Search Type Title Author/Investigator   Search     Advanced Search

Table of Contents | Previous | Next

Chapter Ten: The Provider's Interaction with Children

In family child care, the provider is the critical determinant of the children’s experiences. How she interacts with children, how she structures their activities and experiences, her emotional tone and the content of her spoken interactions are what primarily define the child’s daily experience in care. A major part of the observation of the family child care homes involved rating multiple aspects of the caregiver’s interactions with the children in her care. The description below is derived from three measures: Part I and II of the Provider Rating and the Arnett Global Caregiver Rating Scale. These measures evaluate a variety of aspects of the caregiver’s interaction with children. Taken together the measures given us rounded picture of caregiver’s behavior.

Provider Warmth, Guidance and Supervision

Providers were rated in terms of: their expression of interest in and affection for children and their responsiveness to childrens’ requests and needs; use of positive guidance and discipline; avoidance of harmful interactions with children; and supervision of children.22 In general, providers received high average ratings in all four areas (Exhibit 10-1). Average scores ranged from 2.6 to 2.9 out of 3, where 3 means consistent positive practices. There were only two items on which a substantial number of providers were rated as inconsistent. Only half of the providers consistently helped children to work out their conflicts with words. The one item on which providers received a lower rating was interactive play. Only 41 percent of providers were rated as consistently playing interactively with children, and one-third of providers were rated as rarely or never playing with children.

Ratings of provider behavior did not differ substantially by the type of home (Exhibit 10-2), or by the age mix of children in the home (Exhibit 10-3).

Exhibit 10-1:

PROVIDER WARMTH, GUIDANCE, AND SUPERVISION IN THE FAMILY CHILD CARE HOME

Distribution of Ratings and Average Scores on Provider Warmth, Guidance, and Supervision

		Rarely/ Never%	Sometimes %	Consistently/ Usually%
Caring and Responding		Average rating = 2.7 out of 3
	Shows interest in children	1	16	84
	Responds to children’s language	2	14	84
	Converses with each child	3	17	81
	Shows affection to each child	2	21	77
	Acknowledges child’s efforts	0	15	85
	Offers children help	4	22	74
	Accepts children’s feelings	1	18	81
	Recognizes, responds to signs of distress	1	15	84
	Plays with children interactively	35	24	41
	Holds babies	6	22	72
Positive Guidance and Discipline		Average rating = 2.6 out of 3
	States limits and consequences	2	21	77
	Helps children express feelings	8	27	65
	Helps children notice other’s needs	10	26	64
	Helps children experience consequences	3	17	79
	Does not force children into activities	6	15	79
	Focuses on what to do, not what not to do	4	26	71
	Helps children resolve conflicts verbally	16	28	56
	Redirects children who are frustrated	2	19	79
	Time-out used for self-control, not punishment	2	5	92
Does No Harm		Average rating = 2.8 out of 3
	No physical punishment	4	4	92
	No rough handling of children	4	2	94
	No criticism, shame, threats	4	5	91
	Does not dominate play with children	5	4	92
	Avoids power struggles with children	5	2	93
Supervision, Monitoring		Average rating = 2.9 out of 3
	Can see, hear children at all times	2	18	80
	Supervises children as appropriate	2	19	78
	Special supervision of hazardous activities	1	0	99
	Only uses restraining equipment for short time	10	0	90
Sample size (n=554 homes)

Source: Family Child Care Home Observation: Provider Rating System

Exhibit 10-2:

PROVIDER WARMTH, GUIDANCE AND SUPERVISION IN THE FAMILY CHILD CARE HOME

Average Scores in Four Areas by Type of Home

	All Children Related to Provider Mean a	Some Children Related to Provider Mean	No Children Related to Provider Mean	All Family Child Care Homes Mean
Caring and responding	2.7	2.7	2.7	2.7
Positive guidance, discipline	2.7	2.6	2.7	2.6
Does no harm	2.8	2.8	2.9	2.8
Supervision, monitoring	2.8	3.0	2.9	2.9
Total	2.7	2.7	2.8	2.7
Sample size	147	263	144	554

a Average of ratings on individual items in domain (see Exhibit 10-1), each rated on a 3-point scale: 1 = rarely evident, 2 = sometimes evident, 3 = consistently/usually evident. Source: Family Child Care Home Observation: Provider Rating System

Exhibit 10-3:

