Sequence of child care type and child development: What role does peer exposure play?

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2009.08.005Get rights and content

Abstract

Child care arrangements change as children age; in general, hours in home-based child care decrease as hours in center-based settings increase. This sequence of child care type may correspond with children's developmental needs; the small peer groups and low child–adult ratios typical of home-based care may allow for more individual child–adult time for infants and toddlers, whereas the social stimulation found in center-based care during the preschool years may prepare children for kindergarten. This study examined associations between school readiness and the timing of child care type among children in NICHD's Study of Early Child Care and Youth Development (N = 1349). Findings suggest that children who experience home-based care during the infant–toddler period and center care during the preschool period display the improved cognitive outcomes, but not the increased behavioral problems, generally associated with sustained center care attendance. Continuous home-based care was associated with higher social status at school entry partially through smaller peer groups during the preschool period. These patterns did not differ by child or family characteristics. Implications for policy and research are discussed.

Section snippets

Types of child care

Child care and early education settings are generally categorized into one of three main types based on the child's relationship to the caregiver and the setting in which they take place: (1) “informal,” nonparental home-based care, often referred to as family, friend or neighbor care or “kith and kin” care, that is provided in a private home (either the child's or the caregiver's) by a relative or trusted family friend; (2) “formal” family child care that takes place in the caregiver's home

Child care type and child development

Developmental psychology theory and research emphasize the importance of early experiences, including child care, for children's later development (Bronfenbrenner and Morris, 1998, Shonkoff and Phillips, 2000). Research has not identified one “best” type of child care; if high-quality, all child care can foster positive child development. However, several studies have linked more time in center-based care with improved cognitive and language development (Loeb et al., 2004, Loeb et al., 2007,

Exposure to peers

Previous research suggests that the presence of structured educational environments do not explain the differences in quality and child outcomes across child care types (Kontos et al., 1994). Variability in peer exposure, as measured by group size (i.e., number of children in the setting) and child–adult ratio, present another possible explanation for these differences. Infants and toddlers may not be cognitively or socially equipped to adapt to high levels of social stimulation, and large peer

Moderating effects of child and family characteristics

Bioecological theory emphasizes that individuals are agents in their own development (Bronfenbrenner & Morris, 1998). In turn, children's background characteristics, including gender, temperament, and family income status, may moderate how the sequence and timing of child care type affect development (Crockenberg, 2003, Maccoby and Lewis, 2003). In one study conducted in child care centers in the Netherlands, boys were more likely to initiate negative interactions in child care than girls (

The current study

Despite the wealth of research on child care and children's development, how the developmental timing of child care type and peer exposure affect school readiness remains unexplored. The present study examined children's sequence of child care type from infancy through the preschool years and their cognitive and social-emotional outcomes at age 4 1/2, kindergarten, and first grade using longitudinal data from the NICHD SECCYD. This study differs from previous research in three main ways. First,

Participants

Participants in the NICHD SECCYD were recruited beginning in 1991 at hospitals at ten sites across the country: Boston, MA; Lawrence, KS; Seattle, WA; Orange County, CA; Little Rock, AR; Pittsburgh, PA; Philadelphia, PA; Morganton, NC; Madison, WI; and Charlottesville, VA. The range of regulations governing child–staff ratios and group sizes in the nine states included in the sample did not differ significantly from those in the other 41 states (NICHD ECCRN, 1999). Sample exclusion criteria

Descriptive results

As shown above in Table 4, there was significant and substantial differences between the children who experienced different child care sequences. Children who attended Continuous Center Care tended to be higher in their families’ birth order and had mothers who held more positive views toward maternal employment and who worked longer averages than those in the other two sequences. In addition, they systematically experienced lower quality child care than the children who followed a Home-Center

Discussion

Over the first 5 years of life, there is a gradual shift from home- to center-based child care (NICHD ECCRN, 2004). Previous research offers some evidence that the small groups characteristic of home-based care may better meet the developmental needs of infants and toddlers, whereas the larger peer groups typical of center care may be more developmentally appropriate for preschool-age children (e.g., Dowsett et al., 2008, Loeb et al., 2004, Loeb et al., 2007). The present study tested (1)

Conclusion

There does not appear to be a single type or sequence of child care that is “optimal” for children's development; rather, effects vary across behavioral, cognitive, and social domains. This study provides some evidence that children who experience nonparental home-based settings during the infant–toddler period and center-based settings after age three exhibit a more positive combination of cognitive and behavioral competence than those in continuous center-based care and those who never attend

Acknowledgements

The author would like to thank Rachel Dunifon, Mildred Warner, Moncrieff Cochran, the HD writing group, and anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments on earlier versions of this paper. This research was supported by grant #90YE0089 from the Child Care Bureau, Administration for Children and Families, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and a dissertation grant from the Cornell University College of Human Ecology. The contents are solely the responsibility of the author and do not

References (69)

  • T.M. Achenbach

    Manual for the child behavior checklist/4–18 and profile

    (1991)
  • T.M. Achenbach

    Manual for the teacher report form and profile

    (1991)
  • L. Ahnert et al.

