that they rely on nonparental care. Other
participants pointed to the importance of examining the
sequencing of child care arrangements across the early childhood
and school-age years identifying mixes of arrangements and the
times and places that transitions occurred rather than looking at
single settings experienced by children at isolated points in
time.
Expansion of Child Care Effects
As more and younger children spend increasing amounts of time
with caregivers who are not family members and the very role of
child care changes from one of providing supplemental experiences
to one of providing basic socialization, researchers will need to
reconsider the narrow range of outcomes that are typically
included in child care studies. Moving beyond individual effects
on children, participants suggested, studies will have to
consider different units of analysis, such as the family
(including siblings), the community, peer groups, and the school,
among other variables.
Researchers could look at how child care choices are affected by
family structure and, in turn, affect the childrearing dynamics
within families. At the community level, little is known about
whether and how various characteristics of the child care that is
available to low-income families affects such community
characteristics as neighborhood safety, rates of parental
employment, the local epidemiology of child health, aggregate
school readiness, special education enrollment, and school
dropout rates.
Furthermore, several speakers noted, as child care assumes a more
pervasive role in America s increasingly culturally diverse
society, researchers will need to expand the array of outcomes
measured to take into consideration such issues as child care
providers efforts to preserve families cultures, to teach
English as a second language, and to adopt multicultural
approaches. Useful assessments of child care environments will
increasingly need to consider the ethnic, cultural, and
linguistic mix of the children in care, and the corresponding
backgrounds of their child care providers (see Phillips and
Crowell, 1994, for further discussion of these issues). A
fundamental challenge in this area concerns the basic ingredients
of quality care; what is developmentally beneficial for one child
may not be so beneficial for another.
The Policy Relevance of Quality
Several participants suggested the need to broaden the conception
of quality in the next generation of studies of child care to
include more policy-relevant considerations. They noted the need
to rectify the relative inattention paid to informal child care
arrangements, to consider more policy-relevant indices (e.g.,
reimbursement rates relative to cost of care, access to public
and private subsidies, participation in state and local quality
improvement initiatives), and to consider aspects of the
surrounding community that provide an infrastructure for
high-quality care. Especially in the current climate of
financial cutbacks, some suggested that it would be wise to
conduct cost-benefit analyses similar to those that have applied
to early intervention programs (e.g., Barnett, 1985) and to
examine the returns to the community of investing in child care.
In the context of discussing quality, one participant proposed
that the main issue was one of identifying thresholds of quality
that is, those levels below which children s development is
compromised and above which developmental gains occur, as well as
thresholds of quality beyond which there are diminishing returns
of investments in quality. This approach to assessing the
developmental effects of variations in quality is distinct from
the correlational analyses that dominate the research literature;
it would shift the general debate from one of more is better to
one of how much is good enough, which participants cited as a
more pertinent question in today s policy context. The speaker
also suggested that research be conducted in coordination with
child care resource and referral agencies that maintain sizable
databases on the local supply and characteristics of child care,
as well as in conjunction with monitoring activities that are
carried out by regulatory agencies and also involve data
collection.
Future research should assess the critical dimensions of quality
for informal child care arrangements and determine what
strategies short of regulation and accreditation improve the
quality of informal care, participants suggested. Researchers
could study how quality is attained in the informal market and
via whom regulators, consumers, policy makers in order to
identify the most effective mechanisms for improving quality,
such as training, regulation, consumer education, accreditation,
and improved provider compensation. Lessons have been learned
about successful means of improving quality of care in more
formal child care settings, such as child care centers and
regulated family day care homes (see, for example, Smith et al.,
1995; Larner, 1994); the next step involves extending this work
to informal arrangements and determining what conditions are
necessary to sustain the positive effects of quality improvement
efforts, several participants noted.
Go to the next section.
Return to the Table of Contents.
|