Journal of Extension

February 2003
Volume 41 Number 1
joe home
contents
search
archive
subscribe
info

Newsletters: Treasures or Trash? Parenting Newsletter Series Results in Positive Behavior Changes

Martha Garton
Extension Associate Professor
Petersburg, West Virginia
Internet Address: mgarton2@wvu.edu

Kelly Hicks
Extension Instructor
Romney, West Virginia
Internet Address: hicksk@wvu.edu

Miriam Leatherman
Extension Associate Professor
Moorefield, West Virginia
Internet Address: mleather@wvu.edu

Margaret Miltenberger
Extension Instructor
Keyser, West Virginia
Internet Address: mmiltenb@wvu.edu

Patricia Mulkeen
Extension Specialist and Extension Assistant Professor
Morgantown, West Virginia
Internet Address: pmulkeen@wvu.edu

Lorella Nelson-Mitchell
Extension Assistant Professor
Franklin, West Virginia
Internet Address: lnelsonm@wvu.edu

Carol Winland
Extension Assistant Professor
Morgantown, West Virginia
Internet Address: cwinland@wvu.edu

West Virginia University Extension Service

Introduction

Parenting has become more challenging today, yet time and distance prevent parents' participation in useful programs. To meet parenting education needs while overcoming barriers to participation in a rural eastern section of West Virginia, Extension agents designed and wrote newsletters for the parents of kindergarten-age students. A cooperative arrangement with the area school system allowed the newsletters to be distributed to kindergarten parents via their children.

The use of newsletters had proven effective in similar situations. The research described here supports the existing literature on the effectiveness of newsletters as a parent education tool (Dickinson & Cudaback, 1992; Riley, Meinhardt, Nelson, Sallsbury & Winnett, 1991; Zimmer, Scheer, & Shriner, 1999; and Bogenschneider & Stone, 1997). An article in the Journal of Extension about newsletter research was similar in targeting kindergarten parents, using a brief format, and learning the newsletter was useful (Merkowitz, Jelly, Collins, & Arkin, 1997). However, the study discussed here identified (1) the extent to which parents read the newsletters and (2) the changes in behaviors as a result of reading the newsletters.

Purpose of the Study

The newsletter series Family Times applied a methodology of parent education to a new set of topics for a new group of parents. Evaluation of this series contributed to the knowledge base regarding the effectiveness of newsletters for parent education. The purpose of the study was to determine parents' knowledge gain and behavior change after reading the newsletters.

Research Questions

  1. Will parents read the newsletters?
  2. Can newsletters increase parents' reported use of the parenting techniques described in the newsletters?

Target Audience

The Family Times newsletter series was designed to reach parents of kindergarten-age students because they are often more receptive and open to parenting suggestions at this stage in their child's development (Bingner, 1979; Reynolds, 1989). The evaluation survey was conducted in the five rural counties (average population 15,531) within the Potomac Highland region of West Virginia.

Newsletter Topics

Topics for the newsletters were chosen based on the literature regarding the needs of parents of children 5-8 years old (Merkowitz et. al., 1997), or were suggested by authors of the National Network for Family Resiliency (DeBord, Kirby, & Meade, 1999). The topics selected were:

  • Dear Parent - Introduction Letter
  • Becoming Your Child's Reading Partner
  • Developing Responsibility
  • Friends
  • Dealing with Anger
  • Children and Small Screens--TV, Video, Games and Computers
  • Setting Limits
  • Taking Time to Listen
  • Honesty is the Best Policy
  • Fears and Feelings

Choice of Delivery Method

The delivery of parent education in a rural community presented several problems. Travel to meetings was often difficult because of distances, weather, and lack of adequate public transportation. Busy parents could not always attend meetings and classes (DeBord, Kirby, & Meade, 1999) and indeed preferred learn-at-home training (Zimmer, Scheer, & Shriner, 1999).

