Family Contexts of Academic Socialization: The Role of Culture, Ethnicity, and Socioeconomic Status

Abstract

Family contexts of academic socialization have received growing attention as a way to facilitate the educational development of children and adolescents. The goal of this special issue is to present comparative and complex perspectives about the roles of culture, ethnicity, and socioeconomic status (SES) in multifaceted academic socialization processes from preschool to college. This introduction discusses the roles of culture, ethnicity, and SES in family academic socialization processes, summarizes various themes across the five articles in this issue, presents brief overviews of each article, and addresses future directions of these lines of research.

Family contexts of academic socialization have received growing attention as a way to facilitate the educational development of children and youth. Parental academic socialization includes parents’ education-related beliefs, expectations, and behaviors through which they navigate or influence their children’s academic and school-related development (Hill, 2001; Pomerantz, Ng, Cheung, & Qu, 2014; Puccioni, 2015; Taylor, Clayton, & Rowley, 2004). Academic socialization has been found to play a critical role in the development of children’s academic beliefs, attitudes, and skills from childhood to adolescence (Grolnick & Slowiaczek, 1994; Hoover-Dempsey et al., 2005; Sonnenschein et al., 2012). However, an increasing number of studies have demonstrated that the patterns and effects of academic socialization may differ depending on families’ ethnic and cultural backgrounds (García Coll & Marks, 2009; Hill et al., 2004; Pomerantz et al., 2014; Yamamoto & Holloway, 2010). What is not yet clear is the unique and intertwined ways in which culture and socioeconomic status (SES) function or interact to influence parental beliefs, engagement practices, and the effects of academic socialization (cf. Hill, 2001; Serpell, Baker, & Sonnenschein, 2005). It is critical to gain a deeper understanding of the intersections among culture, ethnicity, and SES and how each element moderates or mediates the processes of academic socialization across different developmental periods.

The aim of this special issue is to advance our understanding of the role of culture, ethnicity, and SES in academic socialization and academic development by presenting studies of diverse ethnic and SES groups in the United States and international settings. Collectively, the five articles in this special issue present comparative and complex perspectives about the roles of culture, ethnicity, and SES in multifaceted academic socialization processes and divergent ways in which academic socialization influence children’s academic beliefs, engagement, and outcomes.

CULTURALLY AND SOCIOECONOMICALLY DIVERSE FAMILIES: A COMPLEX PICTURE

One of the most prevalent views of ethnic minority families that are low SES may be that these families are struggling or even failing to provide ample and effective support for their children’s academic development (Brooks-Gunn & Markman, 2005; Lazar & Slostad, 1999). Family SES has been regarded as one of the most powerful elements determining parenting styles and academic socialization (Bornstein & Bradley, 2012; Gecas, 1979). For example, ample evidence has demonstrated that SES is linked to family investment in children’s educational opportunities and degrees of support provided by parents to their children’s academic development (Engle & Black, 2008; Lareau, 2003; Yeung, Linver, & Brooks-Gunn, 2002). Despite empirical support for these findings, a sole focus on SES in minority families’ academic socialization may blame the children and families from low-SES backgrounds for the difficulties and risks many face. Such an approach also masks what may be strengths to build upon in low-SES or ethnic minority families.

A growing body of evidence in the United States has demonstrated strengths and resilience shared by ethnic minority and immigrant families, including those living in poverty, and creative strategies they use to navigate their children’s education (Cooper & Smalls, 2010; Crosnoe & Fuligni, 2012; García Coll & Marks, 2009). These studies suggest that families who are ethnic minorities often provide unique academic socialization experiences using cultural beliefs and resources to promote their children’s academic development. Culturally relevant academic socialization could be especially critical for children who are ethnic minorities to manage their academic lives as they face challenges due to their minority status, and often low SES (García Coll et al., 1996). However, to what extent culture/ethnicity or SES plays a role in families’ academic socialization and their children’s academic trajectories is not clear. Because ethnicity and SES tend to be intertwined in the United States, it is often difficult to disentangle the effects of each element in the examination of academic socialization. In this special issue, we tried to present the nuanced and complex ways through which culture, ethnicity, and SES are related to patterns, types, and functions of academic socialization across families from diverse backgrounds.

