Effective Methods of Enforcing Good Behavior in Children and How They Work

This APA research paper addresses the current concern of adults, especially parents and teachers: the manner one enforces good behavior in children.

Abstract

This paper addresses the current concern of adults, especially parents and teachers: the manner one enforces good behavior in children. In addition, the variant opinions on “good” behavior and the current fear of a child’s possibly negative future provide some perspective to the concern. While parents do impact their children’s lives, information from various articles describe other significant influences: the environment, genetics, family’s socioeconomic standing, and schools’ policy on recess. A child’s experience and genetics intertwine together in order to create his or her behavior, a crucial point when analyzing the effectiveness of the methods for enforcing good behavior. The four specific methods of enforcing good behavior provide approaches for teachers and parents: first, the SEL program--an innovative approach; second, complete control of a parent--including crucial faults; third, the positive approach of praise; fourth, the negative approach of disappointment. In the conclusion, this paper further examines additional factors that influence a child’s behavior, including his or her personality traits, specifically focusing on stress and aggression, and the culture and society, especially noting cross-cultural differences.

Effective Methods of Enforcing Good Behavior

in Children and How They Work

Many parents and educators struggle with enforcing good behavior in children, no matter the age range, varying from toddlers to teenagers. For starters, perspectives of what good behavior exactly is differs from one individual to the next; in particular, specific traits remain more valuable than other characteristic in certain groups. For instance, “surveys reveal that in the United States, parents from Europe, Asian, Hispanic, and African ethnic groups all place far greater importance on caring than achievement” (Grant, 2014, p. 69). In the academy KIPP, educators heavily emphasize self-control in their students as “one of the fundamental ‘character strengths’” (Lehrer, 2009, p. 82).

Despite the diverse views of a “good” character, the issue of enforcing appropriate behavior in children persists, especially for parents. In order to learn how to solve their troubles with raising their children, some confused parents rely on the internet and books about parenting that provide contradictory information on the issue. For example, one medical doctor warns that urging children to transform into readers and writers in preschool or kindergarten may generate “learning disabilities”; in contrast to the above statement, a self-published author alerts the public that “‘late reading’ (age 6) might lead to dyslexia” (Hopson, 2012, p. 19). Such divergent information appears perplexing and leads parents to formulate new questions instead of helping parents realize a possible solution. A psychology professor at Illinois State University, Laura A. Berk, described the average parent in her book Awakening Children’s Minds: How Parents and Teachers Can Make a Difference: “They appeared uncertain, uneasy, and sometimes highly frustrated in the face of a wide-array of child rearing issues, from how to choose a child-care center to whether to make their children clean up their rooms” (2001, p. ix). As a result of the pressure of raising a child, parents resort to screaming, disconnecting themselves from difficult situations, overcompensating, such as picking up their children when they grow too tired of the conflict, and simply giving up (Runkel, 2007, p. 6). In the end, those negative actions impact the future behavior of children.

Simply, the decisions parents and teachers execute in the present alter the lives and behavior of children in the near and far future. Consequently, Janet Hopson informed the audience of a pivotal study: “education professors Anne Cunningham [...] and Keith Stanovich [...] tested reading in a large group of first-graders, then again when the students were high school juniors. They found that kids who could already read well in first grade also scored the highest on several measures in 11th grade” (2012, p. 22). Those who performed well when reading more likely experienced achievement, positive attitudes, and willing practice while the students who struggled to grasp reading early on encountered difficulty, discouragement, dislike, and avoidance (Hopson, 2012, p. 22); thus, what children accomplish and face in their toddler years ultimately influence--for better or for worse--their behavior and performance later in life.

