About this paper symposium

---

Panel information
Panel 8. Education, Schooling

Paper #1
Balancing Quality and Quantity: How Parental Questioning Supports Preschool-Aged Children's Science Talk and Inquiry
Author information	Role
Kathryn Anne Leech, Ph.D., UNC-Chapel Hill, United States	Presenting author
Coltan Compton, UNC-Chapel Hill, United States	Non-presenting author
Abstract
During early childhood, science inquiry skills develop through interactions with caregivers, where participation in joint activities scaffolds learning (Callanan et al., 2020; Vandermaas-Peeler et al., 2015). Parental questioning plays an important role in informal science interactions, helping children build on prior knowledge and articulate scientific thinking. Both question content (science versus non-science topics) and delivery (open-ended versus close-ended) shape children's science engagement and learning (Morris et al., 2023). However, the timing of questions—particularly over-questioning, where parents ask consecutive questions without a child response—has been less explored. On one hand, frequent questioning might provide more opportunities for children to engage and reflect on the scientific content of the activity. Alternatively, it could limit children's opportunities to share and expand on their own ideas. We examined these hypotheses through the following three research questions: (1) What is the nature and variability of parents' delivery, content, and timing of questioning during informal science activities? (2) How are parents' questioning patterns associated with children’s science talk and inquiry? (3) How do questioning patterns vary by family socioeconomic status (SES)? Seventy parents and their 4- to 5-year-old children were recruited from diverse socioeconomic backgrounds across the United States. Dyads were videotaped interacting with two science-oriented activities: a balance scale and a circuit-building task. The recordings were transcribed and coded for parent questions, capturing the delivery (open- vs. close-ended) and content (science vs. non-science). We also identified instances of over-questioning, defined as three or more consecutive parent questions. Table 1 presents definitions and examples for language variables. Children’s science-related utterances were coded from the transcripts, and their science inquiry understanding was assessed using the inquiry subtest from the Science Learning Assessment (Samarapungaven et al., 2009). Results indicated that parents most often asked close-ended, non-scientific questions, which were three times more frequent than open-ended, science-focused questions.Despite being less frequent, it was the open-ended science-focused questions that best predicted children's science talk (r= .56, p<.001) and inquiry understanding (r= .31, p<.01). Over-questioning also played a role in shaping children’s participation. On average, parents engaged in 2.63 over-questioning sequences, although some parents used as many as 14 sequences. Close-ended science-focused questions were mostly commonly found within over-questioning sequences. Over-questioning was not significantly related to children’s science talk or inquiry understanding. Instead, parents who asked more questions outside of over-questioning sequences had children who talked more about science (r=.38, p<.01). Variation in questioning patterns was, in part, explained by SES. Higher SES parents asked significantly more questions overall (r=.30, p<.05), with much of this difference driven by an increased use of close-ended questions. There was no significant difference in the frequency of open-ended questions by SES. Higher SES parents were also more likely to engage in over-questioning (r=.32, p<.01). These results point to the importance of balance in parental questioning. While asking questions can engage children in scientific inquiry, it is the quality and timing of adults’ questions—rather than sheer quantity—that appear to best support children’s science talk and learning during informal science interactions.

