Children’s early socialization is related to their short and long-term development and well-being. For low-income, ethnoracially minoritized children living in the US, certain socialization practices (e.g., ethnic pride) are protective against the negative sequelae of poverty and racism (Umaña-Taylor & Hill, 2020). To date, however, few studies have investigated the socialization of young Latine children. The term “Latine” is used to refer to individuals whose cultural background originated in Latin America. It is also considered to be a more pronounceable version than “Latinx” by many native Spanish-speakers, including the authors of this manuscript (e.g., Melzi et al., 2021). Beyond the challenges posed by the dearth of research on the socialization of young Latine children, it is challenging to synthesize findings from the existing studies due to the wide array of terms and constructs employed (e.g., parenting practices, socialization goals, childrearing values, ethnic-racial socialization) and no single guiding conceptual framework. Nonetheless, there are a few specific core cultural values that have consistently been identified across these studies that parents consider as central to the socialization process of their preschool-aged children. These heritage values often include familismo (i.e., prioritizing family closeness and interdependence; Buriel, 1993) and respeto (i.e., maintaining harmonious interpersonal relationships by teaching children to be obedient and considerate of adults; Calzada et al., 2010). Families typically transmit these values to their children through consejos (i.e., advice), modeling, and setting routines (Aldoney & Cabrera, 2016; Vesely et al., 2019).

An even smaller body of work has documented that Latine families of preschool children sometimes also adopt US values/beliefs and socialization/parenting goals that are consistent with the mainstream host culture. The most common US value/belief that Latine families report adopting and transmitting to their children starting in early childhood is autonomy (i.e., encouraging children to be independent; Delgado & Ford, 1998) and egalitarian gender roles (i.e., encouraging children to have high aspirations for formal education and teaching them that responsibilities should be shared equally regardless of gender; Vesely et al., 2019). For example, Aldoney & Cabrera (2016) investigated the socialization goals of 30 immigrant, Spanish-speaking parents of children participating in a Head Start center located in Washington DC. Findings from their study showed that parents sought to transmit the heritage values/beliefs of familismo and respeto as well as the US value/belief of autonomy to their children (Aldoney & Cabrera, 2016). Similarly, in their study of 21 low-income, Spanish-speaking immigrant mothers of preschoolers living in a large metropolitan area, Vesely et al. (2019) found that mothers sought to instill the heritage values/beliefs of respeto and familismo along with the US values/beliefs of autonomy and egalitarian gender roles in their children. Some of these mothers also discussed aiming to continue fostering their children’s heritage language because they viewed it as an avenue to maintaining their culture and ensuring their children would become bilingual (Vesely et al., 2019).

In sum, research concerning the socialization processes used among low-income, Latine families with young children is still nascent, but consistently conceptualized as involving the transmission of core heritage and US values. Although findings from a few emerging studies suggest that bilingualism might also be an important part of Latine families’ early socialization process (Vesely et al., 2019), how and why bilingualism is embedded into Latine families’ socialization of their young children is not well understood in the developmental and educational fields, and it has often been underemphasized or omitted from theoretical frameworks. Furthermore, it is important to note that existing findings pertain mostly to Spanish-speaking, immigrant and Puerto Rican families (Aldoney & Cabrera, 2016; González-Ramos et al., 1998; Harwood et al., 1996; Leyendecker et al., 2002; Valdés, 1996; Vesely et al., 2019). Very few studies have explored within-group variability among this minoritized group, even though Latines are an incredibly heterogenous group based on factors such as languages spoken (i.e., 25% English only, 38% Spanish only, 36% multilingual), parent nativity (i.e., 53% US-born) formal education level (i.e., 59% high school or less, 25% 2 year degree or some college, 16% Bachelor’s degree or more), and length of time living in the US (Pew Research Center, 2015; Pew Research Center Hispanic Trends, 2017, 2019).

Drawing from the revised conceptualizations of the bioecological theory (e.g., Vélez-Agosto et al., 2017) and ecocultural theory (Weisner, 2002a, 2000b), these distinctions are important to consider when trying to understand the socialization practices of families because all aspects of parenting are culturally and contextually situated (Wesiner, 2002a, 2000b). Hence, factors such as a families’ generational status in the US likely influence the types of parenting beliefs, values, and practices caregivers enact from their heritage culture and/or those they adopt from the US/host culture (Kramer et al., 2020). For example, Latine families who have been in the US for more generations have likely adopted more US values and experienced more challenges maintaining their heritage language than more recent immigrant families who have had less time experiencing the pressure to assimilate to the US culture. Further, although Latines, particularly immigrants, tend to experience disproportionate poverty, language barriers, and racism, there is also great variability in their “micro-environments”—family support, access to financial and social resources, and childcare arrangements (McWayne et al., 2016; Pachter & García Coll, 2009; Wesiner, 2002b). The interplay of these cultural and contextual factors uniquely shape the way Latine parents organize their children’s daily routines and activities to balance aspects of both cultures (e.g., beliefs and attitudes) with aspects of their ecological context (e.g., poverty, racism, social support) in a manner that they feel best supports their children’s development (McWayne & Melzi, 2014). These negotiations are likely and perhaps uniquely reflected in the daily socialization practices of Latine families and begin early in a child’s life (Melzi et al., 2021).

