V. TIES: TODDLER AND INFANT EXPERIENCESSTUDY—CARROLL AND COLLEAGUES

In 1978, Jean Carew, Principal Investigator, in collaboration with MariePeters and myself, Grace Carroll, as Co-Principal Investigators, launched asmall 3-year descriptive study of young Black toddlers and infants, namedTIES, an acronym for Toddler and Infant Experiences Study. We were eachexcited about the prospect of doing a longitudinal observational study froma multidisciplinary approach. Jean, a psychologist, had invested a decade inher observation instrument and was both challenged and fascinated by thenew technology that allowed us to capture and store the behavior of chil-dren on videotape. Marie, a Black family specialist, courageous and un-swerving in her ongoing battle with cancer, was equally adamant in herdesire to challenge the frequently perpetuated myth that Black childrenwere like Topsey, ‘‘They just grew.’’ My work in education and sociology, aswell as my dive into parenthood, led me to see this as a great opportunity toopen an office where Black children were thought to be bright and beau-tiful, where their parents could have a voice, and where I could learn moreabout parenting. We were all idealistic in thinking that this small studywould make a positive difference in how Black children and their familieswere viewedFwith an emphasis on their strengths rather than on theirdeficits and deficiencies. These ideals, however, motivated us and served tobond us together.

Over the next 2 years, this bonding occurred in the day-to-day oper-ations of the nonprofit organization we had established for the purpose ofconducting this research. The organization was appropriately named theInstitute for Developmental Studies (IDS). We got all of the necessary pa-pers and official approval for a 501(c) organization and set up offices indowntown Oakland, CA. We were each excited about the prospect of ven-turing out on our own, planting the seeds for a new organization. Wewanted to serve children and families through culturally sensitive research.We hoped that such research would provide the foundation for developingbetter social services to support families and children from diverse cultures.

68

We wanted to shatter the conception that the White middle-class familymodel was appropriate for all families irrespective of cultural differences.More importantly, we wanted to contribute to the data that looked atstrengths of our families rather than the myriad of reports and researchfindings that focused on our dysfunctions and deviance.

Jean was based in Menlo Park, CA, and operated from her home onceher appointment with the Stanford Research Center was completed. Shewas engrossed in fine tuning her observation measure for coding the be-havior of infants and toddlers. She had invested nearly a decade in thisinstrument. Jean was driven. Her attention to detail and her desire to add tothe research literature and make a difference in how we view the devel-opment of children were evident in all she did. She focused on the meth-odological issues surrounding the gathering and reporting of observationaldata.

Marie initially was based at the University of Connecticut and mademonthly transcontinental flights so that we could meet and make conceptualas well as operational decisions about the direction of IDS and the TIESresearch project. She loved and was fascinated by Black families. She con-stantly spoke of how amazing it was that so many Black families functionedwell and performed the necessary duties of raising healthy children despitebeing in an environment that constantly gave them negative messages andlittle support.

Both Jean and Marie were seasoned researchers, whereas I was a ne-ophyte. I was only 25 and had just completed my Ph.D. from Stanford in1975, when I first met Jean. In 1977, she approached me with her vision forcreating a research center. We had many late night discussions about Jean’svision and what this would mean for our careers. We discussed how non-traditional this path would be. I guess this is what fascinated me, as I clearlywanted a nontraditional avenue to pursue my personal and research in-terest in stress and coping mechanisms among our families. Jean convincedme to join the team, which was not a difficult task, especially after I metMarie, a wonderful mother figure and mentorFwarm, generous, loving,and always positive.

When we actually began the project in 1978, I had recently moved toOakland, the city with the largest concentration of African American familiesin the Bay Area. We subsequently based our research center there, and Ihad the responsibility of office operations. Jean’s mentor, a Harvard psy-chiatrist, Chester Pierce, who later became a mentor to all of us, was ourprimary consultant. His input was invaluable in the first year of our study,when we were setting up and making hard choices about process and pro-cedures and conducting our pilot work. We hired a wonderful staff of fe-male researchersFformer students and colleagues who wanted to engagein this new venture.

