Schools and the Changing American Family - Research

School and American Family

According to the recent United States Census results, over nineteen million households in America were defined as single-parent households, with fourteen million of those characterized by single-mothers raising at least one child; the implications of this for schools within the United States are many and varied. The following inquiry comprehensively examines how the changing family has informed the public school system, and, more saliently, what must occur in contemporary school policy in order to better cater to the modern, American population.

In essence, while the American family has changed considerably during recent decades, many public schools have failed to address the needs of the evolving family dynamic in the United States. Author S. Coontz writes in her text entitled The Way We Really Are "with 50 percent of American children living in something other than a married-couple family with both biological parents present, and with the tremendous variety of male and female responsibilities in today's different families, the time for abstract pronouncements about good or bad family structures and correct or incorrect parental roles is past"]. By embracing this statement as undoubtedly correct, contemporary school policy must relinquish the proverbial moral high ground for simply seeking to do that which is best for the students. Regardless of which type of family structure is more beneficial to children, it remains that the current dynamics of American families require substantial accommodations from schools that they have thus far not received.

The Two-Parent House

Generally speaking, most social policies in the United States are geared toward the two-parent household. In schools, homework is given to young children with little consideration for their after-school, familial supports. School functions, such as holiday programs, typically occur during the week at night when a parent might be working. Field trips that extend beyond school hours may require parents leave work to pick up their children. In short, schools are guilty on a multiplicity of levels of the assumption that children go home to a mother and a father.

Two-parent households, particularly those that conform to the breadwinner- homemaker model in which one parent works and the other is home, are able to provide children with more parental time, supervision, and homework assistance. In this model, a parent is readily available should a child become sick and need to be picked up at school, and there is a strong relationship between the parent who is at home and the child or children. While this model seems to be advantageous to all involved, there are disadvantages to the traditional family as well. Most importantly, the parent who works is under significant pressure to provide, which can create stress-induced distance between him or her and the children.

The other, and increasingly more prevalent, structure of two-parent household in which both parents work decreases the potential for financial stress, yet increases stress in a variety of other dimensions. When both parents work, there is a fundamental need to discuss the household responsibilities, lest something as seemingly trivial as housework may become detrimental to a family. For schools, there is a fortunate, political trend toward recognizing households in which both parents work. However, there remain few accommodations for single-parent households.

The One-Parent House

Nineteen million, American households are headed by only one parent. The most salient, school-rooted considerations for families of this type are their increased potential for both financial difficulty as well as work-school schedule conflicts. Coontz writes in her aforementioned text that the size of people's bank account has a lot to do with what type of home they can provide, which in turn has a tremendous impact on children's health and well-being. Socioeconomically-challenged children are more likely to be obese, because healthy food is substantially more expensive than processed, empty-calorie containing food. Additionally, single-parent, socioeconomically challenged families are more likely to contain children with severe behavior problems, and the number of these families is unfortunately on the rise. In the 1970s, 37% of families living under the poverty line were able to transcend that line within one year. During the 1980s, that percentage had irrevocably decreased to 23% and is significantly lower now. Social immobility is an important consideration for public schools, particularly those that are afforded with a majority, middle-class or higher student population.

School Experience

A significant part of our self-concept is formed as a result of the school experience. Schoolchildren may feel that they are expected to be good at everything. For example, if a child is artistic but not developmentally ready to tackle abstract math, the student may perceive that he is "bad at math." He may turn away from practice opportunities, creating a negative cycle of minimal effort, poor performance, and self-reproach. Teachers can make a difference and reverse this pattern. Students need positive expectations modeled for them often and repeatedly. Encouragement and support often give reluctant learners the energy to re-engage a task and build success. Gentle behavior management strategies can nurture trusting relationships. Constructive feedback fosters active engagement and learning. When teachers promote inquiry and practice, students learn that their beliefs and actions are important, When children believe their actions make a difference, they gain the stamina to effect positive change in their life and take on the challenge of innovation. When students are encouraged to harness their own power, they use their natural strengths to embrace exciting and sobering challenges. Educators who are prepared, flexible, and good-natured have a tremendous impact on a child's self-image.

School - Family: Summation

While schools are increasingly realizing that they have a more weighted role in the lives of students, much has yet to be done in terms of healthy food programming, monetary considerations for extra-curricular activities, and scheduling accommodations for working, single parents. Unfortunately, the schools that struggle the most with socioeconomically challenged families are likewise constrained by funding. However, if administrators, teachers, and other staff members are simply cognizant of the potential plight of students who live outside of the traditional, family dynamic, they can make a considerable difference in the lives of students.

The most vital piece of knowledge to be had by school staff, however, is that no specific family structure has inherent drawbacks for children. Conversely, every family structure has the potential to challenge children's potential. Parenting efficacy, ultimately, is much more telling of a child's academic success than is the number of parents in the household. Boiling down to quality over quantity, children in single-parent households may receive more attention than those in two-parent households. Therefore, while it is crucial to make policy accommodations for children in single-parent homes, particularly socioeconomically challenged, single-parent homes, school staff must perceive every student as an individual, having his or her own, unique situation after he or she leaves school grounds.