- Visibility 168 Views
- Downloads 16 Downloads
- DOI 10.18231/j.ijpns.2020.020
-
CrossMark
- Citation
A comparative study to assess the cognitive and moral development of school age children among joint versus nuclear family in selected rural area of Bijapur district
- Author Details:
-
Bapu Khodnapur *
Introduction
“The family is school of duties –founded on love”- Felix Adler
Family is where our roots take hold and from there we grow. A sense of belonging is derived from the strong bond of family. Family bonds are a link to our beginning and a guide to our future. We are molded within a unit, which prepares us for what we will experience in the world and how we react to those experiences. Values are taught at an early age and are carried with us throughout our life. Family bonds help to instill trust and hope in the world around us and belief in ourselves. Rituals of bedtime stories, hugs, holidays and daily meals shared together, provide a sense of warmth, structure and safety. These rituals and traditions, not only create memories and leave a family legacy, but create our first path in life.[1]
A nuclear family can be defined as a household consisting of two married, heterosexual parents and their legal children (siblings). So nuclear family consisting of a father and mother and their children, who share living quarters. Nuclear families can have any number of children. Joint family can be defined as members of a uni-lineal descent group (a group in which descent through either the female or the male line is emphasized) live together with their spouses and offspring in one homestead and under the authority of one of the members. Joint family is an extended form of a nuclear family. It is composed of parents, their children, and the children's spouses and offspring in one household.
Children between 6 and 12 years of age will have widened social horizons beyond the confines of their own home. Within the family, school children continue to learn those values and competencies they will bring into the adult world. Their continued family achievement depends on a variety of family factors, including parental expectation, stimulation and guidance. [2]
The school age period is usually the first time that children are making truly independent judgment.[3] Here family play a vital role during development of each school age child, much of what the child know at this age has been learnt through the family circle. Parents and family members have responsibility to teach and train every child. The home and family is first training school for development especially cognitive and moral development. Parent and family members are the first teachers.
In recent decades traditional form of the family has undergone major changes, with increasing rates of divorce leading to single-parent families, remarriages, resulting in extended families and broken families. These trends and the resulting consequences that may have effect on growth and development of children especially cognitive and moral development.
In this contest some family factors may have impact on development [cognitive and moral] of school age children
Need of the Study
A developing trend in the field of paediatrics is focus on the family unit as an element of optimum child health and development. The American academy of paediatrics, task force on the family, examines the family, its components and its influences on the child and wellbeing. For paediatric health care professionals it is important to recognize the influence of family dynamic on the child health, therefore an examination or study of the family and its function must be incorporated into assessment.[4]
The family size and composition directly influences the child development.[4] Parenting practices differ between small and large families.[4] Growth and development of children occurs as a result of their cultural and hereditary backgrounds of family.
A child behavioral pattern to a large extent is the product of the environment in which he or she lives. During this period the family, school and community help in shaping his or her character, molding the personality and laying foundation for his or her future. If the family, school and community do their work properly, his or her chances for a successful and happy life are greatly increased.
There are many factors which influences the growth and development. These factors are classified into two 1. Forces of nature 2. External forces. External forces are so many factors influencing directly on development of health. Among these, family is one of the most important factors which directly have effect on the development of children.
Research statement
A comparative study was done to assess the cognitive and moral development of school age children among joint versus nuclear family in selected rural area of Bijapur district.
The objectives of the study were
To assess the level of cognitive development among school age children belongs to joint and nuclear family as measured by structured questionnaire.
To assess the level of moral development among school age children belongs to joint and nuclear family as measured by structured questionnaire
To compare the level of cognitive development among school age children belongs to joint and nuclear family.
To compare the level of moral development among school age children belongs to joint and nuclear family.
To find out the association between cognitive and moral development of children belongs to joint and nuclear family with selected demographic variables.
Assumptions
Family is one important factor affecting the growth and development of school age children especially cognitive and moral development.
Both types of family that is joint and nuclear family may have influences on growth and development of children.
Children may not give free and frank responses
Review of Literature
There is a significant association between moral development of children with educational status of child. Other than that all were non-significant.
