Parental Socialization and Children’s Engagement in Math, Science, and Computer Activities

1. Parental Socialization and Children’s Engagement in Math, Science, and Computer Activities Sandra D. Simpkins W. Todd Bartko Jacquelynne S. Eccles University of Michigan This research was funded by Grant HD17553 from the National Institute for Child Health and Human Development and Grant 0089972 from the National Science Foundation to Jacquelynne Eccles and Pamela Davis-Kean.

2. Parental Socialization • Parental Modeling is correlated with • Involvement in sports and computer activities • Parental Encouragement is associated with • Involvement in sports and math activities • Confidence and interest in computer, sports, and math activities • Parent-Child Coactivity is linked with • Computer knowledge • Reading achievement • Knowledge, competence, and involvement in sports activities

3. Gender Differences • Children’s after-school activity engagement • Boys are more likely than girls to engage in • Computer activities • Math activities • Science fairs and other science-related activities • Parental Socialization • Parent Encouragement • No gender differences in computer activities • Mixed results concerning math and science activities • Parent-child Coactivity • More explanation about science museum exhibits to boys • More parent-son computer coactivity

4. Eccles’ Expectancy-Value Model • Parent & Family Characteristics • Education • Family Income • Parental Socialization • Coactivity • Encouragement • Modeling Child Activity Engagement • Child Characteristics • Sex • Age • Aptitudes

5. Goals of the Study • To test the role of parents in socializing their children’s involvement in out of school math, science, and computer activities • To test the role of parents in socializing any gender differences in these activities

6. Childhood and Beyond Study • Children • 125 2nd grade children • mean age of 8.20 years, SD = .44 • 123 3rd grade children • mean age of 9.24 years, SD = .43 • 200 5th grade children • mean age of 11.16 years, SD = .37 • 448 Families • Mostly European-American and spoke English • 40% of mothers & 54% of fathers earned a degree from a 4-year college. • Median annual household income: $60,000 - $70,000

7. Measures: Children’s Activities • Child report • How often they • Used a computer outside of school • Engaged in math activities • Engaged in science activities • Scale: 0 = never, 6 = almost every day for a lot of time • Parent report • In the last week, how much did their child • Engaged in math and science activities for pleasure • Use the microcomputer for activities other than action video games • Scale: 1 = 0 hours, 9 = 12-16 hours, 12 = over 25 hours

8. Measures: Parent Socialization • Parent encouragement • How much they generally encouraged their child to • Work on or play with a computer outside of school • Do math-related (e.g., math-oriented games such as mastermind) or science-related (e.g., chemistry sets) activities at home • Scale: 1 = strongly discourage, 7 = strongly encourage • Parent-child coactivity • Generally, how often did they • Work with their child on the computer • Engage in math or science activities with their child • Scale: 1 = never, 3 = 2-3 times a month, 7 = every day for 30 minutes or more • Parent modeling • In the last week, how much time they spent on • Math- and science-related activities • A microcomputer for activities other than action video games • Scale: 1 = 0 hours, 6 = 10-15 hours, 8 = more than 20 hours

9. Measures: Parent & Child Characteristics • Parent education • Highest level of education across each mother-father dyad • Family annual income • Digit Span • Assess children’s mathematics aptitudes • Stevenson & Newman, 1986 • Includes 12 sets of whole numbers

10. Gender Differences • Children’s Activity Engagement • No significant gender difference for math and science activities • Boys used computers more often than girls,F (3, 239) = 3.21, p < .05 • Parental Socialization • No significant gender differences

11. Bivariate Correlations: Computer Use *p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.

12. Bivariate Correlations: Math & Science *p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.

13. Predicting Children’s Activity Engagement Child aptitude Paternal-report of child engagement Child grade Maternal-report of child engagement Child gender Parent education Parent Socialization Child-report of child engagement Family income Maternal coactivity Paternal coactivity Maternal modeling Paternal modeling Maternal encouragement Paternal encouragement

14. Computer Use .10* Child aptitude Paternal-reported computer use R2 = .43 .11* .36*** .65*** Child grade .19*** Maternal-reported computer use R2 = .50 .08* Child gender .15*** .69*** Parent Socialization R2 = .03 Parent education Child-reported computer use R2 = .27 .48*** .11* .43*** Family income .57*** .62*** .37*** .39*** .67*** .71*** Maternal coactivity Paternal coactivity Maternal modeling Paternal modeling Maternal encouragement Paternal encouragement X2 (58) = 140.71, p < .001, TLI = .98, CFI = .99, RMSEA = .05

15. Math and Science .10* Child aptitude Paternal-reported math & science R2 = .34 .11* .36*** .58*** Child grade 23* Maternal-reported math & science R2 = .44 .65*** Child gender .19* Parent Socialization R2 = .03 Parent education Child-reported math & science R2 = .07 .12* .11* .43*** Family income .62*** .47*** .24*** .14* .41*** .22*** Maternal coactivity Paternal coactivity Maternal modeling Paternal modeling Maternal encouragement Paternal encouragement X2 (58) = 122.29, p < .001, TLI = .98, CFI = .99, RMSEA = .05

16. Conclusions • Synergistic combination of socialization methods • Utility of parental modeling • Computer vs. math and science activities • Few gender differences in parental socialization or children’s activities