Abstract: Child-Parent Centers Buffer Children of High-School Dropouts from Adolescent Maladaptive Behaviors (Society for Prevention Research 24th Annual Meeting)

610 Child-Parent Centers Buffer Children of High-School Dropouts from Adolescent Maladaptive Behaviors

Schedule:
Friday, June 3, 2016
Grand Ballroom B (Hyatt Regency San Francisco)
* noted as presenting author
Momoko Hayakawa, PhD, Research Associate/Affiliate Graduate Faculty, University of Minnesota-Twin Cities, Minneapolis, MN
Michelle M. Englund, PhD, Research Associate, University of Minnesota-Twin Cities, Minneapolis, MN
Background: Long-term positive outcomes of the Child-Parent Center (CPC) program, an early childhood intervention for economically-disadvantaged families, have been documented across developmental domains (Reynolds et al., 2011). An important aspect of the CPC program is increasing parental involvement in the classroom. Given that lower parent involvement is related to higher levels of adolescent behavior problems (Loeber & Stouthamer-Loeber, 1986) and that these problems then predict substance use in emerging adulthood (Reef et al., 2010), research supports increased parental involvement as an important intervention strategy.

Researchers have also demonstrated that lower levels of maternal education predict lower parental school involvement (e.g. Davis-Kean, 2005). Extending this literature, we investigated mother’s education status (high school dropout vs. completion) as a moderator in a path analysis leading from CPC participation to parent involvement through adolescent behavioral adjustment to adult substance abuse.

Methods: The study sample is the Chicago Longitudinal Study (Reynolds, 2000) an investigation of the effects of the CPC program. All participants with substance abuse data (n = 1,203) were included in analyses. Measures include CPC participation, 1st-3rd grade parent involvement and expectations, 6th-7th grade behavioral/adjustment problems, and adult substance abuse. We controlled for demographic characteristics (e.g. gender, ethnicity, kindergarten achievement, neighborhood poverty).

Results: Our findings highlight the differential importance of CPC participation for later maladaptive behaviors:

1)      For children whose mothers completed high school, CPC participation increased school parent involvement (β = .16, p < .001) but not parent expectations. However, only parent expectations predicted reductions in problem behaviors (β = -.17, p < .001) and higher frustration tolerance (β =.17, p < .006). Lower problem behaviors predicted reductions in substance abuse (β =.25, p < .004) while higher frustration tolerance suggests a decreased trend in substance abuse (β = -.17, p < .06).

2)      For children whose mothers dropped out of high school, CPC participation increased both school parent involvement (β =.19, p<.001) and parent expectations (β =.13, p < .002). Furthermore, both parent involvement and expectations predicted reductions in problem behaviors (β = -.22, p < .001; β = -.13, p < .02 respectively). Parent involvement also predicted higher frustration tolerance (β = .18, p < .001).

Conclusions: Our results suggest that the CPC program provides children with a foundation for pro-social behaviors through increasing early parental involvement and expectations, especially for children of parents who dropped out of high school.