The handful of studies that have explored within-group heterogeneity in Latine families’ socialization of their preschool children have shown that while Latine families do not meaningfully differ in their transmission of core heritage values/beliefs, they differ in their endorsement of US values/beliefs depending on their generation status or primary language spoken. For example, Delgado-Gaitán (1993) conducted a study among 10 immigrant and first-generation, Mexican American parents living in Southern California to investigate the values by which they raised their young children. Parents were recruited from the Comité de Padres Latinos (COPLA), a parent community organization dedicated to maintaining the Spanish language and Mexican cultural values by advocating for bilingual school programs. Findings showed that respeto and familismo were highly valued and inculcated in Latine children across both generations. However, the US value of independence/autonomy was more salient for first generation compared to immigrant parents (Delgado-Gaitán, 1993). These findings were corroborated in a later study among 48 Latine mothers of preschoolers living in the Northeastern part of the US, which found no meaningful differences in the values/beliefs of respeto and familismo when they made comparisons between Spanish and English-speaking mothers (Calzada et al., 2010). In sum, the available literature that has investigated within-group variability on the socialization of young Latine children can be characterized by relatively small sample sizes and inclusion of family participants who are members of specific cultural organizations (e.g., Delgado study above). As such, further unpacking of how primary language and nativity contribute to within-group heterogeneity in the socialization of Latine children is critical to adequately supporting families in meeting their childrearing goals.

The Present Study

The data for the present study were drawn from a larger, two-phase study focused on developing a culturally grounded measure of family engagement for low-income Latine families of preschool children (McWayne et al., 2013; McWayne & Melzi, 2014). Families were recruited from 14 Head Start centers in New York City that served a majority of Latine families (at least 65%). Interested families were asked to sign up for one of the pre-scheduled focus group interviews. All participating families completed an informed consent form and demographic survey prior to participating in the focus group interviews. All study materials and procedures were reviewed and approved by the university’s Institutional Review Board.

Guided by an emic approach (i.e., within-group, first person: Hall et al., 2016), initial measurement development work was conducted in two phases. The first (qualitative) phase employed English and Spanish language focus groups to understand how Latine caregivers (n = 112) of children attending Head Start discussed supporting their children’s learning, education, and development. The second (quantitative) phase then built on the qualitative data gathered from focus groups to generate items and create a self-report questionnaire of family educational engagement practices entitled, Parental Engagement of Families from Latino Backgrounds (PEFL-English) and its Spanish version Participación Educativa de Familias Latinas (PEFL-Spanish). (McWayne et al., 2013; McWayne & Melzi, 2014). The present study used the focus group data from the first (qualitative) phase of the larger study to answer the following question: What are the salient parenting beliefs, attitudes, and practices that low-income, English- and Spanish-speaking Latine caregivers of preschoolers consider important for supporting their children’s positive development?

Method

Participants

In total, 112 caregivers who self-identified as Latine participated in 17 focus groups conducted at their children’s Head Start center. Seventy-four of these caregivers chose to participate in focus groups conducted in Spanish (n = 9) and 38 in focus groups conducted in English (n = 8).

Spanish focus groups

All caregivers who participated in the Spanish focus groups reported being fluent in Spanish, and 77% of them identified it as the only language spoken at home. The remaining caregivers reported speaking Spanish and another language (i.e., Mixtec, Nahuatl, English) at home. Participants consisted of mothers (93.24%), fathers (n = 4) and one grandmother. On average, caregivers were 30 years old (age range 19–59). Seventy-three percent of caregivers were married or cohabiting, and most reported having between two and three children. Fifty-five percent of participants identified Mexico as their country of origin, followed by Ecuador (16%), the Dominican Republic (15%); Peru (n = 1) and Honduras (n = 1). The remaining participants (9%) were born in Puerto Rico (n = 1) or the US (n = 5). Sixty percent of the foreign-born participants had been living in the US for 9 years or less, 20% for 10–14 years, and 18% for more than 16 years; 2% did not report on this question. Sixty percent of respondents were homemakers, and 73% did not have beyond a high school degree.

English focus groups

There was more variability in the primary language spoken at home among the caregivers in the English focus groups. Specifically, 45% reported that English was the primary language spoken at home, while 24% identified Spanish as their primary home language. The remaining 31% reported speaking English and Spanish at home. Most participants were mothers (89%), one was a father, three were grandmothers, and one was a foster mother. The average age of caregivers in the English focus groups was of 30 (age range 21–57). Forty-five percent were married or co-habiting, and most had two or three children. Thirty-nine percent of caregivers were born in the mainland US and 21% in Puerto Rico, whereas 24% were born in Mexico, 8% in the Dominican Republic, Ecuador (n = 1), and Trinidad (n = 1). One parent did not state their birth country. Fifty percent of foreign-born caregivers had been in the US for more than 15 years, 21% between 10 and 15 years, and 29% for less than 10 years. Sixty-eight percent of caregivers were homemakers, and 45% had beyond a high school degree.

