research topics for kindergarten

128 Kindergarten Research Topics & Essay Examples

📝 kindergarten research papers examples, 🎓 simple research topics about kindergarten, 👍 good kindergarten essay topics to write about, 🏆 best kindergarten essay titles, ❓ kindergarten research questions.

• Early Childhood Education: Studies Review Studies on early childhood education have been conducted in various countries. This paper reviews three studies that were conducted in Germany, Netherlands and the USA.
• Bilingual Education and Preschoolers' Development There are several theories in child development that directly or indirectly discuss the implications of bilingual education and show the importance of bilingual education.
• Engaging the Learner in the Early Years of Schooling The following project report is preparation of education plans for five- year-old Indonesian children who are now growing up in the alien lands of Sydney in Australia.
• Curriculum for Kindergarten Pupils The article presents a mini fitness lesson suitable for kindergarten children, as well as a plan for an interactive family event.
• Developmentally Appropriate Activities for Toddlers The study sample includes a book aimed at developing toddlers’ cognitive skills and gross motor behavior, a go-get interactive game, and a video on learning colors.
• Sloth Sky Preschool: Curriculum Context Sloth Sky Preschool offers center-based care for preschool/kindergarten children as a part of a school. Based on the location, the school is near Penguin Ocean Primary School.
• Special Education for Children of Kindergarten and Third-Grade Levels Special education is designed to address the needs of students with specific disabilities in a very individual manner.
• Literacy Development for Preschoolers The article focuses on the importance of early literacy development in preschoolers and methods that will help teachers in this.
• An Ethical Dilemma With a Child in a Preschool Classroom An ethical dilemma with a child in a preschool classroom stemming from a situation when a child does not want to comply with a particular EC institution’s standard schedule.
• Influence of Teachers’ Attitudes on Student Behavior and Achievement This article is about a study that aims to determine how teacher attitudes affect student behavior and performance in grades kindergarten through fifth.
• How Teacher Attitudes Affect Students' Behavior and Performance in Grades The aim of conducting this study is to determine how teacher attitudes affect student behavior and performance in grades Kindergarten through fifth.
• The Aspects of Purposeful Preschool Program The article argues class management is one of the key components of teaching practice as it can ensure the proper development and academic achievement of preschool children.
• Preschool Teacher Practice Rotation Experience Preschool experience plays a pivotal role in a person’s development, as it lays the foundation for their character
• Using Data in Preschools: Data Collection Data drives every aspect of teaching, especially when there is a need to teach young children. Teachers need to see where the kids are thriving and the gaps that need to be filled.
• Preschooler Education Overview The article "Preschoolers (3-5 years of age)" describes preschoolers' development milestones aged between 3 to 5 and suggests some positive parenting tips.
• "Teaching Strategies for Preschool Educators" Analysis The article focuses on the main teaching strategies used in preschool education. The first strategy is the promotion of early literacy.
• Preschoolers Education and Activities for Children The activities for children should be appropriate for everyone within the class. Preschoolers must be encouraged to play and learn.
• Language Acquisition in Toddlers and Infants Language acquisition in toddlers starts from their communication with the environment. A friendly environment and proper materials allow for simplifying the language learning process
• Importance of the Assessment in Kindergarten and Its Types Assessment in kindergarten is essential in building future generations, building the pupils' strength and giving them the confidence is the joy of a teacher.
• “Investigating Pathways”: Toddler Learning Setups “Investigating Pathways” video examines two toddler learning setups: the blue room and the green room, each using different investigation concepts.
• Infant and Toddler Development and Programming The set of materials presented in this essay provides a beneficial learning process for babies and toddlers because their usage is organized around educational principles of belonging.
• Examination of Books and Interactive Content for Numbers Learning This paper identifies 12 textbooks that teach pre-kindergarten, kindergarten, and second-grade children to understand numbers, counting, and sets.
• Integrated Co-Teaching and Impact on Learning Integrated co-teaching (ICT) is an emerging method of teaching students with learning disabilities. This system is implemented in different levels of educational institutions.
• Number Sense and Learning Centers in Preschool To improve Number Sense in preschool, the educator will have to adopt new learning strategies. The expectations of the learning outcomes are shaped by curriculum.