“Literature review is a critical summary of research on a topic of interest often prepared to put a research problem in context or as the basic for an implementation project.[5]
Review of literature refers to an extensive, exhaustive and systemic examination of publication of relevant to the research project.[6]
The literatures collected for the present study were classified into two parts.
Literatures related to cognitive and moral development
Literatures related to impact of nuclear and joint family on children development.
Methodology
Research approach:Quantitative Research Approach
Research Design: Descriptive Research Design
Variables
Research variable: Cognitive and moral development
Demographic variables: Age, sex, educational status of child, type of family, no of family member, income of family, no of siblings, educational status of father and mother, occupation of father and mother.
Setting: Tikota PHC, Bijapur district, Karnataka
Population: The population under study includes the School age children of selected rural area of Bijapur district.
Sample: UG students studying in CHARUSAT University
Sample size: Sample consisted 100 school age children between 8-10 years of age group belongs to joint family and nuclear family
Sampling technique: Non-Probability Convenient Sampling Technique
Inclusion criteria
School age children belong to joint and nuclear family.
Age group between 8 to 10 years.
Both sexes.
Exclusion criteria
School age children belongs to blended, extended, broken and single parent family
Children belong to urban area.
Mentally retarded children.
Handicapped children.
Tools of data collection
Section-A: Demographic profile of samples
Section-B: A structured questionnaire and structured rating scales was developed by the investigator for assessing the cognitive and moral development for school age children between years of age group 8-10 years.
Demographic data
Age, sex, educational status of child, type of family, no of family member, income of family, no of siblings, educational status of father and mother, occupation of father and mother.
Development of tool
The final structured questionnaires consisted of three parts.
Part 1: Demographic variables which contained items for obtaining base line information about the school age children.
Part 2: Structured questionnaire consisted of 24 items covering all aspects of cognitive development such as time, arithmetic, classification, Thinking and reasoning and memory. The items were of multiple choice types with one correct response. The maximum score was 24 and minimum score was zero.
Part 3: Structured rating scale (3 point scale) for moral development consisted of 30 items covering all aspects of moral development such as Helping, Forgiveness, Respect, Charities, Sincere, Honesty, Rules and Regulations, Loyalty, Ethical Sense, Fairness, and Responsibleness. The items were of structured rating scales (three point scale). The maximum score was 60 and minimum score was zero.
Procedure of data collection
The investigator obtained written permission from the PHC at Tikota. The data was collected for the main study from 20 Sep- 20 Nov 2012. The test was conducted using questionnaire. The time was taken for test was one hour for each sample. The data was collected from 50 samples each from children of joint and nuclear family.[7], [8], [9], [10], [11], [12], [13]
Plan for data analysis
The data obtained was planned to be analysed using descriptive and inferential statistics on the basis of objectives and hypotheses of study.
Data related to the sample characteristics would be analyzed using frequency and percentage.
Data related to cognitive and moral development of school age children, age between 8-10 years of age group. After data collection the data will be calculated by frequency, percentage. Z test for comparison between the cognitive and moral development of children belongs to joint and nuclear families in rural areas. The association of demographic variables with cognitive and moral development will be done by chi-square test.[14], [15], [16], [17]
Finding of study
Demographic profile
Age: Is represents the frequency distribution of study subjects by age group of the child. Among 50 sample from joint family, half of them that is 25 (50%) were from 10 years of age group, 15(30%) were from 9 years, 10(20%) were from 8 years. Among 50 sample from nuclear family majority of them that is 32(64%) were from 10 years of age group, 13 (26%) were from 9 years, 05 (10%) were from 8 years.[18], [19]
Gender: Among 50 samples from joint family, majority of them that is 31(62%) were female children, 19(38%) were male. Among 50 samples of nuclear family, majority of them that is 26(52%) were male, 24(48%) were female children.[20], [21]
