Billie J. Thomas, Northern Illinois University

THE importance of self image and self expectation to the young child's achievement has often been written about (Entwisle, 1979). The first written assessment of the child's ability is often the kindergarten report card. It is a formal assessment from outside the family. What is being communicated to the child and parents in these kindergarten grades? Are stereotypes and significant differences in grades evident even at this early time? Are they reflections of the teacher's or school's or community's expectations? Since the child takes an active part in learning, what communication might be occurring in the other direction? What do the grades communicate to caregivers about the various groups and their needs?

Grades can be expected to effect the child's self-image and expectation as well as the parents' image and expectations for the child. Entwistle (1978) reports that parents' expectations for their child appeared to be influenced by child I.Q., sex, and teacher expectations. Findings suggest that even the earliest marks children receive are major determinants of future evaluations, and that teacher's earliest formal evaluations may play a leading role in determining achievement levels in young children. Kennedy (1976) concludes that teacher attitudes are important because teachers spend more time with children they assess as successful.

Parent involvement in the child's school could effect grades for the child. Entwisle (1979) reports that expectations may be roughly defined as a child's ideas of his or her own ability at a particular task. He finds that children's expectations were raised significantly by praise and interaction with a suitable adult, and that these expectations became generalized from one area of ability to another. A study of achievement of tutoring programs by Fitz-Gibbon (1977) reports that the tutoring program supported by parents received significantly better results than two similar programs receiving less parent support. Nir and Jick (1973) report that generally the parent-teacher interactions seemed to bridge cultural gaps which had existed between parents and teachers. Haiman (1980) discusses the advantages of parent-school in interactions to the Native American student. Therefore, it was predicted that, in this study, significantly higher grades would be found for children with parents that are highly involved in the classroom.

Differences in family social class or ethnicity could result in differences in kindergarten grades. Winetsky (1978) reports finding significant differences between the behavioral expectations of teachers and mothers who were non-Anglo working class, or both, but no significant differences between teachers and Anglo-middle class mothers' expectations. Beuf (1975) reports that at all levels of education, the Native American faces problems arising from cultural bias, poverty, and racial prejudice in white society. He concludes that at the preschool level Native American children perform as well on measures of intellectual ability and achievement as their white counterparts; but even then, absenteeism, language and cultural differences, etc. begin to interfere with learning. Conway (1968) reports that primary grades seemed to be related to kindergarten attendance. Reports of poor school achievement among low income and minority students are common (Baratz, 1970; McDavid, 1969; and Ramirez and Castaneda, 1974). Therefore it was predicted that this study would find significantly lower grades and higher rates of absenteeism for Native American Children. It was also predicted that the study would find significantly lower grades for lower class children.

Uncertainty about differences in achievement for afternoon and morning classes is reported in the research review study completed by the Illinois State Board of Education (1985). Moore (1978) reviews research indicating that young males may have lower achievement in kindergarten than females. Bronfenbrenner (1974) has written of the harmful effects of our increasingly fragmented society and disorganized systems--alienation, antagonism and violence--which are reflected in our family styles. Therefore it was predicted that the study would find significantly higher grades for females and morning classes. It was also predicted that significantly lower grades for children in alternative family styles would be found.

Moore also reviews many research studies about school-age children with mothers working inside and outside the home. The children of working and non-working mothers do not usually differ appreciably in personal or social adjustment, school performance, or in the incidence of delinquency. In general, the school achievement of children of working mothers does not differ from that of children with non-working mothers. Therefore, it was predicted that the study would find no significant differences in grades for children with working and non-working mothers.

Consequently, this study compares report card grades for all kindergarten children in a rural mid-western town near the reservation on the variables of gender, class time, parent involvement, ethnicity, socio-economic status and family style. It is predicted that significantly higher grades will be found for females, morning classes, high parent involvement, Caucasians, upper and middle classes, and married and single parent families.

Two middle class, white, baccalaureate, certified, experienced teachers each taught two kindergarten classes, one morning and one afternoon. The teachers filled out report cards twice during the year, first at the end of 12 weeks of school and next at the end of 36 weeks of school. The teachers did not know the report cards would be analyzed when they filled them out.