Comparisons between caregivers in the English and Spanish language focus groups showed a few statistically significant differences (p < 0.05) on key demographic variables. Namely, a significantly higher percentage of caregivers in the Spanish focus groups were married or living with their partner (73%) than caregivers in the English focus groups (45%; X2 = 8.62, p = 0.003). As expected, more caregivers in the English focus groups included English as one of the primary language(s) spoken at home (76%) than caregivers in the Spanish focus groups (12%; X2 = 34.97, p < 0.001). Additionally, a significantly higher percentage of caregivers in the English focus groups were born in the mainland US and Puerto Rico (60%) than caregivers in the Spanish focus groups (9%; X2 = 34.74, p < 0.001). Caregivers in the English focus groups were also significantly more likely to have more years living in the US (M = 24.34, SD = 11.83) than caregivers in the Spanish focus groups (M = 11.41, SD = 8.81, t = −6.43, p < 0.001).

Procedure

The third author conducted nine focus groups in Spanish, the researcher’s and the caregivers’ primary language, while the second author (a monolingual English-speaker) conducted seven focus groups in English, with the assistance of a bilingual research assistant. As a moderator, the researchers guided the group conversation using a set of open-ended prompting questions designed to elicit specific aspirations, attitudes, and practices regarding the ways primary caregivers were involved in and supported the development and learning (i.e., desarrollo y aprendizaje) of their young children. Caregivers who had more than one child were asked to focus their responses on the child attending Head Start. Caregivers were also asked to reflect on their own childhood experiences, specifically on the similarities and differences between the educational support they received and that which they provided their children. More details about the specific prompts used can be found in Table 1. A Spanish-English bilingual graduate student attended the focus groups to take field notes and operate the audio-visual equipment. The Spanish focus groups ranged in size from 8 to 10 participants and averaged 78 min in length (ranging from 63 to 113 min). The English focus groups ranged in size from 4 to 6 participants and averaged 79 min in length (ranging from 61 to 112 min). Focus groups were audio and video recorded. Bilingual students transcribed the audios verbatim and verified the transcripts from the videos. Data collection materials and procedures were approved by the universities Institutional Review Board. All participating caregivers were provided with an informed consent form and agreed to participate in the study, and to also have findings published.

Table 1 The prompts used in the focus groups in English and Spanish
Full size table

Author Positionality

The first author is a bicultural and Spanish-English bilingual researcher and educator. She is the daughter of two, Spanish-speaking Mexican immigrant parents and was born in Los Angeles California but spent part of her childhood living in her parents’ small rural town in Jalisco, Mexico, while her mother’s green card was processed. Eventually, the first author and her family came back to the United States. Many of her memories from the first years back to the U.S. include the countless challenges her parents encountered navigating health and school settings due to financial struggles, language and literacy barriers, as well as leaving their strong source of social support (i.e., extended family) in Mexico. Despite these challenges, most of her most salient memories consist of the many occasions in which she witnessed her parents deal with their challenges in innovative and optimistic ways that often turned into teaching moments for her and her siblings about the importance of “echarle ganas y no agüitarse” [not giving up and not losing hope]. She is most appreciative of her parents’ resiliency to maintain and transmit their heritage culture and language to her and her siblings, which she considers foundational to her success in being the first in her family to attend high school and pursue a college degree. The first authors’ lived experience and professional training inspired her to focus her research on understanding the parenting challenges low-income, Latine families experience in the US, while also highlighting their parenting strengths and leveraging their knowledge, culture, and practices in efforts to support them. The second author is a White, monolingual English-speaking, researcher and educator who grew up in a working-class family. Her professional training as an applied developmental scientist and school, community, and clinical child psychologist has informed her extensive experience (more than 25 years) working with Head Start families, teachers and administrators. In recent years, her research has evolved towards a co-constructive participatory approach. The third author is a bicultural and Spanish-English bilingual researcher and educator. She was born and raised in an upper-middle income family in Lima, Peru, and moved to the US for college. The combination of her experiences immigrating to the US and being a literacy teacher to immigrant Latine parents from low-income households motivated her research approach of understanding and centering the knowledge, practices, and culture of Latine families.

Qualitative Analysis

Trained bilingual doctoral students and the authors did the initial round of coding and analysis using a grounded theory approach (Strauss & Corbin, 1998) that included inductive, open-coding procedures. Using Atlas.ti (version 5.1) qualitative data analysis software, transcripts were first “chunked” by tagging the smallest meaningful units that answered the main research question. Each chunk was coded using an iterative process that maximized rigor while studying individual experiences and their meanings. Team members read and edge-coded three randomly selected transcripts and generated a list of potential codes that focused on the research question. To maintain objectivity, an additional Spanish/English bilingual doctoral student, who did not participate in the initial coding, served as an auditor after the initial coding round to ensure that codes reflected accurate representations of the data. A coding manual was generated and applied to an initial sample of transcripts. Based on subsequent discussions, the coding manual was further modified by group consensus. This iterative modification process continued until saturation was reached and no new codes emerged from additional transcripts (approximately half of the transcripts). At this stage of the coding process, codes were not mutually exclusive; that is, chunks could receive multiple codes. Two doctoral students involved in this process then independently recoded all transcripts using the final coding manual. Reliability was established on all chunked segments and was found to be high, ranging from 85–90%, with mean agreement of 87.2%.