Educational status of child: Among 50 samples from joint family, majority of them that is 19(38%) were 3rdstd, 15(30%) were 4thstd, 16(32%) were 5thstd. Among 50 children belongs to nuclear family, majority of them that is 20(40%) were 5thstd, 16(32%) were 3rd std, 14(28%) were 4th std.[22], [23]
Number of siblings: Among 50 sample from joint family, majority of them that is 20 (40%) were have two siblings, 16(32%) were having one siblings, 12(24%) were having three or four siblings. 03(06%) did not have siblings. Among 50 sample from nuclear family, majority of them that is 21 (42%) were having two siblings, 20(40%) were having two siblings, 8(16%) were having three or four siblings, 01(02%) did not have siblings.[24], [25], [26]
Educational status of father: Among 50 samples of joint family, majority of the school age children that is 16 (32%) were having primary level of education. 10(20%) of fathers were illiterates, 09(18%) of fathers had high school level of education, 08(16%) of fathers had PUC level of education, 07(14%) had completed graduation. Among 50 samples of nuclear family, majority of them that is 15 (30%) were having primary and PUC level of education. 09 (18%) of fathers were illiterates, 06(12%) of fathers had high school level of education, 05(10%) have completed graduation.[27], [28], [29]
Occupation of father: Among 50 samples of joint family, majority of the fathers of school age children that is 21 (42%) were daily wage, 14 (28%) were non-professionals, 10 (20%) were doing business, 05 (10%) are professionals. Among 50 samples of nuclear family, majority of the fathers of school age children that is 18 (36%) were daily wage, 13 (26%) were doing business, 10 (20%) were professionals, 06 (12%) were non-professionals.[30], [31], [32]
Educational status of mother: Among 50 samples of joint family, majority of the mothers of school age children that is 20 (40%) were having primary level of education. 15 (30%) of mother were had high school level of education, 10(20%) of mothers were illiterates, 03(06%) of mothers had PUC level of education, 02(04%) had completed graduation. Among 50 samples of nuclear family, majority of the mothers of school age children that is 20 (40%) were having primary level of education. 15 (30%) of mothers.
Occupation of mother: majority of the mothers 34 (78%) were house wife, 09 (18%) were daily wage worker and 02 (04%) are professionals. Among 50 samples of nuclear family, majority of the mothers that is 44 (88%) were house wife, 04 (08%) were daily wage worker, 02 (04%) were doing business and 02 (04%) were professionals.[33], [34]
Number of family members: majority of children that is 39 (78%) had four or more family members, 8(16%) had four family members, 3(6%) were having family members in their family. Among 50 sample from nuclear family, majority of them that is 30(60%) four or more family members, 17 (34%) four number family members, 03 (06%) three family members in their family.[35], [36], [37]
Monthly income of family: majority of them that is 32(64%) were having Rs 4001 and above of family income. 10(20%) were between Rs 3001-4000/- of family income, 06(12%) were below Rs 2000/-, 02(04%) were between Rs 2001-3000/- of family income. Among nuclear family majority of them that is 32(64%) were having Rs 4001 and above of family income. 06(12%) were below Rs 2000/-, 06(12%) were between Rs the 2001-3000/- of family income, 06(12%) were between Rs 3001-4000/- of family income.[38], [39], [40]
|
S. No |
Cognitive development. |
Joint family |
Nuclear family |
|||
|
Grading |
Score |
Frequency |
Percentage |
Frequency |
Percentage |
|
|
1 |
Excellent |
19-24 |
34 |
68% |
38 |
72% |
|
2 |
Good |
13-18 |
13 |
26% |
11 |
22% |
|
3 |
Average |
7-12 |
2 |
4% |
1 |
2% |
|
4 |
Poor |
< 06 |
1 |
2% |
0 |
0% |
Inference: Among 50 sample from joint family, majority of the children that is 34 (68%) were have excellent level of cognitive development, 13(26%) were having good level of cognitive development, 02(04%) were having average level of cognitive development, 01(02%) were having average level of cognitive development. Among 50 sample from nuclear family majority of the children that is 38 (76%) were having excellent level of cognitive development, 11(22%) were having good level of cognitive development, 02(04%) were had average level of cognitive development and none were poor in cognitive development.
|
S.No. |
Moral development. |
Joint family |
Nuclear family |
|||
|
Grading |
score |
Frequency |
Percentage |
Frequency |
Percentage |
|
|
1 |
Excellent |
46-60 |
38 |
72% |
39 |
78% |
|
2 |
Good |
31-45 |
11 |
22% |
11 |
22% |
|
3 |
Average |
16-30 |
1 |
2% |
0 |
0% |
|
4 |
Poor |
0-15 |
0 |
0% |
0 |
0% |
Inference: Among 50 sample from joint family, majority of the children that is 38 (76%) were have excellent level of moral development, 11(22%) were had good level of moral development, 01(02%) were having average level of moral development; none were poor in moral development.