In order to secure their children’s bright futures, parents participate actively throughout their children’s lives. Runkel illustrates the anxiety of many parents in his book Screamfree Parenting: The Revolutionary Approach to Raising Your Kids by Keeping Your Cool: “We fret and worry about how our kids will turn out. Inevitably, we’re so focused on our kids that we don’t realize when this anxiety takes over--and we get reactive” (2007, p. 6). In addition to those fears, “the divorce rate is almost 50 percent for new marriages, children are in turmoil and have serious problems, crimes committed by youths are multiplying, and [the] environment seems a great deal less safe” (Kashani, Mehregany, & Kelly, 1998, p. xv). In general, these anxious parents especially desire to prevent their young ones from using drugs, having sex, and participating in violence, which could all possibly occur, no matter the circumstances.

Influences of Children’s Behavior

Aspects of a young individual’s behavior does not solely arise from his or her parents, for environmental factors, such as school and family conditions, and genetic factors influence his or her comportment as well. As studies demonstrate, these influences interact together or in contrast to formulate a child’s future bearing (Junn & Boyatzis, 2014).

Environment and Genetics Connect

Before, scientists believed genetics influenced far more than experience alone in a human’s development throughout his or her life, but current neuroscience research illustrates that experience possesses a larger role in determining one’s mind, brain, and gene expression than scientists presumed (Diamond & Amso, 2008, p. 37). As stated in “Genes in Context,” an article by Frances A. Champagne and Rahia Mashoodh, “the reality that the interaction between genes and environment is a critical feature of development is emerging as a central theme in laboratory studies and longitudinal analyses in human populations” (2009, p. 11). For instance, touch is critical for human newborns: “Human infants who receive little touching grow more slowly, release less growth hormone, and are less responsive to growth hormone that is exogenously administered” (Diamond & Amso, 2008, p. 38). As a long term result, these babies demonstrate “larger reactions to stress, are more prone to depression, and are vulnerable to deficits in cognitive functions commonly seen in depression or during stress” (Diamond & Amso, 2008, p. 38). Furthermore, passive bodily contact may possess “stress-reducing, calming, and analgesic effects,” and if one regularly utilizes the correct sort of touch early in life, “cognitive development, brain development, bodily health throughout life, and gene expression” can improve (Diamond & Amso, 2008, p. 38). In conclusion, experience affects behavior greatly, but as the following will demonstrate, behavior and genetics together also impact behavior.

In Frances A. Champagne and Rahia Mashoodh’s article “Genes in Context,” a study, dealing with rodents, yields evidence that “predictions of behavior must incorporate knowledge of the environmental context of development” (2009, p. 11). In the experiment that Cooper and Zubek published, scientists bred rats to be either “maze-dull” or “maze-bright,” and such rats weaned in either an “enriched” environment with increased sensory stimuli or an “impoverished” surrounding with limited sensory stimuli (Champagne & Mashoodh, 2009, p. 11). The result of this experiment follows: “maze-dull animals reared in an enriched environment showed a significant improved in learning ability, and maze-bright animals reared under impoverished conditions shows a significant decline in performance” (Champagne & Mashoodh, 2009, p. 11). As a result, scientists cannot predict the behavior of individuals without knowledge of their childhood, especially education and their parents’ methods of discipline. In other words, although an individual may possess genetic potential of a characteristic, such as intellect or serenity, a proper environment provides the appropriate experiences, crucial in developing those potential characteristics.

Related to the process of developing specific characteristics, genes provide the appropriate materials that allow an individual to establish his or her idiosyncratic behavior. Following the breakthrough of DNA, scientists define the word “genes” as a “particular sequence of DNA,” which correlates to the study of genetics’s transformation into the study of DNA (Champagne & Mashoodh, 2009, p. 12). In order to further understand the correlation between DNA and the environment, Frances A. Champagne and Rahia Mashoodh, in their article “Genes in Context,” explained DNA: “DNA sits in our cells and waits to be read by an enzyme called RNA polymerase, leading to the production of messenger RNA (mRNA)--a process referred to as transcription… The mRNA transcript is a copy of the DNA sequence that can further be ‘translated’ into protein” (2009, p. 12). Then, such protein would serve to trigger certain events in the body; as stated by Champagne and Mashoodh, “however, without the active process that triggers [the reading of DNA], this potential may never be realized” (2009, p. 12). In order to utilize DNA and assist in achieving full genetic potential, “the environment around the DNA [must contain] those critical factors” (Champagne & Mashoodh, 2009, p. 12). This role of genes relates to the influences of family, who establish certain factors that promote or prohibit certain genetic characteristics of a child.

