Parenting & Individualism (Kusserow 2005)

Kusserow 2005 - goal:

aim to show how working-class and upper-middle class white families develop different styles of individualism (hard vs. soft) and how these class-based approaches to child-rearing shape children’s behavior and interactions with institutions like school

Kusserow 2005 - results:

found that upper-middle-class families promote soft individualism based on emotions and uniqueness. In contrast, working-class families promote hard individualism focused on toughness and self-reliance, differences that often clash with school expectations (bc school has soft individualism) and contribute to inequality

soft individualism is seen as

growing an orchid

Soft Individualism - parents treat their child more

delicate, with praise and encouragement

Soft Individualism - parents see their child as

sensitive, delicate and require optimal conditions

Soft Individualism - parents see the world as

safe, welcoming, and open to uniqueness

Soft Individualism - Parenting style

concerted cultivation

concerted cultivation:

parents actively foster their child’s development through structured activities

Soft Individualism found more in

Higher SES

Soft Individualism - Advantages

sense of self, feel like they can question the authority (step up for yourself)

Soft Individualism - Disadvantages

overscheduling (frequent family conflict), difficulty with self-entertainment, and blurred boundaries between the child and parents

Hard individualism is seen as

growing dandelion

Hard individualism - parents treat their child as

tough, self-reliant, a lot of discipline, and challenge them

Hard individualism - Parents see their child as

resilient, can cope with stress and adversity

Hard individualism - parents see the world as

uncertain and only hard work earn rewards

Hard individualism - Parenting style

accomplishment of natural growth

accomplishment of natural growth

parents only are there for their basic needs. They believe children develop spontaneously.

Hard Individualism found more in

Lower SES

Hard individualism - advantages

greater autonomy, clear boundaries between the child and parents, lost of energy & creativity 

Hard individualism - disadvantages

Will not question the authority (cautious) -> cause to feel powerless in institutions/systems

Hard individualism - skeptic of Goldstein & Schwade experiment (response time affects infant talking, talk more or less)

They will say the kid doesn’t need the reinforcement all the time to talk faster

Hard individualism - skeptic of Yu & Smith (joint attention)

they will think that you don’t have to follow the infants’ attention; they will eventually attend to what you’re doing and learn by themselves.

which approaches are more valuable in school system

soft individualism

there are environmental mismatch (between parents and teachers)

The teacher says there is smth wrong, parents said just let kids be kids

there are environmental mismatch (between children and teachers)

At home, kids get grounded for fighting, but at school, the teacher wants them to talk it out, which confuses them.

Heath (1985) look at

hard individualism: children naturally learn language on their own, just as they learn to walk, without needing to be explicitly taught

Trackton children grow up as

observers, immersed in adult communication, and are expected to pick up language independently through natural exposure, not through adult-led teaching.

Boys are taught that Pragmatic is important

They were taught to pay attention to the mood of the adult when talking to them

Boys learn by experience

treated to see if they can respond to teasing with verbal and non-verbal put-downs.

Girls are taught that Pragmatic is important

they were taught to observe people before talking

Girls learn by observing,

So not as socialized