All kindergarten students in public school in a rural midwestern town were included in the study. Eighty-four students (100%) started in September. Two students (2%) moved out of town during the year, and three new students moved into the classes. These five students were omitted from the study because of incomplete data. The remaining 82 children (98%) started and finished this study. They were taught in four half-day classes. Each class contained 20 to 22 children. Children's ages ranged from 60 to 83 months (M = 68). There were 40 female and 42 male children. There were 44 children in the morning groups and 38 children in the afternoon groups. There were 44 Caucasian and 38 Native Americans. Mothers worked outside the home in 45 families and were homemakers in 37 families. Rankings were completed for the socio-economic status of families and showed 27 lower class, 27 middle class, and 28 upper class (Marwick, 1980). The children lived in 52 married families, 17 single parent families, and 13 alternative families. Alternative families included foster homes, grandparent caretakers, and extended family caretakers. Parents were either in high or low parent involvement groups, depending upon the amount of interaction with the classroom. Amount of involvement was taken from teacher and parent records. One group of 42 families had the traditional parent involvement opportunities, while a second group of 40 families had more involvement.

Report Cards were scored using a four point scale: (a) S + , four points, highly satisfactory progress and effort, (b) S, three points, satisfactory progress and effort, (c) S - , two points, low satisfactory progress, (d) I, one point, improvement needed.

Report Cards were compared on a total of eight grade categories containing 34 grades:

1. Child's General Characteristics included seven grades: Rested, Attentive, Considerate, Relaxed, Friendly, Cheerful, and Even-tempered. Students were given marks of 2(+) or I(indicated by a check mark).

2. Expression included three grades: Contributes to group discussions; Speaks clearly and distinctly; Speaks in complete thoughts. Students were given marks of S + (4), S (3), S - (2), or I (1)).

3. Social Development included seven grades: Works and plays with others; Practices self-control; Shows respect for authority; Accepts responsibility; Respects rights and property of others; Listens while others talk; Practices good health habits. Students were given marks of S + (4), S (3), S - (2), or I (1).

4. Work habits included seven grades: Listens to directions; Follows simple directions; Thinks and works independently; Uses time to good advantage; Cleans up well after work; Works carefully for this level; Works without disturbing others. Students were given marks of S + (4), S (3), S - (2), or I (1).

5. Physical Development consisted of two statements: Has adequate large muscle control; Has adequate small muscle control. Students were given marks of S + (4), S (3), S - (2), or I (indicated by a check mark).

6. Reading & Number Readiness included six grades: Shows interest in books, stories, and poems; Retells story in proper sequence; Makes auditory discriminations; Makes visual discriminations; Can read and write numerals 1-20; Can apply mathematical concepts. Students were given marks of S + (4), S (3), S - (2), or I (1).

7. Art Appreciation and Music Participation each had one question. Students were given marks of S + (4), S (3), S - (2), or I (1).

8. The research created an All Grades category by adding the grade points of the seven categories listed above for each student.

The children started school September 3rd and finished on May 29th. The two teachers filled out and sent home the report cards after the 12th and 36th weeks of classes. The teachers did not know the grades would be used in the study. After the report cards were completed, written permission was obtained from the teachers, school, and all children's parents. Xerox copies were made of the report cards by the researcher, who then entered the scores for the first report card grades, the scores for the second report grades, and the differences between the scores into the mainframe computer. Kindergarten grades were compared between the following groups: (a) male and female, (b) morning session and afternoon session, (c) Native Americans and Caucasians, (d) working mothers and nonworking mothers, (e) upper, middle, and lower socio-economic status, (f) married, single parent, or alternative family style, and (g) more and less parent involvement in the education program. T tests were used for analysis of groups (a) through (f) above. Pooled variance estimates, two tail tests of Analysis of Variance with Multiple Classification Analysis and X2 tests were used for groups, in socio-economic status and also for groups in family styles.

Females, morning classes, and high parent involvement groups were predicted to have significantly higher grades, but this was not found in this study. T tests showed no significant differences even at p< . I in grades for the first grading period, second grading period or the amount of change between them.

TABLE 1
t Values for Comparison of Kindergarten Grades
by Ethnicity and by Mothers' Employment

* p .1 **p .05 ***p .01 ****df = 80

(Note: the X2 has the 2 superscripted in the original document) X2 tests comparing the composition of the male and female groups and composition of the high/low parent involvement groups showed no significant differences at all in any of the nine background variables: parent involvement, time of class, gender, age, number of children in family, ethnicity, family style, socio-economic group, working mothers.

X2 tests comparing the composition of the morning and afternoon groups showed no significant differences in parent involvement, gender, number of children in family, socio-economic group, or age of children. However there were significantly more Caucasian families in the morning group and more Native American families in the afternoon group (1, N = 82) 18.6, p< .000. This may be because children were placed on a "first come, first served basis," and the school staff said that Caucasian families usually enroll their children sooner. There were significantly more single and alternative style families in the afternoon classes, and more married families in the morning classes than in the afternoon classes (1, N = 82) = 6.6, p< .02.