Family and Socioeconomic Classes

Although many families may provide essential love and support for a child to fully develop properly, the socioeconomic status of each family differs, with working parents preventing their child from obtaining the same opportunities, especially educational ones, as a child from a wealthier family. Researchers Betty Hart and Todd Risley revealed the truth of the inequality apparent among families of divergent socioeconomic standings in relation to preparation for school: “In the first three years of life, a child of welfare parents hears 974 different words in daily conversation (9.6 million total), the working-class [parent’s] child [hears] 1,498 [words] (19.5 million total), and the child with professional parents [hear] 2,176 [words] (33.6 million overall)” (Hopson, 2012, p. 22). As result of the substantial disparity among all three classes mentioned above, the children of the welfare parents suffer when they attend school for the first time in preschool or kindergarten while the children of the professional parents learn how to read and write with less difficulty, for their parents expose them to a broader vocabulary. Therefore, the children of lower socioeconomic families perform worse in their early education, and as stated before, a difficult start in a child’s education prompts lower performance in school, even throughout his or her high school years (Junn & Boyatzis, 2014).

School Plays a Factor

Despite the influential academic aspects of school, the amount of recess that students receive influences their behavior, particularly in the “cognitive, social-emotional, and physical domains” (Junn & Boyatzis, 2014, p. 55). In the cognitive domain, “children are less fidgety and more on-task” when they receive recess; the same children benefit socially and emotionally from recess by learning “negotiation skills in order to keep the play going”; physically, children behave “better in classes where [they] had at least fifteen minutes of recess,” according to the ratings of teachers (Junn & Boyatzis, 2014, p. 55). Noting all the factors--such as environment, genetics, family, and schooling--that influence a child’s daily life, one may create effective methods that induce good behaviors in a child.

Methods of Enforcing Desired Behavior

SEL Program: An Educational Approach

Determined to alter the current statistics about adolescents’ behavior--thirty percent of high school students reporting that “they engage in high-risk behaviors, such as substance use, sex, violence, and suicide attempts,” a group of experts adopted “an approach called social and emotional learning, or SEL” (DeAngelis, 2010, p. 58). Based on the belief that schools should instruct young individuals how to function in a team, to regulate emotions, and to solve problems in order to better prepare them for difficult situations later in life, SEL programs concentrates on the following: “self-awareness, social awareness, self-management, relationship skills, and responsible decision-making” (DeAngelis, 2010, 58-59). Once the students learn the skills listed above, they “foster their own well-being,” creating a more positive atmosphere in the classroom that absorbs children in learning the course material; as a result, these young individuals more likely perform better in school (DeAngelis, 2010, p. 59). On the other hand, “critics charge that SEL programs are too broad-based” and that teachers’ responsibilities should not include “social and economic learning”; alternatively, “families should oversee their children’s social, emotional, and character development” (DeAngelis, 2010, p. 58).

The Control of Parents

Many parents feel responsible for their children’s actions and desire to discover an effective technique to make them “think, feel, and behave according to [their] definitions of ‘good’” (Runkel, 2007, p. 18); thus, they utilize their powerful authority in order to receive the results they demand. In reality, as stated in the book Child Development, “new evidence on young children’s understanding of authority reveals that they do not regard adults with unquestioning respect” (Berk, 1997, p. 471). Although “parental discipline is vitally important,” “children’s characteristics can affect the success of certain parenting techniques” (Berk, 1997, p. 464). Additionally, Runkel warned parents of suppressing those characteristics and imposing their control, for the following two options occur: “Children either conform to the system, surrender their individuality, [...] or they rebel against the system, failing to ‘get with the program” (2007, p. 19). In such a situation, the young individual feels “small and incompetent” (Runkel, 2007, p. 19); thus, parents’ urges to control their children’s actions may result negatively, including future behavioral problems.