Next, a variable-concept-indicator coding model was applied (as per LaRossa, 2005) using Atlas.ti’s networking capabilities to extract higher-level conceptual units from the data. An indicator was a word, phrase or sentence (i.e., “chunk,” or direct quotation) from a transcript; a concept was a first-level label (i.e., code); and, a variable was a classification of concepts into higher-level groups. To develop a conceptual map of how the concepts fit together, an iterative process was employed to conduct: (1) within-concept analyses as a way to delve deeper into codes to extract meaning, and (2) across-concept analysis to determine how concepts were connected to one another and to group them into higher-order variables or themes. At this stage of analysis, indicators that were coded using multiple codes were assigned a primary concept or code such that they would belong to mutually exclusive individual codes; we constantly referred back to the indicator level to ensure our analysis was close to participants’ voices. Finally, all codes were grouped under the categories of families’ attitudes/beliefs or practices within each sub-theme for each of the language focus groups. All data materials and data were stored in secure files and cabinets belonging to the second author. Inquiries about access to these data should be sent to the second author.

Results

As shown in Fig. 1, analyses yielded two superordinate socialization goals: Fostering Bilingualism and Transmitting Heritage and US Values, for caregivers in the English and Spanish focus groups. Caregivers sought to accomplish these goals through concrete practices that seemed to be aligned with the attitudes and beliefs they expressed (forming specific themes within and across the two language groups). Although there were a few themes that emerged only for caregivers in the English language focus groups, caregivers in both language focus groups shared many of the same attitudes, beliefs, and practices within the superordinate goals of bilingualism and transmission of values. Additionally, caregivers in both groups voiced encountering similar and different language-related challenges, which undermined their efforts to promote their heritage language(s) and values with their children.

Fig. 1
figure 1

Latine children’s bicultural socialization

Full size image

Together these two socialization goals underscore the bicultural socialization processes low-income, Latine families engage at this young age as they seek to promote the language and values from the child’s two cultures. Culture and language are clearly interconnected (Schecter et al., 1996), and the term biculturalism often describes individuals who have been exposed to and are actively negotiating two cultures (Mistry et al., 2016), which gives them the ability to shift between cultural schemas in response to cultural cues (Benet-Martínez et al., 2002). In raising children simultaneously with heritage and US values, who feel proud of their ethnic identity, and who have command of two languages, the caregivers in our sample were providing their preschool-aged children with the foundational tools to fluently navigate two cultures in the future, and thus, potentially adopt a bicultural identity.

Fostering Bilingualism

Attitudes and beliefs

Across Spanish and English language focus groups, caregivers expressed the goal of raising bilingual children. They worked on achieving this goal by expressing positive attitudes and beliefs towards Spanish-English bilingualism, and, in a few instances among caregivers in the Spanish language focus groups, even trilingualism (i.e., Spanish, English, and an Indigenous language; Positive Attitudes and Beliefs Towards Multilingualism theme). As shown in Table 2, caregivers’ positive attitudes and beliefs towards multilingualism became even more evident when they expressed being satisfied with their children’s current bi-/multilingual abilities.

Table 2 Quotes from caregivers in the English and Spanish focus groups illustrating the theme of positive attitudes and beliefs towards multilingualism
Full size table

Caregivers hoped their children would become bi-/multilingual or maintain their language skills, primarily because they associated multilingualism with access to opportunities in the future (See Table 3).

Table 3 Quotes from caregivers in the English and Spanish focus groups illustrating the theme of positive attitudes and beliefs towards multilingualism
Full size table

Although caregivers across language focus groups shared having positive attitudes and beliefs towards bilingualism, two additional themes emerged among caregivers in the English focus groups. The first theme, Spanish Language Hierarchy, captured caregivers’ sentiment on the importance that children learn “proper” Spanish, “because sometimes people that speak Spanish the very wrong way, so I teach [her} Spanish in the good way.” The second theme, Language and Family Interactions, centered on caregivers’ beliefs about the critical role language plays within family interactions. They believed language barriers between children and their families could negatively affect family communication and parents’ ability to discipline their children. For example, “My grandmother has nine grandchildren. But out of the eight grandchildren, I’m the only one that speaks Spanish. So she [grandmother] gets mad. So now that that they’re [other cousins] trying to speak Spanish, it’s all broken down” and “When the children come here, most speak English right? They learn like so fast and they are so happy. And some parents, they don’t even know English, they don’t even speak, they don’t even understand. I’m like, it’s good, it’s something to be proud of, but it’s also negative because they don’t know the language, so when is the time for them to get communication between them, they are starting to lose that.”

Practices

In addition to holding positive views about children’s bi- or trilingual language development, caregivers across language focus groups discussed the various strategies they used to support their children’s bilingual language development. For example, the quotes in Table 4 illustrate how caregivers across language focus groups tried to foster the development of each language at home using materials or specific linguistic strategies, such as saying everything in both languages.