PROVIDER WARMTH, GUIDANCE and SUPERVISION IN THE FAMILY CHILD CARE HOME

Average Score in Four Areas by Age of Mix of Children in the Home

	Infant/ Toddler Mean a	Infant/ Toddler/ Preschl Mean	Infant/ School-Age Mean	Preschl/ School-Age Mean	School-Age Only Mean	All Age Groups Mean	All Homes Mean
Caring and responding	2.7	2.7	2.6	2.6	2.7	2.7	2.7
Positive guidance, discipline	2.6	2.6	2.6	2.7	2.7	2.7	2.6
Does no harm	2.9	2.8	2.8	2.8	2.9	2.8	2.8
Supervision, monitoring	2.8	2.9	2.9	2.9	2.9	3.0	2.9
Total	2.7	2.8	2.7	2.7	2.7	2.8	2.7
Sample size	37	107	68	40	50	25	554

a Average of ratings on individual items in domain (see Exhibit 10-1), each rated on a 3-point scale: 1 = rarely evident, 2 = sometimes evident, 3 = consistently/usually evident. Source: Family Child Care Home Observation: Provider Rating System

Fostering Children’s Social Learning

One of the things that parents hope their children will learn in a family child care setting is to relate to other children in a positive way—learning to take turns, share, be empathetic. A portion of Part I of the Provider Rating System assessed the extent to which providers foster social learning and understanding in children.

Providers were not rated as high on teaching children social skills as they were rated on other areas of interaction with children (Exhibit 10-4). Across the items in this domain, providers received an average score of 2.3 out of 3. On most of the items, at least a third of providers were rated as not consistently supporting children in learning social skills or developing social understanding. There were no large differences in providers’ support for children’s social learning, by type of home, number or ages of children (Exhibits 10-5 and 10-6).

Exhibit 10-4:

PROVIDER FOSTERING OF CHILDREN'S SOCIAL SKILLS IN THE FAMILY CHILD CARE HOME

Distribution of Ratings a

	Rarely/Never %	Sometimes %	Consistently/ Usually %
Opportunities for children to work together a	11	27	62
Teach children sharing, cooperating, taking turns	8	27	65
Teach older children to care for younger	18	29	53
Teach social rules or limits	16	30	54
Attention to bullying and standing up for self	2	9	89
Teach children about community	68	20	12
Teach children about people’s similarities, differences	14	34	51
Sample size (n=554 homes)

a Items rated on a 3-point scale, with 1 = rarely/never evident, 2 = sometimes evident, 3 = consistently/usually evident. Source: Family Child Care Home Observation: Provider Rating System

Exhibit 10-5:

PROVIDER FOSTERING OF CHILDREN'S SOCIAL SKILLS IN THE FAMIILY CHILD CARE HOME

Average Total Score by Type of Home

	All Children Related to Provider Mean a	Some Children Related to Provider Mean	No Children Related to Provider Mean	All Family Child Care Homes Mean
Total for fostering social skills	2.2	2.4	2.4	2.3
Sample size	147	263	144	554

a Average of ratings on 7 individual items, each rated on a 3-point scale: where 1 = rarely evident, 2 = sometimes evident, 3 = consistently/usually evident. Source: Family Child Care Home Observation: Provider Rating System

Exhibit 10-6:

PROVIDER FOSTERING OF CHILDREN'S SOCIAL SKILLS IN THE FAMILY CHILD CARE HOME

Average Total Score by Age Mix of Children in the Home

	Infant/ Toddler Meana	Infant/ Toddler/ Preschl Mean	Infant/ School-Age Mean	Preschl/ School-Age Mean	School-Age Only Mean	All Age Groups Mean	All Homes Mean
Total for fostering social skills	2.2	2.4	2.3	2.4	2.3	2.4	2.3
Sample size	37	107	68	40	50	252	554

a Average of ratings on 7 individual items, each rated on a 3-point scale: where 1 = rarely evident, 2 = sometimes evident, 3 = consistently/usually evident. Source: Family Child Care Home Observation: Provider Rating System

Supporting Children’s Play

Providers were rated on their support for children’s play (Part I of the Provider Rating System). For young children, play, both fine motor and more active physical play, is a crucial avenue for learning and development. In any good environment for children, there are plenty of opportunities for free play, in which children may independently choose an activity and engage freely with peers and materials. Settings with too much structure or with no opportunities for free play are not ideal for children.

Most providers consistently encouraged children’s play (Exhibit 10.7). The average rating for provider encouragement of play was high—2.7 on the three-point scale. All of the items in the scale show caregivers consistently supporting play, by offering opportunities for free play and by providing support in terms of attention, suggestions, and materials for play.