Three articles in this issue (Sonnenschein, Metzger, & Thompson; Rivas-Drake & Marchand; Suizzo, Pahlke, Chapman-Hilliard, & Harvey) include Black and Latino families whose children generally demonstrate lower academic performance and higher high school dropout rates than White children in the United States (Cheadle, 2008; Kena et al., 2015). Because children in these racial/ethnic groups are more likely to live in poverty than White children (Jiang, Ekono, & Skinner, 2015), it is possible that these children’s academic difficulties, at least in part, are due to their low SES. To illuminate the multifaceted processes through which Black and Latino families support their children’s education and their children’s educational processes in relation to and beyond SES, the three articles bring different SES contexts—families in poverty, mothers with or without high school education, and parents with varied levels of education. In these varied SES contexts, the authors explored different types of academic socialization provided by Black and Latino parents at different developmental periods, and their link to children’s academic beliefs, engagement, and outcomes.

The inclusion of a Chinese immigrant group in this special issue adds a unique insight because Chinese immigrants generally demonstrate high academic performance compared to other racial/ethnic groups. In fact, one may attribute the low poverty rate to their overall high academic achievement (Jiang et al., 2015). By comparing the academic socialization of Chinese immigrant of low SES and middle SES, Yamamoto and colleagues attempted to determine whether poverty brings disadvantages and decreased engagement among Chinese immigrant families. Alternatively, do cultural beliefs and practices challenge the SES-related patterns in this generally high achieving ethnic group?

This special issue also includes a study (Holloway et al.) that examined the intersection between SES and culture in two international settings, Japan and South Korea. Because children in these East Asian countries have consistently ranked high in international academic tests, cultural beliefs and practices rooted in East Asia, such as Confucianism, have received much attention as a foundation to construct strong family support for their children’s education (Li, 2012). However, recent studies have demonstrated consistent or increasing academic gaps associated with SES within these countries, suggesting the need to look beyond cultural beliefs or practices (Byun & Kim, 2010; Yamamoto & Brinton, 2010). Holloway and colleagues examined the roles of SES on academic socialization and children’s school-related competence with Japanese and South Korean families. Their findings clearly illustrate that what we often perceive as cultural differences is contingent upon one’s country’s economic condition and educational system.

Together the articles in this issue demonstrate that culture, ethnicity, and SES bring unique or intertwined contributions to academic socialization and educational processes. More specifically, the five articles in this issue illuminate various strengths associated with ethnicity and culture, as well as efforts reflected in academic socialization processes of families of low SES. Nevertheless, differences between higher SES and lower SES demonstrated in these studies suggest disadvantages associated with poverty, constrained economic resources, and parents’ limited educational experiences. Four themes emerged from the various articles.

One, several articles illustrate positive beliefs related to education shared by families from different ethnic groups. Three articles show that Black and Latino parents, including families in low SES, value education and parental engagement in their children’s learning (Rivas-Drake & Marchand; Suizzo et al.; Sonnenschein et al.). Despite poverty, Black, Latino families in the Sonnenschein et al. article and Chinese immigrants in the Yamamoto et al. article engaged in various school-related activities with their preschoolers.

Two, culturally unique socialization processes, regardless of SES, could promote children’s educational processes. As found in previous studies (Crosnoe & Fulgni, 2012; García Coll & Marks, 2009), cultural beliefs and practices might be particularly powerful for some ethnic groups and reduce risks associated with low SES. For example, the article by Rivas-Drake and Marchand highlights the role of cultural values such as familism, beliefs about obligations and support of families, shared by Latinos regardless of SES, and its critical role in adolescents’ emotional engagement at school. The study by Yamamoto et al. with Chinese immigrant families showed a stronger preservation of cultural beliefs and practices in families of low SES, who may be less exposed to mainstream cultural norms, than families of middle SES. Low-SES parents reported a stronger sense of maternal devotion to their children’s education and more harmonious family environments than middle-SES parents.