• The Quality of Learning Programs in Preschool Establishments The paper research and summarizes the article "Quality 101: Identifying the core components of a high-quality early childhood program" about high-quality child care programs.
• Visiting a Preschool Class as Reflective Practice This report provides a detailed reflection of the activities, environment, and knowledge obtained during a visit to a preschool class in one of the local public schools.
• Strive Preschool: Using Information Systems in a Preschool The school should start by establishing the necessary roles and activities and using IT budget to buy, maintain, and update software and hardware.
• Special Education Curriculum Issues and Their Solutions in the USA There are many potential improvements that can transform the special education programs across the US to become more efficient, inclusive, and appropriate for the stakeholders.
• Lesson Plan for Pre-Kindergarteners Learning activities have to be divided into relevant categories to help the educator pick a small number of developmental milestones and focus on individual elements of learning.
• A Fire Safety Class Held in a Preschool The paper states that the case illustrates a fire safety class held in a preschool. Children were taught the basics of emergency case information.
• Froebel’s Kindergarten Philosophy Friedrich Froebel is a renowned philosopher whose influence on childhood education is evident in the contemporary world.
• Planning and Teaching in a Preschool Setting The teacher's job is to plan learning activities that begin with the development of learning objectives and continue through implementation and evaluation in a preschool setting.
• Physical Development in Florida Voluntary Prekindergarten Education Program The observed Pre-K program had an emphasis on physical development, which incorporated elements of math, reading, music, and arts.
• Lesson Plans for Preschool and Second Grade During the math lesson, it is necessary to observe whether children show increased use of part-whole skills, and division of things into smaller objects.
• Preschool Education in China and Japan Preschool education in China serves several purposes, from child care to educational preparation. Meanwhile, the Japanese preschool system is more directed toward socialization.
• Education System: Building a Class The learning process aims to develop professional skills and develop tolerance and create a picture of the world.
• Importance of Research-Based Curriculum The Fireflies is both a developmentally appropriate and engaging curriculum that allows the teacher to promote learning through play and help children.
• Literacy in Elementary Schools After COVID-19 Pandemic The level of literacy the students of kindergartens and first three grades of elementary schools possess is lower than it was before the COVID-19 pandemic.
• The Preschool Program's Design Analysis This paper aims to design a preschool daycare program for children aged three to five and discuss the activities to enhance their social, emotional, physical, and cognitive skills.
• Early Childhood Education in India Today's preschool education system in India is designed so that parents can rest assured of their children who have been trained in such groups.
• Social-Emotional Skills Program for Preschoolers During the early 21st century, it was reported that the ability to regulate behaviors and emotions could be seen as the fundamental skills showcasing a child’s school readiness.
• Comparison of the Two Early Childhood Educational Institutions in Hong Kong This paper examines the educational and administrative management aspects of two kindergartens in Hong Kong: HKYWCA Athena and The Salvation Army Shui Chuen O Kindergarten.
• Research in the Field of Childhood Literacy This paper contains an annotated bibliography of the two articles devoted to the topics of childhood literacy and education.
• Social-Emotional Skill Program to Enhance Learning in Preschoolers This research studies the relationship between three variables, the learners' socio-emotional skills and their academic and behavioral outcomes in pre-schoolers.
• Me and Others: Observation of Preschool Children This paper analyzes the video “Me and others”, which shows an experiment on suggestibility performed with preschool children (5 years old).
• “The Kindergarten Program”: Visible Learning in Early Childhood Education Visible learning is particularly significant since children learn from experience and should be exposed to real-life situations.
• Interventions and Letter & Sound Recognition Students who experience difficulties in recognizing letters and sounds in words and reading face challenges in writing and isolation of alphabetical sounds.
• Dyslexia in Young Children: Developmental Language Disorder ADHD, autism spectrum disorder, depression, anorexia, Tourette's, and bipolar are among those conditions that have various symptoms.
• Early Childhood Education Programs Comparison Relying on the two videos on Early Childhood Education Programs, this paper compares various programs that are critical for the proper development of children.
• Preschool Activity: Introducing Multicultural Awareness The world is a place of many cultures and nations, which is why it is essential to introduce multicultural awareness to children.
