A Longitudinal Examination of a Father Education Program’s Impact on Low-Income Fathers’ Involvement with Their Children. Chineme Jane Otuonye
O
ver the past four decades, research has consistently shown that fathers’ involvement uniquely contributes to children’s development in ways that are independent of mothers (Lamb & Lewis, 2010; Tamis-LeMonda et al., 2004). Specifically, fathers’ participation in quality interaction with their children has been linked to improved children’s vocabulary, cognitive, and behavioral outcomes (Cano et al., 2020; Downer & Mendez, 2005; Malin et al., 2014; Mulligan, 2002; Tamis-LeMonda et al., 2004). This quality interaction comprises fathers’ engagement with children in activities such as caregiving, play, library visits, and shared book reading. For example, in a semi-structured free play, Rowe, Coker, and Pan (2004) found that fathers’ use of complex language elicited more linguistic and cognitive demands on children. Pancscofar and Vernon-Feagans (2006) corroborated similar findings by demonstrating that during free play, fathers’ use of different word roots significantly contributed to children’s expressive language. Low-income fathers are often the focus of father involvement research as they are often at risk of low-quality parenting and interaction. For example, Bianchi and Milkie (2010), Geller, (2013), and Geller et al. (2011) suggest that low-income fathers are at risk of low-quality parenting due to barriers associated with their socioeconomic status (SES), such as economic hardship and limited position to provide for their children due to employment barriers and prior incarceration. Given that according to Bronfenbrenner’s ecological theory, fathers function as positive proximal partners that help promote children’s development (Pleck, 2007), the findings on low-income fathers’ relationship with their children are of concern.
creation of such programs for fathers may be one way to bridge the gap between the culture of fatherhood and the conduct of fathers and to increase the parenting options for fathers. That is, education programs may be one way to establish a connection between the “societal norms and expressive symbols pertaining to fatherhood” and the “routine activities of men when they are trying to act fatherly” (LaRossa, 2007, p.88). Furthermore, education programs are deemed necessary because many fathers find themselves unprepared to assume an active role in interacting with their children (McBride, 1990). This unpreparedness can result from the lack of preparation and education of male parenting, knowledge about normal child development, and little exposure to paternal models (Kliman & Vukelich, 1985; Palkovitz, 1984; Smith & Smith, 1981). The creation of father education programs is fortunate as it benefits explicitly economicallydisadvantaged fathers and their children. This statement is supported by previous research conducted by Fagan & Iglesias, (1999) on 96 fathers and father figures recruited from Head Start sites to examine the effect of fathers’ participation in an involvement intervention program. The results of this study suggested that a high dosage of father participation in the intervention increased fathers’ level of involvement with their children and children’s mathematics readiness scores, emphasizing the positive effect of fathers’ education programs on father-child dyads. Overall, the results from this study show that father education programs are one way to promote the involvement of low-income fathers in their young children’s lives, eventually bridging the gap in quality parenting and interaction caused by socioeconomic background.
Father Education Programs Fortunately, the recent acknowledgment of the important influence of fathers’ involvement has led to the creation of a plethora of father education programs. Father education programs are programs designed specifically to fit the needs of fathers to encourage those who wish to be involved in childrearing activities. According to McBride (1991), the
Child Academic Outcomes Given that previous research has shown the subsequent effect of father education programs on low-income children’s development (mathematics readiness scores; Fagan & Iglesias, 1999), research must focus on other developmental areas that such programs can improve. One important area of focus