    Shared care: Establishing a balance between home and child care settings

    Child Development

    (2003)
  • P.D. Allison

    Missing data. Series: Quantitative applications in the social sciences

    (2002)
  • W.S. Barnett et al.

    The state of preschool 2007

    (2007)
  • W.S. Barnett et al.

    Educational effects of the tools of the mind curriculum: A randomized trial

    Early Childhood Research Quarterly

    (2008)
  • R.M. Baron et al.

    The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations

    Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

    (1986)
  • J. Belsky et al.

    Are there long-term effects of early child care?

    Child Development

    (2007)
  • L. Bergman et al.

    Studying individual development in an interindividual context: A person-oriented approach

    (2003)
  • U. Bronfenbrenner et al.

    The ecology of developmental processes

  • X. Cai et al.

    Parent and teacher agreement on Child Behavior Checklist items in a sample of preschoolers from low-income and predominantly African-American families

    Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology

    (2004)
  • B. Caldwell et al.

    Home observation for measurement of the environment

    (1984)
  • J. Capizzano et al.

    The number of child care arrangements used by children under five: Variation across states

    (2000)
  • J. Capizzano et al.

    Child care arrangements for children under five: Variation across states

    (2000)
  • K.A. Clarke-Stewart et al.

    Children at home and in day care

    (1994)
  • S. Crockenberg

    Rescuing the baby from the bathwater: How gender and temperament (may) influence how child care affects child development

    Child Development

    (2003)
  • D. Crosby et al.

    Child care assistance policies can affect the use of center-based care for children in low-income families

    Applied Developmental Science

    (2005)
  • E. Dearing et al.

    Within-child associations between income and externalizing and internalizing problems

    Developmental Psychology

    (2006)
  • E.J. De Schipper et al.

    Effects of child–caregiver ratio on the interactions between caregivers and children in child care centers: An experimental study

    Child Development

    (2006)
  • M.J.G. Deynoot-Schaub et al.

    Peer contacts of 15-month-old in child care: Links with child temperament, parent–child interaction and quality of child care

    Social Development

    (2006)
  • G.J. Duncan et al.

    Childcare quality and child outcomes: Drawing policy lessons from nonexperimental data

    American Journal of Evaluation

    (2006)
  • G.J. Duncan et al.

    The endogeneity problem in developmental studies

    Research in Human Development

    (2004)
  • ECLS-K Base Year Public Use Data Files and Electronic Codebook (2002). Available at...
  • R.A. Fabes et al.

    Children at play: The role of peers in understanding the effects of child care

    Child Development

    (2003)
  • Cited by (43)

    • Room to grow: examining participation and stability in child care subsidies using state administrative data

      2023, Early Childhood Research Quarterly
      Citation Excerpt :

      Inequalities in access to high-quality early care and educational experiences contribute to downstream achievement gaps in kindergarten and beyond (Chaudry et al., 2021). Moreover, many children experience frequent changes in or unstable early care and education arrangements; however, counts of these changes in arrangements underestimate care instability resulting from high caregiver or teacher turnover in the sector (Adams & Rohacek, 2010; Ansari & Winsler, 2013; Morrissey, 2010). The quality of early care and education relies on the consistency and warmth of child-caregiver interactions (Zaslow et al., 2016); when these relationships are interrupted, children's outcomes suffer.

    • Making gains or falling behind? Changes and stability in school readiness

      2017, Social Science Research
      Citation Excerpt :

      Thus, more recent cohorts of students entering kindergarten have greater experience in formal social institutions aimed a structuring their day and nurturing early educational development. As noted, participation in these types of early childhood education programs is associated with greater cognitive and non-cognitive skills at kindergarten entry (Gormley et al., 2005; Loeb et al., 2007; Morrissey, 2010; Votruba-Drzal et al., 2013). In addition to increased participation in early childhood education, significant federal, state, and private funds over the last decade have been earmarked for improving the quality of early childhood education (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2012).

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text