Ethnicity
It was predicted that Caucasian children's grades would be significantly higher than Native American children's. Overall, this was not found in the study. Results of t tests are in Table 1.

The two categories with significant differences both in the first grades and the second grades were Child's General Characteristics and Social Development. For the first grades, looking at the t tests of the seven grades on Child's General Characteristics, two were significantly different: Attentive and Considerate (80) = p< .05. For the second grades, there were three: Attentive, Considerate, and Even tempered (80) = p< .1. For the first grades, there were three out of the seven in Social Development that were significantly different: Shows respect for authority; Respects rights and property of others; Practices self control (80) = p< .06. For the second grades, Native Americans ranked lower on all seven grades, with four significantly different: Works and plays with others; Practices self-control; Shows respect for authority; Respects rights and property of others (80) = p< .1.

Absenteeism
It was predicted there would be significantly lower attendance by Native American children in the kindergarten. Lower attendance was found in the study where Caucasian children were present M = 172 days and Native American children were present M = 160 days, t (80) = 4.06, p< .000. There were no significant differences in attendance within the other six groups at p< . 1.

X2 = tests comparing the composition of the Native American and Caucasian groups showed no significant differences in parent involvement, gender, number of children in family, ethnicity, age, or working mothers. There was a significant difference in the time of day they attended classes, since more Native Americans went to afternoon classes (2, N = 82) = 4.98, p< .05. There were more single parent Native American families in the lower class socio-economic group (4, N = 82) = 4.7, p< .05.

Mothers Working Outside the Home
Earlier studies have predicted that children of working mothers would be predicted to perform as well or better in school than children of non-working mothers. Results of the study agree. T tests show significant differences in the category of Expression for children of non-working mothers at the end of the first grading period (80) = -1.98, p< .1. T tests on the three grades in the category of Expression show two to be significantly higher for children of nonworking mothers: Contributes to group discussions and Speaks in complete thoughts (80) = p< .1. However, for the second grading period, there were no significant differences between grades for children with working and nonworking mothers. The amount of change over time was significantly higher for children with working mothers (80) = 1.92, p< .05.

X2 test comparison of the composition for groups of working and nonworking mothers showed no significant differences in amount of parent involvement, gender of child, number of children in home, ethnicity, family style, socio-economic group, or age of child. There were significantly more children with working mothers in the morning classes--see above (1, N = 82) = 5.584, p< .02.

Socio-Economic Status
Analysis of Variance comparing children in the upper, middle, and lower socio-economic groups showed significant differences in the first, second, and changes in grades. The results are in Table 2.

First grades. Multiple Classification Analysis of internal rankings from high to low were upper-middle-lower (UML) for the categories of Social Development, Work Habits, Expression, Art & Music, and All Grades. For Child's General Characteristics, Physical Development, and Reading & Number Readiness the internal ranking was upper-lower-middle(ULM).

TABLE 2
F Values for Comparison of Kindergarten Grades
by Socio-economic Groups and by Family Styles

* p .1 **p .05 ***p .01 ****df = 2, N = 82

Table 2 shows that first grades have significant differences in four grade categories. Looking closely at these and beginning with the seven grades for Child's General Characteristics, X2 tests show significant differences for three: Rested and ready for work; Attentive; Friendly (2, N = 82) = p< .05. The seven grades in Social Development have a significant difference in Works and plays with others (4, N = 82) = p< .03. Work Habits grades were significantly different for Listens to directions and Uses his/her time to good advantage (4, N = 82) = p< .06. All Grades category is a composite of the other categories and is described in Table 2.

Second grades. Multiple Classification Analysis of internal rankings from high to low were ULM for Expression, Social Development, Physical development, Art & Music, and All Grades. Internal ranking was UML for Reading & Number Readiness, Child's General Characteristics, and Work Habits.

Looking closely at the five categories having significant differences for the second grading period, X2 tests show Expression significantly different on two of three grades: Contributions to group discussions, and Speaks clearly and distinctly (4, N = 82) = p< .05. Four of the seven grades in Social Development were significantly different: Works and plays with others; Practices self-control; Accepts responsibility; Respects rights and property of others (4, N = 82) = p< .1. Inspection of the seven grades in Work Habits and the two grades in Physical Development show only near p< .1 significance level individually, but added together by category, they are significant. All Grades category is a composite of the other categories and is described in Table 2.

Change. The Multiple Classification Analysis of internal rankings highest to lowest were lower-middle-upper (LMU) for the grade changes in Child's General Characteristics, Social Development, Work Habits, Art & Music, and All Grades. The internal rankings were lower-upper-middle (LUM) for Expression and Physical Development. The internal ranking was middle-upper-lower (MUL) for Reading & Number Readiness.