Paper #2
Does a math talk intervention also promote parental autonomy support for preschool aged children?
Author information	Role
Salvador R. Vazquez, Ph.D., Purdue University, United States	Presenting author
Sona C. Kumar, Purdue University, United States	Non-presenting author
Eylül Turan, KU Leuven & University of Washington, Belgium	Non-presenting author
Sarah H. Eason, Purdue University, United States	Non-presenting author
Abstract
Recent studies examining math and STEM (science, technology, engineering, math) talk with children indicate that there is a positive association between autonomy supportive parental management language and math/STEM talk (Clements et al., 2021; Aldrich & Haden, 2024). These findings highlight that both the content and style of parental communication can enhance children’s engagement with math and STEM. In this study we explore whether an intervention designed to promote math talk between parents and preschoolers during everyday activities at home also promotes parental autonomy support language. Seventy parent-child dyads (children ages 3-4 years old) in the United States were randomly assigned to a math condition (n = 35, 54.3% girls) where they received an infographic on early math or to a control condition (n = 35, 60.0% girls) where they received an infographic on nutrition. Dyads were then videotaped during a Zoom session where they completed two activities designed to mimic common daily activities: laundry and groceries. The intervention consisted of parents in the math condition receiving a set of tip cards on how to talk about math during the laundry sorting activity, whereas dyads in the control condition engaged in the laundry sorting activity with no prompts or tips. The grocery activity was designed as a near-transfer task to see if the resources in the math condition (math infographic and guided math talk during laundry activity) would continue to influence parental behavior when they were not prompted. Videos were transcribed and coded to capture frequency of parental management language—defined as a statement, direction, or question that had a direct implication for the child’s actions or behavior immediately following the utterance (Clements et al., 2021). We hypothesized that parents in the math condition would have more management language utterances than parents in the control condition. Initial findings with a subset of the sample (n = 18) suggest that parents in the math condition (n = 9) expressed more management supportive language utterances (M = 41.00, SD = 24.40) than parents in the Control condition (n = 9; M = 26.39, SD = 12.99). Inferential statistical analyses on the entire sample will be included in our presentation, comparing both raw instances of management language and the ratio of management language utterances when accounting for total utterances. Follow-up analyses will also be presented, examining the levels of autonomy supportive management language parents used in both conditions (see Table 1) and assessing potential mediating factors including parents’ perceptions of children’s math ability and their perceptions of how cognitively challenging the tasks were for their preschooler. Findings from this study could have implications for how interventions inform nuances in how parents support math learning during everyday activities at home and provide more insight into the association between parental math talk and autonomy supportive language use.

Paper #3
Beliefs at Play: Examining Parental Beliefs and Praise during Preschool Math Interactions
Author information	Role
Sivan Lurie, University of Maryland College Park, United States	Presenting author
Gillian Grose, University of Maryland College Park, United States	Non-presenting author
Qianru Tiffany Yang, Stanford University, United States	Non-presenting author
Nine Asad, University of Maryland College Park, United States	Non-presenting author
Maylee Montagut, University of Maryland College Park, United States	Non-presenting author
Meredith Rowe, Harvard University, United States	Non-presenting author
Geetha B. Ramani, University of Maryland College Park, United States	Non-presenting author
Abstract
Prior work suggests that beliefs about whether human traits are fixed or changeable significantly impact motivation, cognition, and behavior (Heyman & Dweck, 1998). Praising children for their effort (process praise) fosters incremental beliefs, encouraging persistence and adaptive learning strategies (Gunderson et al., 2013; Kamins & Dweck, 1999). Process praise also predicts later academic achievement, linking early praise to higher performance in 4th grade (Gunderson et al., 2017). However, little is known about the types of praise parents provide during informal interactions and how parents’ own beliefs may influence these practices. The current study examines parent-child interactions during play-based activities. Our sample included 138 parent-child dyads, with children aged 3.5 to 5 years, reflecting diverse backgrounds from across the United States. None of the participating parents held graduate degrees. Families participated in a 12-minute semi-structured interaction captured via Zoom, during which they read a book with math themes, completed a number-puzzle, and played a number board game. We transcribed and coded the videos (47 done to date), classifying parental praise into three categories: process praise (focused on effort; e.g., “you worked hard”), person praise (implying fixed traits; e.g., “you are so smart”), and other praise (general positive feedback; e.g., “wow”), based on Gunderson et al. (2013). We also noted whether each instance of praise was math-related, such as following a child’s successful counting. Parents’ beliefs were gathered using an adapted version of the Parental Beliefs about Ability Fixedness scale (PBAF; Muenks et al., 2015) for mathematics. Preliminary analyses revealed that parents averaged 12.77 praise utterances (SD = 9.40), praising in about 5% of their total utterances. They used more process praise (205 math-related instances; 63 non-math) than person praise (21 math-related; 10 non-math), as shown in Figure 1. Paired t-tests confirmed that these differences were significant with parents providing more process math praise (M = 8.25) compared to person praise (M = 4.34; t(46) = 5.75, p < 0.001), and similar results were found for non-math-related praise (process: M = 2.34; person: M = 1.21; t(46) = 4.84, p < 0.001). Additionally, a two-sample t-test indicated a marginally significant difference in total praise by child gender, with girls receiving more praise (M = 15.71) than boys (M = 10.38; t(33.69) = 1.91, p = 0.064). Regression analyses showed that parental beliefs about fixedness of math ability did not predict total praise (β = 1.53, p = 0.5664) or its proportion over total utterances (β < .01, p = 0.531). Additionally, there were no significant relationships for specific praise types (process: β = 0.25, p = 0.85; person: β = 0.19, p = 0.599). Preliminary findings suggest that parental beliefs about fixedness of ability do not significantly influence the types of praise parents provide to children, indicating that although parents may hold incremental beliefs, these do not necessarily relate to their praise practices. Overall, regardless of reported beliefs, parents are using math-related process praise, which research shows positively impacts children's beliefs about their own abilities.