Among 50 sample from nuclear family, majority of them that is 39 (78%) were having excellent level of moral development, 11(22%) had good level of moral development, and none of them scored average and poor level in moral development.
|
Type of family |
SD |
Z score |
P-value |
D f |
Remarks |
|
Joint |
3.33 |
-1.39 |
1.99 |
98 |
Significant |
|
Nuclear |
3.15 |
[Table 3] Reveals that there is a significant difference in the cognitive development between children of joint and nuclear family. So null hypothesis is rejected and research hypothesis is accepted.
|
Type of family |
SD |
Z score |
P-value |
D f |
Remarks |
|
Joint |
6.37 |
0.25 |
1.99 |
98 |
Significant |
|
Nuclear |
5.55 |
[Table 4] Rreveals that there is a significant difference in the moral development between children of joint and nuclear family. So null hypothesis is rejected and research hypothesis is accepted.
|
Demographic samples |
χ2 |
Table Value |
Df |
Remarks |
|
Age |
6.52 |
3.84 |
1 |
S |
|
Sex |
0.0005 |
3.84 |
1 |
NS |
|
Educational status of child |
3.68 |
3.84 |
1 |
NS |
|
Number of siblings |
000 |
5.99 |
2 |
NS |
|
Number of family member |
0.0016 |
3.84 |
1 |
NS |
|
Educational status of father |
0.08 |
3.84 |
1 |
NS |
|
Educational status of mother |
0.013 |
3.84 |
1 |
NS |
|
Occupational of mother |
3.07 |
3.84 |
1 |
NS |
[Table 5] There is a significant association between cognitive development of children with age of children. Other than all were non-significant with demographic variables.
|
Demographic samples |
χ2 |
Table Value |
Df |
Remarks |
|
Age |
0.72 |
3.84 |
1 |
NS |
|
Sex |
0.0 |
5.99 |
2 |
NS |
|
Educational status of child |
4.05 |
3.84 |
1 |
NS |
|
Number of siblings |
1.33 |
3.84 |
1 |
NS |
|
Number of family member |
00 |
3.84 |
1 |
NS |
|
Educational status of father |
0.08 |
5.99 |
2 |
NS |
|
Educational status of mother |
2.84 |
5.99 |
2 |
NS |
|
Occupational of mother |
0.88 |
3.84 |
1 |
NS |
[Table 6] Shows the association between cognitive development and demographic variables. There was no significant association between the demographic variables such as age, sex, Educational status of child, Number of siblings, Number of family members, Income of family, Educational status of father, Educational status of mother and cognitive development of school age children..
|
Demographic samples |
χ2 |
Table Value |
Df |
Remarks |
|
Age |
0.82 |
3.84 |
1 |
NS |
|
Sex |
0.04 |
3.84 |
1 |
NS |
|
Educational status of child |
2.83 |
3.84 |
1 |
NS |
|
Number of siblings |
0.06 |
3.84 |
1 |
NS |
|
Number of family member |
1.17 |
3.84 |
1 |
NS |
|
Educational status of father |
0.14 |
3.84 |
1 |
NS |
|
Educational status of mother |
1.05 |
3.84 |
1 |
NS |
|
Occupational of mother |
0.00 |
3.84 |
1 |
NS |
[Table 7] Shows the association between cognitive development and demographic variables. There was no significant association between the demographic variables such as age, sex, Educational status of child, Number of siblings, Number of family members, Income of family, Educational status of father, Educational status of mother and cognitive development of school age children.
|
Demographic samples |
χ2 |
Table Value |
Df |
Remarks |
|
Age |
0.57 |
3.84 |
1 |
NS |
|
Sex |
0.0005 |
3.84 |
1 |
NS |
|
Educational status of child |
4.84 |
3.84 |
1 |
S |
|
Number of siblings |
0.91 |
3.84 |
1 |
NS |
|
Number of family member |
0.013 |
3.84 |
1 |
NS |
|
Educational status of father |
0.0005 |
3.84 |
1 |
NS |
|
Educational status of mother |
2.88 |
5.99 |
2 |
NS |
|
Occupational of mother |
00 |
3.84 |
1 |
NS |
[Table 8] There is a significant association between moral development of children with educational status of child. Other than that all were non-significant.