X2 tests comparing the composition of Socio-economic Status groups showed no differences in amount of parent involvement, gender or age of child, number of children in the family, family style, or working mothers. There were more lower class children in the morning classes (2, N = 82) = 9.5, p< .01. There were more Native American families in the lower class, and more Caucasian families in the middle and upper classes (2, N = 82) = 23.5, p< .000. There were more single families in the middle and upper classes (4, IN = 82) = 10.4, p< .034.

Family Style (Married, Single, Alternative)
See Table 2 for overall results of Analysis of Variance comparisons among the three groups.

First grades. The Multiple Classification Analysis of internal ranking from highest to lowest for Child's General Characteristics and Social Development was married-alternative-single (MAS). It was single-married-alternative (SMA) for Work Habits, and Art & Music. It was married-single alternative (MSA) for Expression, Reading & Number Readiness, and All Grades. It was SMA for Physical Development.

Looking closely at the two grade categories having significant differences in the first grade period, X2 tests show significant differences in five of the seven grades in Child's General Characteristics: Rested, Ready for work; Attentive; Considerate; Relaxed; and Friendly (2, N = 82) = p< .07. From the seven grades in Work Habits the following five were significantly different: Follows simple directions; Can think and work independently; Uses time to good advantages; Works carefully for kindergarten level; and Works without disturbing others (4, N = 82) = p< .08.

Second grades. Comparisons for the second period grades showed General Characteristics and Social Development with a Multiple Classification Analysis of internal ranking from highest to lowest of MAS. Expression, Work Habits, Physical Development, Reading & Number Readiness, Art & Music, and All Grades had an internal ranking of SMA.

Looking closely at the two grade categories showing significant grade differences, X2 tests show significant differences in four of the seven grades of Social Development: Works and plays with others; Practices self-control: Shows respect for authority; and Respects the rights and property of others (4, N = 82) = p< .1. The two grades in the category of Physical Development are not significantly different individually, but together they are (4, N = 82) = p< .1.

Change. The one grade category where significant differences in the amount of change occurred was Child's General Characteristics, with a Multiple Classification Analysis internal ranking of SAM.

X2 test comparing the composition of groups in Family Styles showed no differences in gender or age of children, number of children in the family, or working mothers. There were more married families in the high parent involvement group and more alternative families in the low parent involvement group (2, N = 82) = 8.09, p< .02. There were more single families with children in the afternoon classes and more married families with children in the morning classes (2, IN = 82) = 15.5, p< .000. There were more single parent Native American families and more married Caucasian families (2, N = 82) = 10.0, p< .000. There were more single and alternative parent families in the lower class, and more married families in the upper class (4,1 N = 82) = 10.4, p< .03.

The grades given by the teachers did not indicate differences between the genders, morning and afternoon classes, or high and low parent involvement groups. Apparently none of the stereotypes were being communicated, either from the teacher to the child and parent, or from the child to the teacher. The teachers may have set different grading standards within the groups, but when questioned about this, they assured us that they did not.

The kindergarten teachers gave higher grades to Caucasian children in the categories of Child's General Characteristics and Social Development. Looking at the content graded in these two areas, it seems they would easily reflect cultural differences, especially when the teachers are middle class Caucasians as they were in this study. It appears that teachers are communicating negatively to the child and family about Native American characteristics and social interactions. The stereotypes are recognizable in the communication going both ways. Since the significance levels are higher at the end of the year, perhaps the child and parent are communicating to the teachers that they prefer the other ways of interacting. They were less attentive, considerate, and even-tempered during the second part of the year, perhaps temper of anger at a loss or negation of preferred behavior? However, there were six other grade categories that were not significantly different between the races in kindergarten. This could indicate that the differences in school achievement found in intermediate grades are not present when Native American children start school, but begin to develop when they finish kindergarten. Much more research needs to be done in this area.

The kindergarten teachers gave significantly higher grades in Expression to the children of non-working mothers at the end of the first grading period, but by the end of the second grading period, the differences were no longer significant. Perhaps children with mothers helped in expression development earlier. The amount of change was significantly higher for the children of working mothers. It appears that the children of working mothers learned more about verbal expressions in groups during the year. Since this was the only category that was significantly different, working mothers can be reassured by the study. The teachers are not communicating stereotypes to the child or parent in this grading area. The children may be indicating that they are ready to learn a lot about verbal expression during the kindergarten year. They do not seem to be communicating that they are different if their mother works.