Three, SES also appeared to be associated with degrees or types of academic socialization and children’s and adolescents’ academic engagement and outcomes. Sonnenschein and colleagues report fairly limited engagement in math and literacy activities among Black and Latino preschoolers who are low income despite a strong value placed on these activities by their parents. Yamamoto and colleagues found that low-income Chinese immigrant parents’ strong commitment to support their children’s education was not necessarily reflected in their engagement in literacy or enrichment activities. In general, articles in this issue captured significant and positive associations between SES and parents’ academic socialization strategies across ethnic groups. SES was significantly associated with higher educational expectations among Latinos (Rivas-Drake & Marchand), more parental engagement in literacy and extracurricular lessons among Chinese immigrants (Yamamoto et al.), more active involvement and demanding hard work, especially by African American parents (Suizzo et al.), and higher parenting self-efficacy and more involvement in their children’s education among mothers in South Korea (Holloway et al.). Because some of these types of academic socialization led to positive academic beliefs, engagement, or outcomes, results of these articles demonstrate indirect roles, in addition to direct roles, of SES in these children’s academic trajectories via academic socialization.

Four, going beyond SES, some of the articles captured ethnic and cultural differences in academic socialization processes. Two studies in this issue (Sonnenschein et al.; Suizzo et al.) demonstrated that Black children more frequently engaged in school-related activities or their parents were more actively involved in their children’s schooling than their Latino counterparts when SES was controlled. Suizzo and colleagues found that ethnicity moderated the relation between parents’ demanding hard work and college students’ academic self-efficacy with stronger relations for African Americans than Mexican Americans. However, the relation between parents’ support for autonomy and students’ college adjustment was stronger for Mexican Americans than African Americans. Holloway and colleagues further highlighted country/ethnic difference in their findings; academic socialization measured as parenting self-efficacy and parental involvement mediated the relation between family income and children’s school-related competence in South Korea but not in Japan.

OVERVIEW OF THE ARTICLES IN THIS ISSUE

The five studies in this issue collectively demonstrate that parents construct and provide academic socialization experiences to their children from preschool through college. The articles by Yamamoto et al. and Sonnenschein et al. examined preschool children. Holloway et al. examined first and second graders, whereas Rivas-Drake and Marchand focused on adolescence, and Suizzo et al. focused on college students.

When children are young, parents may focus on providing basic cognitive and academic types of activities and nurturing family environments as a beginning of academic socialization. The first article by Yamamoto and colleagues compared family environments and parental engagement in their children’s cognitive, literacy, enrichment, and extracurricular activities with Chinese immigrant families who are low and middle SES. Although an increasing number of studies have reported cultural beliefs and practices that might facilitate Chinese children’s academic socialization processes (Lee & Zhou, 2015; Li, 2012), as Yamamoto and colleagues note, little attention has been paid to SES-related differences in this group. The majority of families who are low SES in this study lived in poverty. There were significant SES-related gaps in academic performance that were partially explained by different degrees of literacy experiences. Nevertheless, their study suggested that cultural advantages, such as an emphasis on cohesive family relations and parental commitment to support children’s development and academic success, buffer the negative effects associated with low SES and poverty.

Sonnenschein et al. extend these insights by examining low-SES Black and Latino Head Start parents' beliefs about math and reading socialization for their children and related academic outcomes. Their study suggests the need to examine domain-specific academic socialization processes. Even though most Black and Latino parents in this study placed strong value on children’s engagement in reading and math activities, they emphasized the importance of engagement in reading more than math. Furthermore, the difference was larger for Blacks than Latinos, suggesting varying ethnic differences in educational beliefs depending on subject domains. Their findings showed that parents as role models of academic engagement was significantly associated with children’s engagement in reading and math activities and their vocabulary and early math skills. In other words, parents’ enjoyment and engagement in their own reading and math activities affect children’s development of academic engagement.