The newsletter could be distributed to a large number of people, could be age-paced to meet the needs of parents, and would be cost effective. Newsletters have been found an effective parent education tool with a variety of other audiences:

  • Teen parents (Dickinson & Cudaback, 1992);
  • Single parents (Nelson, 1986);
  • New parents (Riley, et. al., 1991);
  • Volunteers working with five to eight year-olds (Zimmer et al., 1999); and
  • Low- and high-risk parents of adolescents, (Bogenschneider & Stone, 1997).

Mailing the newsletter was cost prohibitive, so distribution through the schools was chosen. This method strengthened partnerships with the schools and reinforced work that the schools were already doing (Lerner, 1995). Collaboration with the schools brought the program to parents through an institution that was a routine part of their lives (Merkowitz et al., 1997).

Instrument

The instrument used was a post-then-pre questionnaire design. The post-then-pre method reduces distortion in evaluation findings due to respondents' exaggerated ratings of knowledge or skill prior to a training session (Rockwell & Kohn, 1989). The two-page questionnaire distributed to parents included four general questions about the newsletters, a series of post-then-pre questions assessing parenting behavior before and after reading the newsletters, and demographic questions. A pilot test of the survey, using parents not part of the test population, revealed that the parents could understand and successfully complete the survey tool.

Methodology

Cluster sampling was used to select two schools in each of the five counties to receive the survey forms. Cluster sampling was chosen due to the practical advantages that it afforded for data collection purposes (Pedhazur & Schmelkin, 1991).

The survey was divided into two phases. This was done to shorten the survey and to lessen the length of time between when the respondents received the newsletters and when they were asked to respond about their behavior related to the content of the newsletters. Phase 1 dealt with the first five newsletters, and Phase 2 dealt with the remaining four newsletters.

The same demographic information was requested in each phase. Different schools were used in each phase to reach a broader population. Extension agents in each county developed school contacts, distributed questionnaires to the teachers, collected the returned questionnaires, and forwarded them to one location for collective data entry.

A total of 1,044 kindergarten students received the newsletters in the five-county area. Eight hundred and twenty-eight families were surveyed (369 in Phase 1 and 459 in Phase 2). There was a 42.82% response in Phase 1 and a 33.33% response rate in Phase 2.

Analysis

A series of paired-samples t-Tests were conducted to determine whether differences between respondents' ratings of knowledge before and after the newsletter were statistically significant. The paired samples t-Test accounts for the covariance between before and after responses being greater than zero. This positive difference would be expected in two responses from the same person (Hays, 1988).

Major Findings

A majority of the respondents did read most of the Family Times newsletters. Approximately 75% of respondents read three or more of the five Family Times newsletters surveyed with the Phase 1 questionnaire. Among the respondents to the Phase 2 questionnaire, 75% read three or more of the four newsletters.

An overwhelming number of respondents (between 60-75% in Phase 1 and 75-85% in Phase 2) did learn something new from the newsletters. Respondents demonstrated the greatest increase in new information from the reading, responsibility, and the "Taking Time to Listen" topic.

Respondents reported positive changes in their parenting behavior. Areas of positive change are arrayed in Tables 1 and 2. The paired sample t-Tests reveal that the bold items in Table 1 are significant. For example, under reading items, there is a significant positive gain among respondents in using the shared reading tips. However, there were not significant gains in reading with children.

Table 2 reveals that the mean for reading with children before reading the newsletter was high, which indicates that most respondents were already reading to their children. Under responsibility, there were four areas of significant gains:

  1. Positive gains in parenting behavior,
  2. Setting reasonable limits and rules,
  3. Involving the child in setting the rules, and
  4. Helping the child learn from mistakes.
Table 1.
Results of Paired Samples t-Tests for Post- and Pre-Newsletter Parent Practices with Kindergarten Child, Phase 1

Parent Practice

Mean Differences

SD

t

df

Reading Items

. . . Read with your child?

2.36E-02

.48

.55

126

. . . Use shared reading tips?

.29

.57

5.59*

120

. . . Write with your child?

2.42E-02

.50

.53

123

. . . Make books with your child?

8.94E-02

.56

1.77

122

. . . Meet with your child's teacher?

4.92E-02

.40

1.34

121

Responsibility Items

. . . Set reasonable limits and rules?