Table 4 Quotes from caregivers in the English and Spanish focus groups illustrating how caregivers taught their children multilingual skills
Full size table

Additionally, Table 5 shows how caregivers in both language groups, but particularly those in the English language focus groups, talked about their intentional efforts to foster their children’s heritage language development at home.

Table 5 Quotes from caregivers in the English and Spanish focus groups illustrating caregivers’ efforts to foster children’s heritage language(s)
Full size table

Many caregivers, especially those from the Spanish language focus groups, also tried to foster their children’s English language development. However, and as shown in Table 6, because a large portion of caregivers did not feel comfortable with their own English language skills, they recruited their family members or older children for support.

While caregivers across language focus groups engaged in many of the same practices to foster their children’s English and heritage language development, caregivers in the English language focus groups discussed two additional practices that caregivers in the Spanish focus groups did not mention. First, they supported their children’s English language development by incorporating more English into their conversations at home. Notably, the caregivers who mentioned engaging in practices to support their children’s English language development indicated doing so because they felt their child was fluent in Spanish but limited in their English skills, “She’s really getting to know English because she knows only Spanish. But she’s now coming with words in English, “Oh ma, do this, this on the garbage”. Stuff like that basically. (Moderator: You speak Spanish with her mostly at home?) Yeah, so now we trying to get her used to English.” Hence, they were supporting the child in developing what they perceived to be the child’s weaker language. Other members of the English focus groups discussed resorting to their family for support in fostering their children’s Spanish language skills, “Because who’s going to teach the kids Spanish? So, they’re getting their Spanish from my mom. That’s how they’re getting their Spanish.

In sum, caregivers across language focus groups held positive attitudes and beliefs about their children’s multilingual language development because they believed it would provide them with opportunities in the future. Additionally, caregivers in the English language focus groups also underscored the importance of teaching children “proper” Spanish, and of fostering children’s heritage language to strengthen family communication. Beyond just holding these positive attitudes/beliefs about bi-or trilingualism, caregivers actively engaged in practices that supported children’s multilingual skills. Among caregivers in the English language focus groups, some caregivers discussed supporting the language they perceived their child to be less fluent in at home (English or Spanish). Thus, highlighting caregivers’ active role in trying to raise bilingual children.

Transmission of Heritage and US Values

Attitudes and beliefs

In addition to fostering children’s bilingualism, caregivers also had the goal of instilling specific heritage and US values in their children. One of the values that emerged among caregivers across both language focus groups was Ethnic Pride. Caregivers believed that it was important for children to learn about their heritage culture and feel proud of their roots. It is important to note, that ethnic pride was mentioned more frequently among English focus groups than the Spanish focus groups. Furthermore, caregivers in the English language focus groups expressed fear about the possibility of their children learning about their culture from the wrong sources or not learning about it at all and potentially losing out on that aspect of themselves (See Table 6).

Table 6 Quotes from caregivers in the English and Spanish focus groups illustrating caregivers’ recruitment of their family to teach children English
Full size table
Table 7 Quotes from caregivers in the English and Spanish focus groups illustrating the theme of Ethnic Pride
Full size table

Across language focus groups, caregivers also underscored the importance of teaching children Respeto (See Table 8).

Table 8 Quotes from caregivers in the English and Spanish focus groups illustrating the theme of Respeto
Full size table

The third value that caregivers across language focus groups thought was important to instill in their children was Egalitarian Gender Roles. As described in Table 9, caregivers seemed to view egalitarian gender roles as a US value that was in contrast with the traditional gender roles from their heritage country.

Table 9 Quotes from caregivers in the English and Spanish focus groups illustrating the theme of Egalitarian Gender Roles
Full size table

Caregivers in both language focus groups thought that males and females should share equal household responsibilities, and that women should be encouraged to pursue a higher education (See Table 10).

Table 10 Quotes from caregivers in the English and Spanish focus groups illustrating the theme of Egalitarian Gender Roles
Full size table

Though caregivers in the English and Spanish language focus groups shared similar attitudes and beliefs regarding the values they aimed to instill in their children, there was an additional theme that only emerged among caregivers in the English focus groups— the importance of having family meals like in their heritage country (Familismo). “It’s very important, because when you don’t have time, that dinner time, even if it’s 15 min, you will know what your kids are doing. You get to talk, you get to communicate, and it’s like sharing time. And in our culture, I believe that they still do that.”

Practices

To achieve their goal of inculcating specific heritage and US values in their children, caregivers described intentionally engaging in specific practices. For example, the quotes from Table 11 show how some caregivers had conversations with their children about being respectful.

Table 11 Quotes from caregivers in the English and Spanish focus groups illustrating how they taught their children to be respectful
Full size table

Caregivers also engaged in various practices that exposed children to their heritage culture, including teaching them about their heritage history, visiting their heritage country, playing traditional games, dancing, and eating foods from their heritage culture (See Table 12).

Table 12 Quotes from caregivers in the English and Spanish focus groups illustrating how caregivers transmitted ethnic pride to their children
Full size table

Additionally, caregivers also engaged in active practices to inculcate egalitarian gender views in their children. As shown in Table 13, these strategies included practicing egalitarian gender roles with their partners, enrolling their children in specific sports (i.e., karate for a daughter instead of ballet), disciplining children when attempting to adopt traditional gender roles, having conversations with their children, and assigning their female and male children equal household chores.