In addition to academic socialization, cultural and ethnic socialization, messages about cultural and ethnic heritage are likely to become core socialization strategies to promote educational trajectories of ethnic minority families, especially during adolescence. The article by Rivas-Drake and Marchand delved into such issues with Latino parents and adolescents by examining the roles of cultural processes, messages related to their cultural heritages conveyed by parents or family members and familism, respect and obligations for families, in adolescents’ academic beliefs and engagement. They found an indirect role of SES, measured as mothers’ completion of high school education, in adolescents’ beliefs about utility of education through their perceptions about parental educational expectations. However, cultural socialization and adolescents’ value on familism, that were not associated with SES, also played an important role in students’ school engagement. Their study suggests that though parents’ SES plays an important role in parents’ educational expectations, contributions of cultural beliefs and socialization may be robust to the effects of SES (see also Yamamoto and colleagues, this issue).

Suizzo and colleagues further explored interactions between culture and SES by analyzing moderating and mediating effects of SES on college adjustment among African American and Mexican American college students. Their study focused on students who attended university. Not surprisingly perhaps, close to two thirds of the participants’ mothers had some college education, much higher than the proportion of college educated mothers in these two racial/ethnic groups. However, unfortunately, entering college does not guarantee educational success for African American and Mexican American students because these two groups tend to demonstrate high college dropout rates. A major contribution of the study is that they examined three different types of academic socialization that were developed based on secondary students’ perceptions of parental involvement from diverse ethnic groups: parents’ demanding hard work, being actively involved in their children’s education, and providing emotional autonomy support. Emotional autonomy support, that is, parents’ promotion for development of an autonomous person, was the most frequently reported type of academic socialization by African American and Mexican American students and the most important in their college adjustment when SES was controlled.

Holloway et al. brought a global perspective to this issue by presenting data collected in Japan and South Korea focusing on the role of SES and culture in parents’ efficacy in promoting academic socialization. Their study, which examined family income and parental education as two separate components of SES, demonstrated different effects of these factors on mothers’ sense of parenting self-efficacy, their involvement in children’s education, and first- and second-grade children’s school-related competence. In South Korea where shadow education such as private tutoring and educational institutions are widespread, family income appeared to be critical in determining mothers’ sense of efficacy that was associated with children’s school competence. In contrast, family income did not appear to be important in Japan. Instead, maternal education moderated the association between parenting self-efficacy and children’s school-related competence. These findings suggest the need for more studies that examine the interactions between culture, SES, and academic socialization in the societies’ larger educational and economic contexts, including those outside the United States of America.

CONCLUSIONS AND FUTURE DIRECTIONS

Although there have been constructive debates about definitions and measures of family SES in human development research (see Bornstein & Bradley, 2012 for details), studies that examine the role of SES in academic socialization and children’s developmental processes in relation to culture and ethnicity are still scarce. In many cases, SES tends to be used as background information or a control, and little is known about mediating and moderating roles of SES in academic socialization or educational processes, especially through interactions with culture/ethnicity.

In this special issue we aimed to present nuanced ways by which ethnically and culturally diverse parents facilitate their children’s academic-related development and how such processes are related to SES, ethnicity, and culture. Although the studies in this issue included children from different developmental periods, none of the studies was longitudinal. A lack of longitudinal studies limits our understanding of the dynamic aspect of academic socialization in relation to SES, culture, and ethnicity, and its long-term influence on children’s/adolescents’ educational processes. Longitudinal studies would also help us understand how academic socialization changes over time across and within diverse SES and ethnic/cultural groups, and whether there are critical periods in which the effect of SES or culture on academic socialization is more powerful in children’s academic achievement.

In sum, the collective findings across the five studies suggest that more attention needs to be paid to SES contexts, such as neighborhoods, communities, or countries, which encourage or limit families’ access to information and resources for effective academic socialization. Examining SES contexts is especially important for minority children’s development because ethnic minority families living in certain ethnic enclaves can use ethnic resources available in the community to counter the negative effects of disadvantageous conditions (Lee & Zhou, 2015).