Exhibit 10-7:

PROVIDER SUPPORT FOR CHILDREN'S PLAY IN THE FAMILY CHILD CARE HOME

Distribution of Ratings on Individual Items

	Rarely/ Never %	Sometimes %	Consistently/ Usually %
Free play opportunities with choice, at least 2 hrs/day	17	0	83
Provider provides materials, suggestions for play	5	19	76
Daily time for active physical play	7	12	81
Sample size (n=554 homes)

Items rated on a 3-point scale: 1 = rarely/never evident, 2 = sometimes evident, 3 = consistently/usually evident. Source: Family Child Care Home Observation: Provider Rating System

Neither the type of home nor the age mix of children in the home was strongly related to providers’ ability to support children’s play (Exhibits 10-8 and 10-9).

Exhibit 10-8:

PROVIDER SUPPORT FOR CHILDREN'S PLAY IN THE FAMILY CHILD CARE HOME

Average Score by Type of Home

	All Children Related to Provider Meana	Some Children Related to Provider Mean	No Children Related to Provider Mean	All Family Child Care Homes Mean
Total for supporting play	2.6	2.7	2.8	2.7
Sample size	147	263	144	554

a Average of ratings on individual items in domain (see Exh 10-1), each rated on a 3-point scale: 1 = rarely evident, 2 = sometimes evident, 3 = consistently/usually evident. Source: Family Child Care Home Observation: Provider Rating System

Exhibit 10-9:

PROVIDER SUPPORT FOR CHILDREN'S PLAY IN THE FAMILY CHILD CARE HOME

Average Score by Age Mix of Children in the Home

	Infant/ Toddler Meana	Infant/ Toddler/ Preschl Mean	Infant/ School-Age Mean	Preschl/ School-Age Mean	School-Age Only Mean	All Age Groups Mean	All Homes Mean
Total for supporting play	2.7	2.7	2.6	2.6	2.8	2.7	2.7
Sample size	37	107	68	40	50	252	554

a Average of ratings on individual items in domain (see Exh 10-1), each rated on a 3-point scale: where 1 = rarely evident, 2 = sometimes evident, 3 = consistently/usually evident. Source: Family Child Care Home Observation: Provider Rating System

Supporting Children’s Cognitive Development

Together with the child’s parents, the child care provider is one of the child’s first teachers. Although there is some disagreement about the extent to which preschool and younger children need to be taught pre-academic skills, there is little disagreement about the importance of the child’s first five years, and especially the first three years, as a critical time for the child’s acquisition of knowledge and intellectual skills. Daily life for children provides constant opportunities for learning, through the child’s own experimentation and play with materials and peers. At the same time, the adults in the child’s life can support this learning by providing opportunities for the child to explore and experiment with objects and peers in his or her world or by direct instruction.

A section of Part I of the Provider Rating System assessed the extent to which providers support children’s learning in literacy, math, science or creative arts, either formally or informally in the course of everyday activities. The average score for these items was 2.2 out of 3. On twelve of the seventeen items in this area, fewer than half of the providers consistently supported learning, either through active involvement in teaching or by providing activities that teach a variety of concepts or information (Exhibit 10-10). Providers received especially low ratings on their provision of learning opportunities. Less than half of the providers read even one book to children or encouraged them to read or look at books on their own. Only one-quarter of providers consistently introduced math concepts, such as counting or measuring, into their everyday activities with children.

There were no large differences in support for learning in different types of homes or by ages of children served (Exhibits 10-11 and 10-12).

Exhibit 10-10:

PROVIDER SUPPORT FOR CHILDREN'S LEARNING IN THE FAMILY CHILD CARE HOME

Average Scores in Two Areas and Distribution of Ratings a and Average Scores on Support for Learning

		Rarely/ Never %	Sometimes %	Consistently/ Usually %
Provider Involvement in Learning		Average rating = 2.3 out of 3
	Provider builds upon natural "teachable moments"	20	34	46
	Children have activities to do at all times	11	24	65
	Provider uses open-ended questions	22	40	38
	Provider helps children learn specific skills	18	35	47
	Provider teaches children to take care ofequipment	9	32	59
	Provider introduces children to new activities	25	34	41
Learning Activities		Average rating = 2.1 out of 3
	Provider reads at least one book to childrenb	56	NA	44
	Provider encourages children to read books on own	37	23	39
	Opportunities to learn shapes, sounds of letters, words	33	27	40
	Children encouraged to use math in everyday contexts	48	26	25
	Opportunities to explore the natural environment	34	26	40
	Open-ended, child-directed creative activities	23	24	53
	Evidence of children's art available	43	14	43
	Opportunities for children to make music	44	21	35
	Opportunities to dance or move creatively	32	20	48
	No more than 1 hour of TV, computer, video b	36	NA	64
Sample size (n=554 homes)

a Items rated on a 3-point scale, 1 = rarely/never evident, 2 = sometimes evident, 3 = consistently/usually evident. b Items on the rating scale are coded as only "No" or "Yes," with no code for "Sometimes." Source: Family Child Care Home Observation: Provider Rating System