TIES: TODDLER AND INFANT EXPERIENCES STUDY

69

TIES was exciting and fresh for all of us who wanted to get into thecommunity and use the academic skills we had developed to help improvefamily lives in important ways. Because videotaping in home settings was anew phenomenon at that time, we had a video expert who also became aresearcher during her work with TIES. The technology had not yet pro-gressed to the small lightweight camcorders available today. Quite the con-trary, our researchers had to be strong enough to support an awkward andfairly large 10-pound recorder on their shoulder as they videotaped. Theequipment was purchased, the literature reviews conducted, a beautifullogo developed, measures and instruments created, the pilot families se-lected, training on inconspicuous videotaping initiated, and recruitment forstudy families begun. TIES was coming to life!

The overarching purpose of the toddler and infant experiences studywas to examine the socio-emotional, intellectual, creative, physical, andlanguage development of Black toddlers and the corresponding childrear-ing practices, attitudes, beliefs, and values of working-class and middle-classBlack parents, who, because they are Black, are outside of mainstreamAmerican society. Reflecting back, this was an enormous undertaking. At thetime, I was too new to the research to really understand just how ambitiousit was. I felt we could do anything! Based on our own family experiences, wetruly believed that our families respond to the differences being Blackmakes to our economic, social, and political lives, and we needed to doc-ument this affirmatively. Thus, a primary goal for TIES was to examine, indepth, the intricacies and uniqueness of Black family life, child socialization,and child development.

The specific objectives of TIES were: (a) to document and trace lon-gitudinally, from age 1 to 3, the daily experiences (behaviors, interactions,and activities) of Black children, including both the experiences that chil-dren generate for themselves in independent pursuits and those in whichtheir caregiver and other family members play some part, (b) to documentand trace the development of major socio-emotional, intellectual, language,creative, self-care, and physical competencies, (c) to examine the connec-tions between the children’s daily experiences (both self-generated and en-vironmentally produced) and the development of the competenciesreferred to, using three types of assessments, based respectively on video-taped observations of children in their home, caregiver reports, and per-formance in a standardized test, (d) to document and trace longitudinallythe childrearing practices and styles used by Black caregivers in socializingtheir infants and toddlers and to identify the underlying rationales, lifeexperiences, life conditions, and personal characteristics that influencethese practices and their associated attitudes and expectations, and (e) todocument and describe the lives of Black families, focusing on both (1)factors that commonly cause stress for Black mothers and influence their

70

ability to cope with the problems of parenthood and of living in a society inwhich racial and social discrimination are pervasive aspects of daily life and(2) sources of happiness, satisfaction, self-esteem, hope, and pride.

‘‘Ambitious but do-able’’ was our unwritten but often spoken motto.Jean came to the office regularly and we went to her Menlo Park office,where she had set up a for-profit sister organization called Research forChildren. Her observation measure and process was mapped out and testedin our pilot work. Jean spent hours training our observers so that reliabilityand validity issues could be resolved to her high standards, ultimately get-ting an intercoder agreement above 85% with the error variance for eachcode attributable to intercoder unreliability below 5%. Jean, Marie, and Iagreed on protocols for interviews so that all of our interests could be met. Ifelt I had really arrived when they both agreed to my ‘‘debrief and race as astress factor’’ final interview. Marie made a bold move as we engaged in thedata collection phase of the research: she took an apartment in Oakland. Weknew of her cancer and had shared her times of high and low energy,treatments, and hospital stays. Thus, we were truly surprised that in spite ofher health, she wanted to be with us in this project on a day-to-day basis.Her mother-in-law and a few other extended family members lived in theBay area, but her husband and children were still on the East Coast. Re-alizing her love for life and resolve in making TIES work, they too sup-ported her decision. I was in awe of her commitment, passion, and strength.We forged onward.