.12

.35

3.83*

125

. . . Involve child in setting rules?

.11

.47

2.71*

122

. . . Help the child learn from mistakes?

.12

.37

3.44*

119

. . . Make opportunities for the child to practice being responsible?

.15

.50

3.45*

122

Friendship Items

. . . Know your child's friends?

8.00E-02

 
.41

2.16

124

. . . Invite other children to your home?

.14

.41

3.72*

123

. . . Encourage your child to join groups?

4.92E-02

.50

1.09

121

. . . Encourage your child to make friends?

.11

.34

3.67*

122

Anger Management Items

. . . Calm yourself when angry?

.15

.44

3.70*

123

. . . State clear rules to your child?

.11

.32

3.95*

122

. . . Teach your child respect for others?

8.87E-02

.31

3.15*

123

. . . Compliment your child's positive behavior?

.12

.35

3.83*

123

Media Items

. . . Watch TV as a family?

.11

.36

3.27*

121

. . . Tape good programs to view later?

7.56E-02

.27

3.10*

118

. . . Introduce your child to other fun activities?

.18

.38

5.02*

118

. . . Limit TV viewing time to less than 2 hours per day?

.25

.49

5.71*

122
* Significant at the p < .05 level

 

Table 2.
Means and Standard Deviations for Parenting Practices Items, Phase 1
 

Before Newsletter

After Newsletter

Parent Practice

Mean

SD

Mean

SD

Reading Items

. . . Read with your child?

3.54

.66

3.57

.61

. . . Use shared reading tips?

2.49

.98

2.78

.86

. . . Write with your child?

2.99

.92

3.02

.84

. . . Make books with your child?

1.71

.82

1.80

.88

. . . Meet with your child's teacher?

2.70

1.10

2.75

1.08

Responsibility Items

. . . Set reasonable limits and rules?

3.45

.75

3.57

.65

. . . Involve child in setting rules?

2.85

.94

2.96

.92

. . . Help the child learn from mistakes?

3.37

.78

3.48

.61

. . . Make opportunities for the child to practice being responsible?

3.20

.85

3.36

.70

Friendship Items

. . . Know your child's friends?

3.27

.91

3.35

.84

. . . Invite other children to your home?

2.48

1.06

2.62

1.05

. . . Encourage your child to join groups?

2.84

1.01

2.89

.97

. . . Encourage your child to make friends?

3.55

.70

3.67

.57

Anger Management Items

. . . Calm yourself when angry?

3.06

.77

3.21

.72

. . . State clear rules to your child?

3.37

.70

3.48

.62

. . . Teach your child respect for others?

3.73

.55

3.81

.45

. . . Compliment your child's positive behavior?

3.70

.54

3.82

.40

Media Items

. . . Watch TV as a family?

3.25

.84

3.35

.76

. . . Tape good programs to view later?

2.18

1.17

2.26

1.16

. . . Introduce your child to other fun activities?

3.03

.84

3.20

.72

. . . Limit TV viewing time to less than 2 hours per day?

2.38

.90

2.63

.81
No significant differences were found in the mean scores of the respondents for parenting practices Phase 1.

Results of the paired sample t-Tests reveal that all of the items in Table 3 are significant with regard to positive changes in parenting practices.

Table 3.
Results of Paired Samples t-Tests for Post- and Pre-Newsletter Parent Practices with Kindergarten Child, Phase 2

Parent Practice

Mean Differences

SD

t

df

Limits Items

. . . set and maintain consistent limits

.32

.60

6.13

130

. . . involve your child in setting rules

.39

.58

7.67

126

. . . check to learn if the child understands the limit

.30

.58

5.80

126

. . . give a child limited choices

.31

.59

5.71

119

. . . follow through with limits that are set

.38

.70

6.18

128

Listening Items

. . . make time to listen and talk with your child

.26

.49

6.07

129

. . . listen with patience to your child

.28

.57

5.66

129

. . . actively listen with interest and attention

.31

.58

6.15

130

. . . recognize communication blocks

.32

.57

6.20

125

. . . encourage your child to talk

.21

.57

4.19

127

Honesty Items

. . . praise your child for telling the truth

.14

.39

4.06

128

. . . model correct behavior -- avoid white lies, etc.