Paper #4
“Es Elemental”: Latine Caregivers’ Beliefs about Math in the Mexican Craft of Papel Picado
Author information	Role
Paola Montufar Soria, New York University, United States	Presenting author
Gigliana Melzi, New York University, United States	Non-presenting author
Abstract
Family engagement, the ways caregivers support their children’s learning and development, relates to academic outcomes across disciplines, including math. Eason et al. (2022) extend this construct to math learning, defining family math engagement as a socioculturally grounded multidimensional construct that includes not only what families do, but why, how, and for what purpose. Examining caregivers’ views on math learning is crucial to understanding how they structure their children’s early math experiences. Research in U.S. Latine families shows caregivers value early math learning, often distinguishing between academic or “school” math and everyday math. While their math experiences vary from positive to negative, little is known about how Latine caregivers’ math beliefs shape their math engagement. This paper explores Latine caregivers’ attitudes toward math and early learning in the context of the Mexican craft of papel picado, previously studied as a math learning context with school-age children (Civil & Andrade, 2003). It is still unclear whether caregivers would regard it as a math learning context for preschool children. Three research questions were asked: (a) what learning value do Latine caregivers attribute to a papel picado activity?, (b) what math do caregivers see in a papel picado activity?, and (c) are math attitudes related to the learning value attributed or the math seen in the activity? Method Participants were 20 Latine caregivers (Mage = 35 years; SD = 5.95) and their preschoolers (Mage = 54.17 months; SD = 5.26; 50% girls). About half of the caregivers were of Mexican heritage. Caregivers had on average 11 years of schooling (SD = 4.77). Dyads were given materials (i.e., paper, scissors, pencil, eraser) to create a papel picado based on a reference design. Caregivers were then interviewed more broadly about the learning value they attributed to the activity and their math experiences. Interviews were coded inductively to explore the learning value (mathematical or otherwise) attributed, the math content identified (e.g., numbers, measurement, geometry), and caregivers' math attitudes and beliefs. Results and Discussion Preliminary analyses show that most caregivers viewed papel picado as beneficial for motor skill development, with a third recognizing it as a math learning opportunity. When prompted about math, all caregivers acknowledged its value, primarily for learning geometric shapes. While most caregivers had positive math experiences and reported frequent engagement, 25% indicated limited involvement. Additionally, 60% valued early math learning for future academic success, while 40% saw it as a practical tool for everyday life. Preliminary analyses further suggest that caregivers who see math as a practical tool for everyday life are more likely to identify a math learning opportunity within the activity without prompting. These results confirm previous findings that papel picado provides a rich math learning context, now extending it to early childhood. Additionally, they highlight how caregivers’ views on the purpose of math learning may influence how they structure math opportunities for their children. Findings will be discussed in the context of math learning theories and the need for culturally grounded and qualitative approaches for family math engagement.

⇦ Back to session