TIES was in full swing. We had selected a sample of 25 Black familieswho, at the time of recruitment, were rearing their infant or toddler athome. These toddlers and infants were all age cohorts of my daughter, bornshortly after my move to Oakland. Her timely birth gave us an excellentopportunity to try out our measures on her prior to piloting work on otherinfants and toddlers in the study. Although the sample was small, greatefforts were made to insure that participating families represented a broadrange of social classes, family structures, and other demographic charac-teristics.

Beginning in the fall of 1978 through the end of 1980, we conducted 3-hour visits to our TIES families’ homes each month. Five types of data weregathered on each family: (1) videotaped and eyewitness observations of thechild’s behavior and interactions in his normal home environment, (2)child-focused interviews with the mother or primary caregiver, (3) childassessments (Bayley mental development scales at 24 and 30 months andthe Stanford Binet at 36 months), (4) adult-focused interviews with theparents, and (5) assessments of the physical environment, such as materialsand cultural resources in the home. The data gathering procedure wasorganized in four 6-month cycles, with appropriate modifications ofprocedures and measures for each cycle. Most of the observations and

TIES: TODDLER AND INFANT EXPERIENCES STUDY

71

child-focused interviews occurred in the first three cycles, while most of thein-depth, adult-focused interviews were concentrated in the fourth and lastcycle. Needless to say, we had no shortage of data!

During the course of developing the study, recruiting the families andstaff, and opening an office in Oakland, Jean, Marie, and I developed anintimate friendship with one another. Professional and personal successesand problems were shared. We used one another as sounding boards forideas. We rarely agreed about anything, and we each were known forpushing our own point of view. Because we listened to and respected eachother, however, our perspectives evolved, producing a more healthy andinformed research team. Thus TIES, originally only an acronym, became asymbol of our own personal ties to the project, our cases, our staff, our ideas,and one another.

Jean and Marie were intent on making me respect and participate inacademe. Although I had received a doctorate emphasizing research, I wasa reluctant academic. I had often viewed myself more as a practitionerbecause my passion was working with children and families, not presentingresearch findings to a bunch of strangers. My formal training, which in-volved constant doses of deviance data in reference to Black families, hadmade me wary of research and its effect on the greater Black community.Viewing the care that both Jean and Marie took in respecting our case studyfamilies and in truly trying to understand the nuances of the data made merethink my perspective. Working intensely together gave me an appreci-ation for the breadth of the impact that research can have. Jean felt thatAfrican American researchers needed to get together in the larger profes-sional organizations and share research, information, issues, and concernsthat affect our lives in ways that White researchers may not understand. Sheworked diligently to get the Black Caucus of the Society for Research inChild Development (SRCD) together. I felt this to be a bit ironic, as Jean andI constantly argued about what Blackness meant in the day-to-day lives offamilies. She felt that I was too radical in thought and too tough on Whitefolks. I felt that she was too compromising and had not really experiencedbeing African American, having been brought up in a foreign country andsheltered at Harvard. Eventually, however, we came to a profound under-standing about our internal diversity. We experienced first hand that Blackfolks were not monolithic, nor should they be categorized as such. Withinsocial class or any given community, Black folks have a wide range of dif-ferences, too often not captured in research about our families. Jean mademe keenly aware of this internal diversity. She also increased my ability to betolerant of those who do not think like me.

Marie was equally insistent on making changes in professional academicorganizations. She wanted them to be more understanding of Black familyissues, to see African American families as culturally different, not culturally

72

deprived, to better comprehend the legacy of racism and its impact onfamilies. Her organization of choice was the National Council on FamilyRelationships (NCFR). She, like Jean, attended conferences, presented pa-pers, and tried her best to advocate for Black families with the powers thatbe in these academic arenas. Marie even used her own family and theMcAdoo family as live cases on a panel for NCFR. The Peters and McAdoofamilies, including children, presented their own lives, and responded toquestions about being Black families in America. She was very proud of thispresentation and often spoke of it fondly.

Both Jean and Marie rationalized that if the Black professionals gottogether within these predominately White professional organizations towhich they belonged, and pushed an agenda for change, they could col-lectively make these organizations more relevant to the issues of Black re-searchers, families, and children. I went along, kicking and scratching, as Irespected my mentors, but at the time I did not see clearly how theseendeavors were the best use of my time, space, and energy. I would laterlearn.