Positive Reinforcement: Praiseworthy Approach

When parents extol the efforts of their children instead of their abilities, those young individuals, in turn, grow more motivated and establish a stronger work ethic (Grant, 2014, p. 69). In addition, children with “warm and responsive” parents that “provide reasonable expectations for behavior” feel good about themselves (Berk, 1997, p. 433). In an experiment discussed in Grant’s article, researchers randomly assigned a specific type of praise to each child; in one instance, “they praised the action: ‘It was good that you gave some of your marbles to those children. Yes, that was a nice and helpful thing to do’”; for the other type, “they praised the character [...]: ‘I guess you’re the kind of person who likes to help others whenever you can. Yes, you are a very nice and helpful person’” (2014, p. 69). The results of the experiment follows: “When faced with more opportunities to [...] share. The children were much more generous after their character had been praised than after their actions had been [praised]” (Grant, 2014, p. 69-70). When the researchers praised their character, children, even at a young age, interpreted the compliments as a reflection of their personality and learned that their actions are a part of their identity (Grant, 2014, p. 70).

Negative Reinforcement through Disappointment

While many forms of negative reinforcement exists, according to Professor Eisenberg and David R. Shaffer, expressing disappointment and, then, providing sufficient explanation about the inappropriate behavior, its consequences, and possible solutions assists parents in rearing caring children (Grant, 2014, p. 70). When parents convey their disappointment correctly, their children feel guilt, experience remorse and regret, and strive to rectify their actions. (Grant, 2014, p. 70). As Grant explicates in his article, discipline through disappoint permits children “to develop standards for judging their actions, feelings of empathy and responsibility for others, and a sense of moral identity,” all essential qualities in a good person with impeccable behavior (2014, p. 70). More importantly, “it communicates disapproval of bad behavior [and the] high expectation [...] for improvement: ‘[...] Even if you did a bad thing, I know you can do better’” (Grant, 2014, p. 70).

Conclusions and Final Acknowledgments

As stated before, various factors, such as experience and genetics, influence the behavior of children and the effectiveness of the methods used to enforce such behavior. Thus, children act differently in the similar situations for numerous of reasons, including their personality traits and environment--more specifically, culture and society.

Stress and Aggression

The varying ways children cope with stress demonstrates the clear differences among young individuals. For instance, Noah Muthler, a good student in a program for gifted individuals, suffered from anxiety before taking his first state standardized tests in third grade; he would cry, worry tremendously about not knowing all of the test material, and struggle to fall asleep (Lehrer, 2009, p. 79). Such anxiety only worsened as he grew older, for the duration of his anxiety lengthened to even after the tests in fifth grade (Lehrer, 2009, p. 79). Contrary to Noah’s anxious behavior to stress, his brother Jacob, an eighth grader in the gifted program, did not experience unmanageable worries about the standardized tests (Lehrer, 2009, p. 79). Like any human deportment, one’s response to pressure originates from an intricate group of factors: how one was raised, one’s skills and experience, and the hormones one was exposed to as a fetus (Bronson & Merryman, 2013, p. 72). Similarly, traits, such as aggression, differ in various situations; although “most psychologists assumed that aggression was a stable trait,” Walter Mischel discovered that “children’s responses depended on the details of the interaction” (Lehrer, 2009, p. 79). While the small youngster may constantly rebuke angrily when teased by a peer, he or she may accept to an adult’s disciplining; in another case, a child may socialize well with classmates but react negatively to a teacher’s warning (Lehrer, 2009, p. 79).