Table 13 Quotes from caregivers in the English and Spanish focus groups illustrating how caregivers inculcated egalitarian gender views in their children
Full size table

An additional theme that emerged among caregivers in the English language focus groups were caregivers’ efforts (practices) to teach their children the value of helping family from their heritage country (i.e., Familismo). Such strategies included having children give away clothes and toys, “that’s how I’m trying to teach my kids. If you have something, and if you have a lot, learn how to give. What we do, I let him pick out some toys and we leave some not open and he puts them for his cousins in Mexico.”

In sum, caregivers across language groups had similar attitudes and beliefs about the values they wanted to instill in their children (i.e., Ethnic Pride, Respeto, and Egalitarian Gender Roles). Though, caregivers in the English focus groups stressed ethnic pride more than caregivers in the Spanish focus groups and viewed having family meals together as important. Notably, caregivers across language groups also engaged in practices that would help them transmit these values to their children. Practices typically consisted of visiting their home country, teaching their children to help extended family in their home country, conversing about being respectful and assigning their husband and children equal household chores.

Challenges in Supporting the Heritage Language(s)

Although caregivers worked towards fostering bilingualism and values from both cultures, they also encountered various language-related challenges that likely hindered their efforts towards socializing their children to be bicultural. While one of the challenges was shared among caregivers across language focus groups, there were additional language-related challenges that were unique to each language group. The challenge that caregivers across language focus groups shared was their children’s preference for the English language, as illustrated by the quotes in Table 14.

Table 14 Quotes from caregivers in the English and Spanish focus groups illustrating children’s preference for English
Full size table

Caregivers in the English language focus groups also raised three additional language-related challenges that caregivers in the Spanish language focus groups did not mention. These challenges included children’s difficulty communicating in Spanish, trying to foster Spanish in a household where English was the dominant language, and the caregiver’s own experiences of Spanish language loss. Although caregivers did not explicitly connect this particular theme with difficulties in fostering their children’s bilingualism or specific values, it could arguably shape these efforts, nonetheless. In contrast, caregivers in the Spanish focus groups mentioned encountering experiences of linguistic discrimination due to not speaking or having limited skills in English. For instance, Spanish-speaking caregivers recounted situations in which they had been ignored, shamed, or mistreated for not speaking English, sometimes in front of their children, “I got a friend, her daughter, she said she doesn’t understand Spanish and she doesn’t speak Spanish. But she speaks Spanish, only with her mother. She says, “No, I don’t want to be Spanish.” Because, she says, “Spanish discriminate.” So she has a bad idea in her mind. That’s what society taught her.” Children might find it difficult to embrace their heritage language when they become aware that English holds a higher status than Spanish outside of their home, and that they can experience discrimination for speaking it.

In sum, the challenges that caregivers encountered in attempting to raise bicultural children centered around the difficulty of preserving their heritage language in a society that has often been considered a “graveyard for languages because of its historical ability to absorb immigrants by the millions and extinguish their mother tongues within a few generations” (Rumbaut, 2009, pp. 9).

Discussion

Using an emic approach and focus group data from a large sample of caregivers, this study explored the salient parenting beliefs, attitudes, and practices that low-income, English- and Spanish-speaking Latine caregivers of preschoolers consider important for supporting their children’s positive development. Results showed that both English- and Spanish-speaking Head Start caregivers intentionally engaged in the parenting process of bicultural socialization in their aim to support their preschool children’s development. The two main pillars of bicultural socialization that emerged with this group were: promoting bilingualism and fostering bicultural values. Caregivers across language focus groups discussed the importance of transmitting specific heritage (i.e., familismo, respeto) and US (i.e., egalitarian gender roles) cultural values to children, while supporting proficiency in Spanish and English and encouraging ethnic pride; though important differences emerged across the two language groups as well.

Results underscore Vélez-Agosto et al.’s (2017) argument in their revision of Bronfenbrenner’s bioecological theory—that culture is the key factor shaping and organizing all processes that take place within children’s microsystems. In our study, caregivers in the English and Spanish focus groups demonstrated this when they discussed specific goals they had for their young children, such that the daily parenting practices in which they engaged (e.g., saying everything in both languages) and the activities they organized for their children (e.g., asking relatives to teach their children Spanish or English) were intentionally designed to socialize their children to become bicultural. Moreover, though caregivers in the English and Spanish focus groups had many similar goals for their children, their sometimes-differing ecocultural circumstances (e.g., caregivers’ own language capabilities) influenced how they met their bicultural goals for their children through specific parenting practices (Weisner, 2005).