When considering the socio-economic groups, the upper class group consistently ranks highest in grades. The middle class appears to perform higher than the lower class group, but at the end of the year, the lower class has made considerable gains, and in five of the eight grade categories they have higher average year end grades than the middle class children. However, the lower class group did not show as much change in Reading & Number Readiness as the upper and lower class groups. Lower class children rank in the middle at the beginning of the year, but rank at the bottom by the year's end. Perhaps this observation is a communication from the child of a downward trend. Overall, both the lower and middle class children show more changes from period one to period two than the upper class children do. Lower class children show the most changes for seven of the eight grade categories. However, the upper class children still have higher average grades in all eight grade categories at the year's end. This could reflect differences in developmental rates of growth, better preschool environments, or even innate genetic superiority. Whatever the causes, the upper class children seem to be communicating "We know what we are doing!" and the teachers are communicating the same thing back to them. The middle class children, communicate that they can change, are changing, and know which areas are the important areas. The teachers communicate their approval. The lower class children communicate that they are changing a great deal in Expression, Social Development, Physical Development, and Art & Music, but not in the areas the teachers weigh heavily (Reading & Number Readiness, and Work Habits). Perhaps the communication here shows differences in preferred interactions and life emphasis, both from child and parent to teacher and from teacher to child and parent. The stereotypes are clearly here for the social classes.

The results raise several possibilities for further study. Do dress, speech and manners effect grades in the kindergarten? Do teachers develop attachments for, or feel sorry for, the lower class children and therefore treat them more leniently on final grades? Are lower class children "making up for lost time" and beginning to catch up in some areas that are not academic?

Results for the family styles reaffirm some traditional expectations and do not reaffirm others. Few differences are found. Initially, children from married families have higher grades, but by the year's end, children from single and alternative style families have caught up. Children from married families have better grades in Social Development. Maybe with more people around, social development is more important? Or, perhaps in a more traditional family social development is stressed more? Children in single families have better Work Habits initially, but not by the year's end. On the final grades, children from single parent families have better Physical Development. Perhaps their lifestyle requires greater self-control and independence? Over all, there are few differences in grades when they are compared by family style.

Baratz, S., & Baratz, J. (1970). Early childhood intervention: The social science base of institutional racism. Harvard Educational Review, 40, 29-50.

Beuf , A. (1975). The home of whose brave? Problems confronting Native Americans in education. New York, NY: Ford Foundation. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 188833)

Bronfenbrenner, U. (1974). The origins of alienation. Scientific American, 231, 53-61.

Conway, C. (1968). A study of public and private kindergarten and nonkindergarten children in the primary grades. Vancouver, Canada: Educational Research Institute of British Columbia. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 028837).

Entwisle, D. R., & Hayduk, L. A. (1978). Academic expectations and the school attainment of young children. (Report No. BBB06621). Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University, Center for Social Organization of Schools. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 174359).

Entwisle, D. A., Webster, M. & Hayduk, L. (1974). Expectation theory in the classroom (Final Report). Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University, Center for Social Organization of Schools. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 102437).

Fitz-Gibbon, C. T. (1977). Tutoring: Some new ideas. (Report No. BBB06621). Washington, D.C.: National Institute of Education (DHEW). (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 148806).

Haiman, P., et al. (1980). Eagle Butte, South Dakota basic educational skills project program description. Washington, DC: Administration for Children, Youth, and Families (DHEW). (ERIC Document Reproduction No. ED 191577).

Haiman, P. (1980). Eagle Butte, South Dakota basic educational skills project program description. Washington D.C.: Administration for Children, Youth, and Families (DHEW). (ERIC Document Reproduction No. ED 191577).

Illinois State Board of Education. Early Childhood Education Policy Study: An Overview. Springfield, IL, April, 1985.

Kennedy, E. R. (1976, April). Kindergarten teacher’s individual integrative and dominative contact patterns with children and their relation to teacher assessments of children. Paper presented at the meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA.

Marwick, A. (1980). Image and Reality. Oxford University Press: New York.

McDavid, J. (1969). The teacher as an agent of socialization. In E. Grotbert (Ed.). Critical Issues in Research Related to Disadvantaged Children. Princeton, N.J.: Educational Testing Service, 1969.

Moore, S. (1978). Research in review. Young Children, 33 (1), 76-82.

Nit, N., & Jick, T. (1973). Kedmah (parent-teacher discussion groups). Jerusalem, Israel: Henrietta Szold Institute, Ruth Bressler Center for Research in Education. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 103112).

Ramirex, M., & Castaneda, A. (1974). Cultural democracy, biocognitive development and education. New York: Academic Press.

Winetsky, C. S. Comparison of the expectations of parents and teachers for the behavior of preschool children. Child Development. 49 (4), 1146-1154.