.23

.55

4.77

131

. . . not overreact if your child does lie

.14

.60

2.66

125

. . . talk with your child about the importance of honesty

.11

.47

2.76

130

Fears Items

        

. . . learn what is causing your child's fear

.25

.58

4.92

126

. . . listen to your child describe fears and feelings

.23

.46

5.63

125

. . . understand that the child's fears are real

.33

.62

6.03

127

. . . help your child deal with fear in small steps

.32

.56

6.36

124

. . . understand that fears are a natural part of growing up

.24

.56

4.91

127
All items had significant differences at the p< .05 level.

 

Table 4
Means and Standard Deviations for Parenting Practices Items, Phase 2
 

Before Newsletter

After Newsletter

Parent Practice

Mean

SD

Mean

SD

Limits Items

. . . set and maintain consistent limits

2.89

.88

3.21

.79

. . . involve your child in setting rules

2.38

.93

2.77

.81

. . . check to learn if the child understands the limit

2.89

.88

3.19

.81

. . . give a child limited choices

2.98

.89

3.29

.81

. . . follow through with limits that are set

2.98

.87

3.36

.70

Listening Items

. . . make time to listen and talk with your child

3.38

.77

3.64

.57

. . . listen with patience to your child

3.06

.81

3.35

.66

. . . actively listen with interest and attention

3.13

.83

3.44

.63

. . . recognize communication blockers

2.75

.89

3.06

.75

. . . encourage your child to talk

3.41

.79

3.63

.65

Honesty Items

. . . praise your child for telling the truth

3.69

.60

3.83

.45

. . . model correct behavior -- avoid white lies, etc

3.17

.81

3.40

.71

. . . not overreact if your child does lie

2.87

.89

3.02

.89

. . . talk with your child about the importance of honesty

3.64

.61

3.76

.56

Fears Items

. . . learn what is causing your child's fear

3.24

.81

3.49

.65

. . . listen to your child describe fears and feelings

3.37

.79

3.60

.66

. . . understand that the child's fears are real

3.34

.81

3.66

.58

. . . help your child deal with fear in small steps

3.21

.80

3.53

.65

. . . understand that fears are a natural part of growing up

3.50

.70

3.74

.54

In Table 5, results of the paired samples t-Test for the topic subscales reveal that eight of the newsletters resulted in significant positive changes in parenting behavior. Reading was the only topic where there was not significance.

Table 5.
Results of Paired Samples t-Tests for Post- and Pre-Newsletter Parent Practices Subscales, Phase 1

Subscale

Mean of Differences

t

df

Reading

7.590E-02

2.53

129

Responsibility

.1247

5.13*

126

Friendship

9.933E-02

4.54*

124

Anger Management

.1200

5.52*

124

Media

.1519

6.68*

123
* Significant differences at the p< .05 level

 

Table 6.
Results of Paired Samples t-Tests for Post- and Pre-Newsletter Parent Practices Subscales, Phase 2

Subscale

Mean Differences

SD

t

df

Limit

.33

.47

8.10

133

Listen

.28

.44

7.30

133

Honest

.16

.38

4.88

134

Fears

.26

.47

6.30

130
All items had significant differences at the p< .05 level.

Conclusions

Based on the results of the research, a parenting newsletter such as the Family Times newsletter can increase parents' reported use of parenting techniques. After reading the different newsletters, a significant number of respondents reported positive behavior changes as a result of the suggested parenting techniques. They also reported that they learned something new.

Thus, it is possible to reach parents with parenting information who would not be reached otherwise and effect a behavior change in their parenting skills and knowledge. Most important, many parents will actually read the newsletter. This is the first step in effecting behavioral change using written material. Additionally, newsletter topics that are focused on a specific parenting issue can motivate positive behavior change in the parents.

Implications

When time, money, and personnel are limited, sustained face-to-face contact is not always possible. Extension must explore and evaluate alternative methods for delivering important information. The study discussed here indicates that newsletters that are well written and focused on a specific parenting issue can make a difference in the lives of families.

