Search

The measurement of self-regulation in young children has been a topic of great interest as researchers and practitioners work to help ensure that children have the skills they need to succeed as they start school. The present study examined how a revised version of a commonly used measure of behavioral self-regulation, the Head-Toes-Knees-Shoulders task (HTKS) called the HTKS-R, and measures of executive function (EF) was related to academic outcomes between preschool and kindergarten (ages 4-6 years) in a diverse sample of children from families with low income participating in Head Start in the United States. Participants included 318 children (53% female; 76% White; and 20% Latino/Hispanic) from 64 classrooms in 18 Head Start preschools who were followed over four time points between the fall of preschool and the spring of kindergarten. Results indicated that children with higher HTKS-R scores had significantly higher math and literacy scores at all-time points between preschool and kindergarten. The HTKS-R was also a more consistent predictor of math and literacy than individual EF measures assessing inhibitory control, working memory, and task shifting. Parallel process growth models indicated that children who had high initial scores on the HTKS-R also had relatively higher initial scores on math and literacy. In addition, growth in children's scores on the HTKS-R across the preschool and kindergarten years was related to growth in both children's math and literacy scores over the same period independent of their starting points on either measure. For the HTKS-R and math, children's initial scores were negatively associated with growth over the preschool and kindergarten years indicating that lower skilled children at the start of preschool started to catch up to their more skilled peers by the end of kindergarten.

Education professionals' conceptions of assessment can influence how they enact assessment with children. In this study, we explored the factor structure of a previously validated survey instrument, Brown's Conceptions of Assessment Questionnaire (COA-III), when administered to a social-media-based sample of 241 U.S. early childhood professionals. We then used these results to examine participants' conceptions and how these conceptions relate to one another. In common with prior research, the exploratory factor analysis yielded a 3-factor model of the participants' conceptions of the purposes of assessment: assessment improves educational outcomes, assessment is irrelevant, and assessment as an accountability measure. Thus, the COA-III offers promise to educational researchers, policymakers, and professional preparation programs seeking to understand what early childhood professionals think and believe about the purpose of assessment. Further analyses--namely evidence of conflicting assessment beliefs--confirmed some of the complexities of assessing young children; such findings hold important implications for assessment-related training, policy, and practice.

This study extended existing work on the Individualized Classroom Assessment Scoring System (inCLASS), established as a measure of preschool-age children's observed interactions in the four domains of Teacher Interactions, Peer Interactions, Task Orientation, and Negative Engagement. Our sample included kindergarten-age children (N = 117; mean age = 5.53 years) in 11 classrooms in four schools from a low-income community. We had three aims: (a) examine the inCLASS' applicability in this new sample, (b) examine associations with teacher reports of children's social skills and learning behaviors, and (c) identify characteristics at the time point, child, and classroom levels that contribute to inCLASS scores. We found limited variability in scores for each of the four inCLASS domains, with scores related to teacher reports of children's skills as expected. Children's inCLASS scores were highly variable from one observation time point to the next, and time point, child, and classroom characteristics differentially contributed to their scores. Implications for observational assessment are discussed.