Jean and Marie insisted that we begin sharing our findings as soon as wemade sense of them. We had weekly meetings to discuss procedures, data,and analyses. We reached out to others who were engaged in similar work.We presented initial findings to various professional meetings and were ableto generate a series of early papers: a Monograph for SRCD, a chapter in abook edited by Hamilton McCubbin on family socialization, and variousjournal articles. Jean and Marie supported me in ways that I have come toappreciate as being rare for a young scholar. I did not truly know howfortunate I was. They solicited and respected my views, encouraged me tothink outside of the box, introduced me to key theories and researchers,opened doors to many of the hallowed halls of academe which I had fre-quently rejected, and, most importantly, helped me navigate a professionallife consistent with my personal convictions.

My respect for my two colleagues grew. They nurtured my professionalgrowth and served as the mentors and role models I sorely missed in myStanford graduate experience; I had never had an African American femaleprofessor throughout my 8 years in college and graduate school. My col-leagues supported my desire not to have to choose between academia andcommunity service. They provided for me a safe and sturdy bridge betweenthe two. Then this wonderful magical spell was broken. The hurricanes ofillness came and my bridge was irreparably damaged. Jean died in her sleepafter a serious case of manic depression in the summer of 1981. This was tobe our writing year. Marie, who attacked her cancer as she lived her life,with vigor and optimism, succumbed to it in the winter of 1982.

The passing of my two friends and mentors overwhelmed me: I felt soalone, with such a responsibility to publish the work of TIES. I knew it was

TIES: TODDLER AND INFANT EXPERIENCES STUDY

73

so very important to both Jean and Marie. But I could not. It was toopainful. It took me over a decade to return to our work. Prodded by Re-ginald Jones, I completed a chapter about TIES in his measurement andtesting compilation (Massey, Milbrath, Hayes, Buchanan, David, & Rosenb-erg, 1996).

I had lost track of much of the data, but I had kept the final interviewswith our sample mothers conducted by Marie and me in her last year. Iwrote about the data that focused on parenting, race, and stress. It becamemy favorite chapter in my book Environmental Stress and African Americans:The Other Side of the Moon (Carroll, 1998). The title of this chapter, ‘‘Parent-ing: Mothers, Magic, M.E.E.S. and Myths,’’ captured my feelings for my toobrief time with Jean and Marie. They were outstanding mothers who trulygave unconditional love to their children. They helped me become a bettermother to my two children by their encouragement and through theirpersonal examples. We broke many of the myths in our coming togetherand in our research. We proved that Black women of extremely differentbackgrounds and orientations could not only work together but bond invery special ways. We were able to put forth, with supporting data, themultiple ways that Black children and families are able to cope and thrive inthe midst of a hostile environment. Myths of Black deviance did not enterour space. M.E.E.S. stood for ‘‘mundane, extreme, environmental stress,’’ aterm to describe the stress associated with being African American in anenvironment that did not value your assets and gifts. I felt that Jean hadexperienced this stress as she tried to negotiate her professional career,parenting role, and racial identity issues. Although stressful toward the endof our time together, my workspace with Jean and Marie was overall a safespace for me to grow and develop my professional identity. I will be eter-nally indebted to them for their mentorship, guidance, and friendship. As Ireflect back, this was indeed a magical time for me. I feel truly blessed tohave had this time with two very wonderful and remarkable women.

REFERENCES

Carroll, G. (1998). Environmental stress and African Americans: The other side of the moon. West-port, CT: Greenwood Press.

Massey, G. C., Milbrath, C., Hayes, W. A., Buchanan, A., David, J., & Rosenberg, J. (1996).Observation instruments of Toddler and Infant Experiences (TIES). In R. Jones (Ed.),Handbook of tests and measurements for Black populations (Vol. 1, pp. 19–30). Hampton, VA:Cobb and Henry.

74