Exhibit 10-11:

PROVIDER SUPPORT FOR CHILDREN'S LEARNING IN THE FAMILY CHILD CARE HOME

Average Scores by Type of Home

	All Children Related to Provider a Mean	Some Children Related to Provider Mean	No Children Related to Provider Mean	All Family Child Care Homes Mean
Provider involvement in learning	2.2	2.3	2.4	2.3
Learning activities	1.9	2.2	2.2	2.1
Total for supporting learning b	2.0	2.2	2.3	2.2
Sample size	147	263	144	554

a Average of ratings on individual items in domain (see Exh 10-1), each rated on a 3-point scale: 1 = rarely evident, 2 = sometimes evident, 3 = consistently /usually evident. b Total is average of items under “provider involvement in learning” and “learning activities”. Source: Family Child Care Home Observation: Provider Rating System

Exhibit 10-12:

PROVIDER SUPPORT FOR CHILDREN'S LEARNING IN THE FAMILY CHILD CARE HOME

Average Scores by Age Mix of Children in the Home

	Infant/ Toddler Mean a	Infant/ Toddler/ Preschl Mean	Infant/ School-Age Mean	Preschl/ School-Age Mean	School-Age Only Mean	All Age Groups Mean	All Homes Mean
Provider involvement	2.5	2.4	2.3	2.4	2.3	2.3	2.3
Learning activities	2.1	2.2	2.0	2.0	2.0	2.2	2.1
Total for supporting learning b	2.2	2.5	2.1	2.1	2.1	2.2	2.2
Sample size	37	107	68	40	50	252	554

a Average of ratings on individual items in domain (see Exh 10-1), each rated on a 3-point scale: 1 = rarely evident, 2 = sometimes evident, 3 = consistently /usually evident. b Total is average of items under “provider involvement in learning” and “learning activities”. Source: Family Child Care Home Observation: Provider Rating System

Provider Emotional Responsiveness to Children

In addition to rating the provider on many specific items related to her behavior with children, two overall qualitative ratings summarize the provider’s behavior and emotional tone with children: Part II of the Provider Rating System and the Arnett Global Caregiver Rating. These ratings are particularly important since the provider’s emotional responsiveness to children has been shown to be related to the child’s functioning in care. On the Provider Rating System, nine characteristics of the provider are rated on a five-point scale, from “very much like” the provider to “not at all like” the provider. The measure focuses on the provider’s level of energy with and interest in the children, as well as her warmth and positive management.

On this scale, providers, on average, consistently received high ratings on all eight qualities (Exhibit 10-13). The average score on the qualitative rating was 4.6 out of 5, which means that providers were seen as being much like the positive qualities being rated. There were no differences in the overall ratings by type of home (Exhibit 10-14) or by the age mix of children in the home (Exhibit 10-15).

Exhibit 10-13:

PROVIDER RESPONSIVENESS TO CHILDREN IN THE FAMILY CHILD CARE HOME

Distribution of Ratings a

	Not At All Like Provider %	Somewhat Like Provider %	Very Much Like Provider %
Relaxed with children	<1	23	76
Gentle with children	1	33	66
In control of children	<1	20	80
Physically competent	<1	25	75
Enjoyment of children	<1	23	77
Attentiveness to children	<1	22	78
Patience with children	<1	23	77
Flexibility with children	1	33	66
Sample size (n=554 homes)

a For purposes of summary, scores on the 5-point scale were combined as follows: 1 or 2 = "Not at all like provider," 3 = "Somewhat like provider," and 4 or 5 = "Very much like provider." Source: Family Child Care Home Observation: Provider Rating System - Summary Rating of Provider

Exhibit 10-14:

PROVIDER RESPONSIVENESS TO CHILDREN IN THE FAMILY CHILD CARE HOME

Average Score by Type of Home

	All Children Related to Provider Meana	Some Children Related to Provider Mean	No Children Related to Provider Mean	All Family Child Care Homes Mean
Total score (out of 5)	4.7	4.6	4.6	4.6
Sample size	147	263	144	554

a Average of nine items each rated on a 5-point scale; 1="Not at all like provider" to 5="Very much like provider." Source: Family Child Care Home Observation: Provider Rating System - Summary Rating of Provider

