Análisis de las observaciones de los estudiantes sobre los profesores de la Facultad de

Both parents completed a series of questions on parenting style, developed for the Growing Up in Australia study (LSAC, Zubrick et al., 2014). In contrast to the Pianta scale, which emphasises aspects of parent-child interaction led by the child, parenting style captures the adult’s approach to the task of child-rearing and characteristics of parent-led actions. The items reflect the extent to which parent-initiated actions are characterised by consistency (5 items, e.g. When you give this child an instruction or request to do something, how often do you make sure that he/she does it?), hostility (6 items, e.g. How often are you angry when you punish this child?) and warmth (6 items, e.g. [I] hug or hold this child for no particular reason).

In general, parents tended to score higher on warmth and consistency and lower on hostility. Table 5.3 compares the scores of Primary and Secondary Caregivers at age five years, and provides the comparable figures from age three years.

97

Table 5.3: Descriptive statistics for parenting style scales at 5 years, contrasted with mean scores at age 3 years, as reported by PCG and SCG

5 Years 3 Years

Mean (SD) Range % with ‘best’

score Mean Primary Caregiver Warmth 4.7 (0.4) 1 - 5 54% 4.8 Hostility 1.8 (0.5) 1 - 4.3 4% 1.8 Consistency 4.1 (0.7) 1 - 5 12% 4.0 Secondary Caregiver Warmth 4.5 (0.5) 1 - 5 32% 4.6 Hostility 1.8 (0.5) 1 – 4.3 3% 1.7 Consistency 3.9 (0.7) 1 - 5 7% 3.8

Note: ‘Best’ score means maximum score for warmth and consistency scales and lowest score for hostility scale.

Within families, Primary Caregivers had somewhat warmer and more consistent parenting styles than Secondary Caregivers, but did not differ in terms of hostility. For example, over half of Primary Caregivers (54%) had the highest possible warmth score compared to just one-third of Secondary Caregivers (Table 5.3). Both parental figures had similar rates of having the ‘best’ score on the hostility measure, however, at just 4% and 3% respectively. On the consistency subscale, 12% of Primary Caregivers and 7% of Secondary Caregivers had the ‘best’ possible score.

The correlations between parents for these three scales are a useful indicator of the similarities between them: a correlation of 0 would indicate no relationship at all while a correlation approaching 1 would indicate that the scores are highly associated. The correlations were .24, .31 and .34 for warmth, consistency and hostility, respectively. This suggests that, although the scales are modestly associated, there was quite a lot of variability between Primary and Secondary Caregiver scores across the three domains.

To examine socio-demographic trends in parenting styles, scores were separated into deciles: the lowest- scoring decile for the warmth and consistency scales and the highest-scoring decile for the hostility scale. Given the tendency towards favourable scores overall, they cannot be interpreted as indicating objectively ‘poor’ parenting. Instead, they are relative measures, indicating a less favourable relationship in these respects than for other parents. In general, socio-demographic differences in parenting styles were modest.

Primary Caregivers

No one socio-demographic characteristic emerged as being strongly related to all three scales. The urban/ rural divide was statistically significant on each Primary Caregiver scale but the absolute differences were small and did not consistently favour one region over the other. Rural Primary Caregivers were more likely to be in the least favourable warmth decile (12% versus 10%) but less likely to be in the least favourable decile for hostility (10% versus 12%) or consistency (9% versus 11%).

98

Figure 5.4: Percentage of 5-year-olds whose Primary Caregivers reported levels of warmth, hostility and consistency in the least favourable decile, by family type

On the warmth scale, the biggest differences were observed in relation to family size rather than whether it was a one-parent or two-parent family. Primary Caregivers in one-child families were less likely to be in the least favourable warmth decile (Figure 5.4). Only 6% of one-parent/one-child Primary Caregivers were lower in warmth, compared to 13% of those in one-parent/multi-child families. Similarly, for two-parent families, only 7% of Primary Caregivers with one child were in the least favourable warmth decile compared to 12% of those with more than one child.

On the hostility scale, Primary Caregivers were more likely to be in the least favourable decile if the Study Child was a boy, but again, the absolute differences were small (12% compared to 10%). Primary Caregivers in one-parent families with multiple children were the most likely to be in the least favourable hostility category (15%) and those in two- parent/one-child families were the least likely (8%).

Primary Caregivers in one-parent/multi-child families were also the most likely to feature in the least favourable decile for consistency (18%), with those in two-parent/multi-child families the least likely (9%). The consistency measure showed more socio-demographic trends than either warmth or hostility, with an increased likelihood of a Primary Caregiver being in the least favourable decile also observed for income (lowest income quintile 15% versus 7% in highest); education (Junior Cert. education 19% versus 7% for degree-level) and social class (13% semi/unskilled versus 7% professional/managerial).

Secondary Caregivers

There were also relatively few socio-demographic trends for the Secondary Caregivers’ parenting styles. Child’s gender was statistically significant for two of the scales, but with modest absolute differences: Secondary Caregivers were more hostile towards boys than girls (12% versus 9%) but less consistent with girls (16% in lowest decile compared to 11% for boys).

% of 5-year-olds 0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12% 14% 16% 18% 20% 22% 6% 13% 7% 12% 12% 15% 8% 11% 13% 18% 11% 9%

One parent, one child

One parent, two+ children

Two parents, one child

Two parents, two+ children

One parent, one child

One parent, two+ children

Two parents, one child

Two parents, two+ children

One parent, one child

One parent, two+ children

Two parents, one child

Two parents, two+ children

99 Interestingly, there was a similar trend towards lower warmth in multi-child families among Secondary Caregivers (all of whom were in two-parent households by default), as was observed for Primary Caregivers. Only 5% of those with one child were in the least favourable warmth decile compared to 11% of Secondary Caregivers with multiple children, although cell sizes were small in some cases.

In terms of consistency, apart from child gender, the most significant relationship was with household social class; 22% of Secondary Caregivers in ‘never employed’ families were in the least favourable consistency decile compared to 11% of those in the professional/managerial group. The non-manual/skilled manual and semi/unskilled manual groups were both at 16% (in the least favourable consistency decile).