Culture and Society

Such personal factors do not account the cultural and societal influences on one’s perspective of good behavior and the proper methods to ensure such behavior. Although “people everywhere have minds, goals, desires and beliefs, [...] the existence of a universal moral code is a highly controversial claim; [...] considerable evidence for wide variation from society to society [exists]” (Bloom, 2010, p. 86). In fact, the psychologist Joseph Henrich and several of his colleagues, in the journal Science, disclosed a cross-cultural study of fifteen miscellaneous populations and discovered that individual’s “propensities to behave kindly to strangers and to punish unfairness are strongest in large-scale communities with market economies, where such norms are essential to the smooth functioning of trade” (Bloom, 2010, p. 86). In conclusion, “much of the morality that humans possess is a consequence of the culture in which they are raised, not their innate capacities” (Bloom, 2010, p. 86). On the other hand, adapting from humans’ tendency to work with other humans, people everywhere possess “a sense of right and wrong,” for evaluating the traits of “right and wrong” in other individuals developed along with the humane characteristic of teamwork (Bloom, 2010, p. 86). As one studies behavior in children, such factors remain influential, for no single trait nor element of one’s environment can completely explain a child’s behavior and provide enough context to create a thorough and effective method to promote and guarantee that child’s good behavior.

References

Berk, L. E. (1997). Child development (4th ed.). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn and Bacon.

Berk, L. E. (2001). Awakening children’s minds: How parents and teachers can make a difference. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Bloom, P. (2010). The moral life of babies. In E. N. Junn & C. J. Boyatzis (Eds.),  Annual editions: Child growth and development, twenty-first edition (pp. 84-90). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Education.

Bronson, P., & Merryman, A. (2013). Why can some kids handle pressure while others fall apart?. E. N. Junn & C. J. Boyatzis (Eds.),  Annual editions: Child growth and development, twenty-first edition (pp. 72-76). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Education.

Champagne, F. A., & Mashoodh R. (2009). Genes in context. In E. N. Junn & C. J. Boyatzis. (Eds.), Annual editions: Child growth and development, twenty-first edition (pp. 11-15). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Education.

DeAngelis, T. (2010). Social awareness + emotional skills = successful kids. In E. N. Junn & C. J. Boyatzis (Eds.), Annual editions: Child growth and development, twenty-first edition (pp. 58-60). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Education.

Diamond, A., & Amso, D. (2008). Contributions of neuroscience to our understanding of cognitive development. In E. N. Junn & C. J. Boyatzis (Eds.), Annual editions: Child growth and development, twenty-first edition (pp. 36-40). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Education.

Grant, A. (2014). Raising a moral child. In E. N. Junn & C. J. Boyatzis (Eds.), Annual editions: Child growth and development, twenty-first edition (pp. 69-71). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Education.

Hopson, J. (2012). Infant intelligentsia: Can babies learn to read? And should they?. In E. N. Junn & C. J. Boyatzis (Eds.), Annual editions: Child growth and development, twenty-first edition (pp. 19-23). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Education.

Junn, E. N., & Boyatzis, C. J. (Eds.). (2014). Annual editions: Child growth and development (21st ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Education.

Kashani, J. H., Mehregany, D. V., Allan, W. D., & Kelly, K. (1998). Raising happy children: A parent’s guide. New York, NY: Three Rivers Press.

Lehrer, J. (2009). Don’t!. In E. N. Junn & C. J. Boyatzis (Eds.),  Annual editions: Child growth and development, twenty-first edition (pp. 77-83). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Education.

Runkel, H. E. (2007). Screamfree parenting: The revolutionary approach to raising your kids by keeping your cool. New York, NY: Broadway Books.

Author's Note

This is an APA paper I wrote for a high school class; of course, it is not in the appropriate format, for it is difficult to format on this website. I received a perfect score of 100%, so I pretty proud about it. All of my sources are printed books, and I hope you all learn something new about children, their behavior, and enforcement. I know this paper opened up a whole new world: child development. If you are interested in this sort of thing, take a class about child development in your local community college. It is a fun class.