Exhibit 10-15:

PROVIDER RESPONSIVENESS TO CHILDREN IN THE FAMILY CHILD CARE HOME

Average Score by Age Mix of Children in the Home

	Infant/ Toddler Meana	Infant/ Toddler/ Preschl Mean	Infant/ School-Age Mean	Preschl/ School-Age Mean	School-Age Only Mean	All Age Groups Mean	All Homes Mean
Total score (out of 5)	4.6	4.6	4.6	4.5	4.7	4.6	4.6
Sample size	37	107	68	40	50	252	554

a Average of nine items each rated on a 5-point scale; 1="Not at all like provider" to 5="Very much like provider." Source: Family Child Care Home Observation: Provider Rating System - Summary Rating of Provider

The Arnett Global Caregiver Rating, a commonly-used measure of emotional responsiveness which produces scores for three aspects of the provider’s emotional responsiveness to children: warmth, detachment, and harshness. Each of these scores is the sum of seven or eight items, each scored from 1 (not at all like the provider ) to 4 (very much like the provider).

For this sample of providers, the average score for warmth was 3.2 out of 4 (Exhibit 10-16), indicating that providers were, in general, warm and emotionally responsive to children. The average score for harshness was 1.1, meaning that providers did not typically act harshly with children. On the third construct, detachment, the average score was 2.3, suggesting that providers were not consistently engaged with children and sometimes appeared distant or uninterested in the children’s activities.

The average scores on the Arnett were not different as a function of the type of home (Exhibit 10-16) or the age mix of children in the home (Exhibit 10-17). Also, this sample of providers compares favorably with samples of caregivers in centers on these ratings.23

Exhibit 10-16:

PROVIDER SCORE ON ARNETT GLOBAL CAREGIVER RATING

Average Scores by Type of the Home

	All Children Related to Provider Mean a	Some Children Related to Provider Mean	No Children Related to Provider Mean	All Family Child Care Homes Mean
Warmth b	3.2	3.2	3.6	3.2
Harshness c	1.1	1.1	1.1	1.1
Detachment d	2.3	2.3	2.3	2.3
Sample size	147	263	144	554

a Average score for items in each domain. b Warmth: 10 items rated on a 4-point scale: 1="Not at all like provider" to 4="Very much like provider." c Harshness: 7 items rated on a 4-point scale: 1="Not at all like provider" to 4="Very much like provider." d Detachment: 4 items rated on a 4-point scale: 1="Not at all like provider" to 4="Very much like provider." Source: Family Child Care Home Observation: Arnett Global Caregiver Rating

Exhibit 10-17:

PROVIDER SCORE ON ARNETT GLOBAL CAREGIVER RATING

Average Scores by Age Mix of Children in the Home

	Infant/ Toddler Mean a	Infant/ Toddler/ Preschool Mean	Infant/ Toddler/ School-Age Mean	Preschool/ School-Age Mean	School-age Only Mean	Infant/ Toddler/ Preschool/ School-Age Mean	All Homes Mean
Warmth b	3.2	3.3	3.1	3.2	3.2	3.2	3.2
Harshness c	1.2	1.1	1.1	1.2	1.1	1.1	1.1
Detachment d	2.4	2.3	2.3	2.3	2.3	2.3	2.3
Sample size	37	105	69	40	49	252	552

a Average score for items in each domain. b Warmth: 10 items rated on a 4-point scale: 1="Not at all like provider" to 4="Very much like provider." c Harshness: 7 items rated on a 4-point scale: 1="Not at all like provider" to 4="Very much like provider." d Detachment: 4 items rated on a 4-point scale: 1="Not at all like provider" to 4="Very much like provider." Source: Family Child Care Home Observation: Arnett Global Caregiver Rating

Summary of Findings Providers showed interest in and affection for the children in their care, supervised their activities, and were responsive to their needs. Providers consistently encouraged children’s play, providing opportunity and materials, and setting aside time for physical play. Although they were less likely to be partners in play with the children, they were substantially involved, perhaps more in organizing and managing rather than participating. A majority of providers did not consistently spend time teaching children social skills or supporting learning in a variety of areas. There were no large differences in these behaviors between providers who cared only for related children and other providers, or between providers caring for different ages of children.

---

Table of Contents | Previous | Next