Conclusion
Based on analysis of the findings of study, the following inferences were drawn down.
Nursing implication
The findings of the study have implication for nursing practice, nursing education, nursing administration and nursing research.
Nursing practice
The paediatric nurses can take into consideration about the family structure and its function during the assessment of a child in the hospital.
The school health nurse should have adequate knowledge regarding the type of family and its influence on the growth and development of school age child.
Nursing education
Student nurses can be taught regarding the influence of family factors on growth and development of children, what is family centered care and its importance in paediatric nursing.
Nursing research
Similar study can be done in urban setting.
Similar study can be done with large sample size and different age group have an exploratory view of this aspect in our country.
A study can be done on the same topic with inclusion of academic achievement at school setting.
Limitation
Study setting was limited to only in Tikota PHC Bijapur district.
Lack of random sampling technique hinders the generalizations of results.
A structured knowledge questionnaire was used for data collection, which restricts the amount of interaction motion that can be obtained from the respondents.
Recommendations
The study can be conducted in other setting.
The study can be conducted on parental factors influencing on developmental aspect of different age group.
The study can be done including other aspect of growth and development like social, psychological and behavioural.
The study can be done with large sample size so that the results can be generalized.
A similar study can be conducted in urban families.
Conclusion based on the study findings
The following conclusions can be drawing based on study findings:
Family places an important healthy growth and development of children.
Type of family has influence on the growth and development of the children in general and cognitive and moral development in particular.
The family factors such as type, socio- economic status, siblings etc should be considered while planning a care for paediatric client.
Conflicts of Interest
All contributing authors declare no conflicts of interest.
Source of Funding
None.
References
- D Kathy. Family values: the importance of strong family bonds. . [Google Scholar]
- D R Marlow, B A Redding. Pediatric Nursing. 6th edn. 2010. [Google Scholar]
- Pillitteri. MCH nursing; Care of the child bearing and child bearing family. 2nd edn 1995. [Google Scholar]
- M J Hockenberry, D Wilson. Wong's Nursing care of infant and children. 8th edn. 2007. [Google Scholar]
- D F Polit, B P Hungler. Nursing research.. 6th edn. 1999. [Google Scholar]
- B T Basavanthappa. Nursing Research. 2nd edn. 2007. [Google Scholar]
- B Parikh. Development of Moral Judgment and Its Relation to Family Environmental Factors in Indian and American Families. Child Dev 1980. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
- A Bahadur, N Dhawan. Social values of parents and children in joint and nuclear family. J Indian Acad Appl Psychol 2008. [Google Scholar]
- P A Amato. Family process and the competence of adolescents and primary school children. J Youth Adolesc 1988. [Google Scholar]
- D. Wood. Impact of family relocation on children's growth, development, school function, and behavior. JAMA: J Am Med Assoc 1993. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
- C Hughes, R Ensor. Executive Function and Theory of Mind in 2 Year Olds: A Family Affair?. Dev Neuropsychol 2005. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
- Lee S Lee. he concomitant development of cognitive and moral modes of thoughts: A test of selected dedutions from Piagets theory. . Genet Psychol Monogr 1971. [Google Scholar]
- A A Susanne, N S Darci, C B Ana, R Márcia. Family environment and child’s cognitive development: an epidemiological approach. Rev Saude Public 2005. [Google Scholar]
- BR Kar, SL Rao, BA Chandramouli. Cognitive development in children with chronic protein energy malnutrition. Bio Med Publication 2008. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
- S Arora, S Bharti, S Sharma. Comparative Study of Cognitive Development of ICDS and Non-ICDS Children (3-6 Years). J Human Ecology 2007. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