It is important that the major learning objectives are clear to the reader. In the case of the Family Times newsletters, "To Make a Difference" action blocks were used to present a clear message. When these specific actions were targeted in the survey for evaluation, respondents were clearly able to identify with the suggested parenting technique, as indicated by significant behavior change for almost all areas.

The research supports the existing literature on the effectiveness of newsletters as a parent education tool (Dickinson & Cudaback, 1992; Nelson, 1986; Riley et al., 1991; Zimmer et al., 1999; & Bogenschneider & Stone, 1997). The evaluation research study was consistent with Bogenschneider and Stone (1997) and Cudabeck (1988) in finding that a newsletter is suitable to reaching a wide population. Results were also consistent with Riley's findings in 1999 in reaching social isolates that are least likely to attend most kinds of parenting programs, because the newsletters reached parents from a variety of economic and educational levels. The research is currently being replicated in other sections of the state.

Limitations

There are two main limitations on the study's findings.

The survey responses were self-reported by the respondents. Although there is research to support the validity of self-reported responses, this opens the possibility that respondents could over- or underestimate their behavior changes. However, it would have been too expensive to conduct independent observations.

Every effort was made to insure confidentiality in the surveys, but there is the possibility that participants responded in consideration of social desirability to show a positive change. This may have inflated the positive changes in parenting behavior results.

References

Bigner, J.J. (1979). Parent-child relations: an introduction to parenting. New York, NY: Macmillan Publishing Co., Inc.

Bogenschneider, K., & Stone, M. (1997). Delivering parent education to low and high-risk parents of adolescents via age-paced newsletters. Family Relations, 46, 123-134.

DeBord, K., Kirby, J.J., & Meade, J.P. (1999). What topics parents want and don't want. National Network for Family Resiliency. Available at: http://www.nnfr.org/parented/Parbr1.html

Dickinson, N.S., & Cudaback, D.J. (1992). Parent education for adolescent mothers. The Journal of Primary Prevention, 13 (1), 23-35.

Hays, W.L. (1988). Statistics, 4th Ed. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.

Lerner, R.M. (1995). America's youth in crisis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Merkowitz, R.F., Jelley, K., Collins, E., & Arkin, C.F. (1997). Backpack buddies: a newsletter series for parents. Journal of Extension [On-line], 35 (5). Available at: http://www.joe.org/joe/1997october/iw3.html

Nelson, P.T. (1986). Newsletters: an effective delivery mode for providing educational information and emotional support to single parent families? Family Relations, 35, 183-188.

Pedhazur, E.J., & Schmelkin, L.P. (1991). Measurement, design, and analysis: An integrated approach. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Reynolds, A.J. (1989). A structural model of first-grade outcomes for an urban, low socioeconomic status, minority population. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81(4), 594-603.

Riley, D., Meinhardt, G., Nelson, C., Sallsbury, M.J., & Winnett, T. (1991). How effective are age-paced newsletters for new parents? A replication and extension of earlier studies. Family Relations, 40, 247-253.

Rockwell, S.K., & Kohn, H. (1989). Post-then-pre evaluation. Journal of Extension [On-line], 27(2). Available at: http://www.joe.org/joe/1989summer/a5.html

WV Kids Count (1999). County profiles of child well-being. WV Kids Count Foundation, Charleston, WV.

Zimmer, B.P., Scheer, S.D., Shriner, J.A. (1999). Cloverbud connections--A newsletter approach to tuning in to kids. Journal of Extension [On-line], 37(1). Available at: http://www.joe.org/joe/1999february/tt2.html

This article is online at http://www.joe.org/joe/2003february/rb5.shtml.

Copyright © by Extension Journal, Inc. ISSN 1077-5315. Articles appearing in the Journal become the property of the Journal. Single copies of articles may be reproduced in electronic or print form for use in educational or training activities. Inclusion of articles in other publications, electronic sources, or systematic large-scale distribution may be done only with prior electronic or written permission of the Journal Editorial Office, joe-ed@joe.org.