Our findings contribute to the existing literature in three main ways. First, most of the limited research has focused on understanding the socialization of Spanish-speaking, immigrant families of preschool-aged children and families with older children (Halgunseth et al., 2006). By exploring within-group heterogeneity in a relatively larger sample of Latine families, important similarities and differences in low-income, Latine families’ socialization process with their young children were able to surface. Second, our findings advance Latine parenting literature by centering language development within family socialization processes. In fact, bilingualism emerged as a core goal in the bicultural socialization of young Latine children for both English- and Spanish-speaking caregivers. Although bilingualism has not been identified as a core component of the socialization process of young Latine children (where the focus has been on heritage cultural values), ethnographic early socialization research in other disciplines, such as applied linguistics and anthropology, has documented that maintaining heritage language is an important means by which bilingual Latine families foster ethnic identity in young children (Schecter et al., 1996). Pease-Álvarez (2002) documented that Latine parents of older children across various generations desired for their children to speak their heritage language even when they themselves did not speak Spanish. Hence, it appears that despite often being omitted or under-emphasized in socialization research among young children, bilingual language development is indeed a core pillar of the bicultural socialization process for low-income, Latine families and should be included in future research and theoretical considerations.

Third, our findings seem to indicate that our current conceptualization of Latine families’ socialization of their preschool children should be termed bicultural socialization. Current constructs of socialization, such as the sub-domain of cultural socialization within the ethnic-racial socialization domain, define cultural socialization as teaching children about their cultural heritage, customs, traditions, and history as well as promoting ethnic, racial, and cultural pride (Hughes et al., 2006). Although this construct acknowledges families’ efforts to transmit their heritage culture to their children, the conceptualization of this construct was primarily informed by research on Black families and, to a lesser extent and more recently, Latine families with adolescents (Hughes et al., 2006; Umaña-Taylor & Hill, 2020). As such, the centrality of bilingualism, dual focus on instilling both heritage and US values, and the unique tensions that diverse Latine families feel in fostering two languages and cultures is underemphasized, especially among families with young children whose language skills are dynamically developing. For these reasons, we argue that the term bicultural socialization should be used when referring to the socialization process of Latine families (and probably many other immigrant families) with young children.

Our findings also highlight the resourcefulness and resiliency of Latine families that other researchers have noted (Yosso, 2014). In our study this is evident by families’ determination to foster their children’s bilingual language development, regardless of their own bilingual proficiency and discrimination they have encountered for speaking their heritage language. Importantly, our findings also bring awareness to the specific language-related challenges English- and Spanish-speaking caregivers differentially experience and the ways they seek to overcome these challenges. For instance, caregivers in the English focus groups expressed their desire to raise bilingual children, but many of them had experienced heritage language loss. To overcome this contextual challenge, caregivers often turned to extended family for support in fostering their children’s Spanish language development. Conversely, Spanish-speaking caregivers also aimed to raise bilingual children, but often they did not speak English; therefore, they sought the support of their family to foster their children’s English language development. Notably, both Spanish and English-speaking caregivers faced the common challenge of having children who sometimes preferred to speak English. This finding is not surprising as previous researchers have noted that children become aware that English holds a higher status than their native language as early as the preschool period (Montanari et al., 2019).

In addition to promoting bilingualism, caregivers in both language groups sought to instill heritage values. For example, in line with existing research, respeto was found to be a salient value for Latine families regardless of primary language spoken (Calzada et al., 2010). Indeed, Spanish and English-speaking caregivers from our study often expressed dismay at the lack of respect they witnessed from children in the US, praising the respectful manner in which children are raised in their heritage countries. However, in contrast to prior research among families of preschool children (e.g., Calzada et al., 2010; Delgado-Gaitán, 1993), our study showed that familismo emerged as a salient theme for caregivers in the English focus groups only. Specifically, caregivers in the English focus groups discussed the importance of intentionally having family meals together and teaching their children to help family members in their heritage countries. The salience of familismo in the English focus group discussions might be attributed to their witnessing the deterioration or loss of aspects of their culture with time (e.g., inability to speak Spanish or loss of family cohesion across generations living in the US). Indeed, caregivers in the English focus groups often expressed missing having family meals together every day as they did in their heritage country in the context of discussing their efforts of maintaining family meals together in the US. In an attempt to hold on to their heritage, actively embracing aspects of their heritage culture (i.e., familismo) might be more salient for caregivers in the English focus groups than for those in the Spanish focus groups. This same desire to maintain their heritage culture might also explain why instilling ethnic pride in their children was a relatively more salient theme for the English-speaking caregivers compared with those in the Spanish focus groups (Anderson et al., 2015). Preserving minoritized cultures in the US can be an incredibly difficult act of rebellion for minoritized families due to the constant pressures to assimilate and speak English. As such, maintaining a strong sense of ethnic pride might be a way of coping with and being resilient against the systemic and personal discrimination families encounter for choosing to preserve their heritage culture. In comparison, caregivers in the Spanish focus groups might not yet experience or realize that they are potentially losing aspects of their heritage culture because they have lived in the US for less time or might be more preoccupied with ensuring family survival in the new context. Alternatively, familismo might have been more salient for English speakers because the two cultures are amplified for them due to their experience of living in both for more time. Such a dual cultural perspective might foster more awareness of the differences between both cultures, providing them the lens to talk about these differences. For the Spanish-speaking families, the fact that they did not speak about familismo does not mean they do not uphold this value; rather it is likely deeply embedded within their parenting such that they might not think to discuss it, especially with another immigrant, Spanish-speaker (third author). Another explanation for the salience of mealtimes for English-speaking caregivers could be that because they are likely more acculturated, they are also more sensitive to the messages they receive during the well-child visits about the importance of mealtime routines. Again, for the Spanish-speaking and likely less acculturated mothers, mealtimes might already be a part of their daily life that they do not think to discuss it.