- J E Hum. The role of family configuration in early childhood intellectual development in the context of an extended family system in Pakistan. J Hum Ecol 2007. [Google Scholar]
- B Böhm, M Katz-Salamon, K Institute, A C Smedler, H Lagercrantz. Forssberg H; Developmental risks and protective factors for influencing cognitive outcome at 5 1/2 years of age in very-low-birth weight children. Dev Med Child Neurol 2002. [Google Scholar]
- R M Rao, A R Brenner, F E Schisterman, T Vik, L Mills. Long term cognitive development in children with prolonged Crying. Published by group.bmj.com. 2004. [Google Scholar]
- . Merel Braspenning: An Exploration of Religious Education and its Importance for Moral Development in Children. 2010. [Google Scholar]
- B C Wright, J Mahfoud. A child -centred exploraiton of the relevance of family and friends to theory of mind development.2nded. scandinavian. 2nd Edn. 2011. [Google Scholar]
- E. Arranz, J. Artamendi, F. Olabarrieta, J. Martín. Family Context and Theory of Mind Development. Early Child Dev Care 2002. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
- L. Leunens, S. Celestin-Westreich, M. Bonduelle, I. Liebaers, I. Ponjaert-Kristoffersen. Follow-up of cognitive and motor development of 10-year-old singleton children born after ICSI compared with spontaneously conceived children. Human Reprod 2007. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
- D Manavipour. To assess four dimensional structures of moral development (Spiritual Life, Moral Judgment, Moral emotions and post-conventional morality). 2012. [Google Scholar]
- S L Haynes. The role of the family in the moral development of the foundation phase learner. 2006. [Google Scholar]
- . Khatoon, Asia; the impact of nuclear and joint family system on the academic achievement of secondary school students in karachi. 2008. [Google Scholar]
- TC Lian, F Yusooff. The effects of family functioning on self-esteem of children. 2009. [Google Scholar]
- S. O Salami, E A Alawode. Influence of single-parenting on the academic Achievement of adolescents in secondary Schools: implications for counselling. 2002. [Google Scholar]
- J Choi. Family and School in Child Development: The Effect of Family Instability, the Role of the Father, and School Quality on Cognitive Outcomes. 2011. [Google Scholar]
- I Schoon, E Jones, H Cheng, B Maughan. Family hardship, family instability, and cognitive development. J Epidemiol Comm Health 2012. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
- DL Williamson, FJ Salkie, N Letourneau. Welfare Reforms and the Cognitive Development of Young Children. Can J Public Health 2005. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
- S Miller, L K Maguire, G Macdonald. Home-based child development interventions for preschool children from socially disadvantaged families. 2011. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
- S Norberg, Magdalena. The phase out of the nuclear family: empirical studies on the economics and structure of modern Swedish families. . [Google Scholar]
- M S Craig. The parental support of the nuclear family: effects on adolescent success in education. . [Google Scholar]
- E Lena, R Aminur. Household Structure and Child Outcomes: Nuclear vs.Extended Families – Evidence from Bangladesh. Columbia University. 2004. [Google Scholar]
- Kendall, D Earline. Effects of Changed Family Structures on Children: A Review of the Literature. Education resource information centre. . [Google Scholar]
- S K Suresh. Nursing Reasearch & Statistics. 2nd Edn. 2011. [Google Scholar]
- B K Mahajan. Methods in Biostatistics for medical students and research workers. 6th edn. 2005. [Google Scholar]
- P S Sundar Rao, J Richarard. An introduction to biostatistics a manual for students in health sciences. 3rd Edn. 2002. [Google Scholar]
- V Beth, J M Anna, B W Lee. Family nursing practice. 1st Edn. 1998. [Google Scholar]
- M F Marilyn. Family Nursing; Research, Theory & Practice. 4th Edn. 1997. [Google Scholar]
- Introduction
- Need of the Study
- Review of Literature
- The literatures collected for the present study were classified into two parts.
- Methodology
- Variables
- Inclusion criteria
- Exclusion criteria
- Tools of data collection
- Demographic data
- Development of tool
- Procedure of data collection
- Plan for data analysis
- Finding of study
- Conclusion
- Limitation
- Recommendations
- Conclusion based on the study findings
- Conflicts of Interest
- Source of Funding