With respect to socialization around more mainstream US values, our study contributes to the literature by showing that fostering egalitarian gender roles is important for both Spanish and English-speaking families. A previous study also found that fostering egalitarian gender roles was a salient theme for Latine mothers of preschoolers, but the study was conducted exclusively with Spanish-speaking, immigrant mothers (Vesely et al., 2019). Thus, our study suggests that similar to the value of respeto, egalitarian gender roles might be a pan-ethnic value emerging among low-income, Latine families in the US. Caregivers in our study discussed modeling egalitarian gender roles with their partners and then reinforcing this equality within everyday family life. Latine mothers in this study expressed the desire to provide their children, regardless of gender, with the opportunity to have a better quality of life than they have had due to the lack of educational opportunities and reinforcement of traditional gender roles while growing up. For these mothers, a better quality of life for their children meant having a career and equal partnerships in their marriage that allowed them to pursue their own goals. Surprisingly, the US value of autonomy was not brought up by caregivers in either of the language groups, even though prior research has identified it as a common US value that low-income, Latine caregivers seek to transmit to their children (Aldoney & Cabrera, 2016; Delgado & Ford, 1998). It could be that this sample of caregivers viewed the theme of egalitarian gender roles similar to that of autonomy in the sense that some of them discussed the importance of transmitting egalitarian gender views in their children so that they could feel empowered to pursue their own goals and formal education, regardless of gender.

This study provides additional insights into the goals low-income, diverse Latine mothers have for their young children and the ways they are actively trying to accomplish these at home, from their own voices. However, there are a few limitations worth noting, including the fact that this study primarily represents the voices of Latine mothers, which limits the generalizability of its findings to other caregivers, such as fathers or grandparents. Additionally, the study was conducted in two Head Start programs in a single urban area, which may limit the generalizability of its findings to other geographic regions or early childhood education settings. Another limitation is that the study relied on self-reported data from participants, which may be subject to social desirability bias or other forms of response bias. Finally, while the researchers used purposive sampling to recruit participants who represented a range of demographic characteristics, it is possible that some subgroups within Latine communities were underrepresented in the sample. These limitations suggest that caution should be exercised when generalizing the findings of this study to other populations or contexts.

There are several ways in which future research can build upon this study’s findings to further our understanding of bicultural socialization values and practices in Latine families in several ways. First, future studies could explore the experiences of other caregivers, such as fathers or grandparents, to gain a more complete picture of the parenting beliefs and practices within Latine families. Second, future research could examine how bicultural socialization values and practices vary across different geographic regions or early childhood education settings. Third, future studies could use longitudinal designs to examine how bicultural socialization values and practices change over time as children grow and develop. Fourth, future research could explore how bicultural socialization values and practices are impacted by other factors, such as socioeconomic status or immigration status. Finally, future studies could use mixed-methods approaches to gain a more comprehensive understanding of the complex interplay between cultural values, parenting beliefs and practices, and child development outcomes in Latine families. By building upon this study’s findings in these ways, future research can deepen our understanding of bicultural socialization in Latine families and inform the development of culturally responsive interventions that support positive child development outcomes for low-income Latine children.

The significance of the study’s focus on bicultural socialization values and practices in Latine families lies in its contribution to our understanding of the diverse parenting beliefs and attitudes within Latine families that may impact children’s development. The study highlights the importance of understanding how parents from diverse cultural backgrounds navigate the process of raising children who are able to successfully navigate both their home culture and the dominant culture. By focusing on bicultural socialization values and practices, the study provides insights into how low-income, diverse Latine mothers are actively trying to accomplish these goals in their own words. This information can be used to design ways of supporting families to meet their goals of raising bicultural children in two-generation early childhood education programs like Head Start.

Importantly, these findings provide valuable information to researchers and practitioners about the goals low-income, Latine families have for their children’s development, which could be used to design ways of supporting families and children better by incorporating bicultural socialization values and practices into curriculum and teaching strategies. For example, educators can promote bilingualism by providing resources and opportunities for children to learn and practice both English and Spanish. They can also foster bicultural values by incorporating cultural traditions, celebrations, and stories from Latine cultures into their curriculum. Additionally, educators can work with parents to understand their goals for their children’s development and provide resources that support these goals, such as Spanish-language materials or referrals to community organizations that provide services in Spanish. By incorporating the findings of this study into their practice, early childhood educators can create a more culturally inclusive learning environment that supports the diverse needs of Latine families and children. For example, Head Start teachers participating in an intervention designed to support them in connecting children’s home experiences with their science curriculum created a “Home-to-School Information Sheet” to learn about the types of plants families ate or grew at home. After obtaining the responses from parents, teachers used this knowledge to design their unit on Planting and Plants We Eat (McWayne et al., 2021). Efforts such as these likely communicate to families and their children that their knowledge and practices are valued, which might also foster stronger family-school relationships (McWayne et al., 2022).