• The Lingua Globe Educational Toy The Lingua Globe toy represents a globe that features multiple buttons corresponding to different countries. The toy addresses primarily the linguistic aspect of development.
• Early Childhood Education: Pedagogical Skills Understanding each child as a unique individual with their own psychological characteristics and structure of thinking seems to be a necessary competence of any children's teacher.
• Positive Behaviour Support Framework in Preschool The School-Wide Positive Behaviour Support framework promotes acceptable behavior expectations for children in schools to facilitate a safe learning culture.
• The Overall Expectations in the Kindergarten Program The documentation The Overall Expectations in the Kindergarten Program supports the idea that the cup-stacking activity addresses the two overall expectation frames.
• Mutual Storytelling in the Baby's Edcuation Communicating with your child is an essential aspect of learning because from a very early age, children try to copy the behavior of adults.
• The Montessori Method and Its Benefits The Montessori Method of education is an influential teaching method to ensure that students are equipped with the best practical skills in the learning process.
• Expanding Existing Programs and Services in Preschool The expansion of the existing program and service in preschool is a good project which needs to be implemented in the West Bronx neighborhood.
• DIBELS: The Cognitive Foundations of Reading and Its Acquisition DIBELS is a literacy assessment program that helps identify and offer assistance to lagging students. The key tests in the DIBELS program are the LNF, ISF, PSF, and NWF tests.
• Early Childhood Education Aspects Early childhood is considered the most crucial time of child development because it is a period of fast physical and mental development.
• Family Partnerships to Help Needy Preschooler Students Family and parent partnerships are essential to ensuring that students build strong relationships that can help in boosting their success.
• Educational Assistant: Roles and Responsibilities Educational assistants monitor and record learners' needs, strengths, behavior, and achievements during their time in school and report crucial incidents.
• Should Pre-K Be Made Available to All Children? Preparing children for elementary school can benefit them because preschool improves their cognitive abilities and gets them used to a regimented schedule.
• A Description of the Student Observation The paper includes a description of the setting, including one's first impressions, suitability for children, and the school environment and atmosphere.
• English Language Learners and Kindergarten Entry Age: Achievement and Social-emotional Effects
• Preschool and Kindergarten Best Practice Curriculum
• Language Acquisition and Expected Developmental Differences for Children of Preschool, Kindergarten, and Primary Ages
• The Lesson Plan Created for Kindergarten Students Based on Next Generation
• The Need for Universal All Day Pre Kindergarten
• Intervention and Theoretical Paper Kindergarten Age
• Full-Day vs Half-Day Kindergarten: Which Is Better? This research used an experimental method to point out the cause and effect of having children enrolled in a full-day or half-day kindergarten program.
• The Literacy Improvement Program for Pre Kindergarten
• Teacher Quality and Learning Outcomes in Kindergarten
• Kindergarten Children’s Attachment Security, Inhibitory Control, and the Internalization of Rules of Conduct
• Getting Mom Ready for Kindergarten
• Developmental Differences That Can Be Expected in Language Acquisition for Preschool, Kindergarten and Primary Aged Children
• The Challenges Facing Kindergarten Teachers for Deal With Children Whom English Is an Additional Language
• Teaching English Language in Saudi Arabia Kindergarten
• This research will primarily explore the significance of integrating English in Kindergarten, which have started emerging in Saudi Arabia, in both private and public schools.
• Team Work, Connection and Cooperation Among Two Institutions – School and Kindergarten
• Shared Book Reading Promotes Not Only Language Development, but Also Grapheme Awareness in German Kindergarten Children
• Factors Affecting the School Readiness of Public Kindergarten Pupils in Lanao Del Sur I–B
• High-Quality Pre Kindergarten Classroom Look Like
• The Kindergarten Attendance Allowance in Hungary
• Using Kindergarten Number Sense To Predict Calculation Fluency in Second Grade
• The Full Day Kindergarten Program
• Effects of Kindergarten Activities on Cognitive Development This paper explores how teachers and parents can enhance the development of cognitive skills of kindergarteners through engagement with nuts and bolts.
• Kindergarten Enrollment and the Intergenerational Transmission of Education
• Procedures for Sampling Texts and Tasks in Kindergarten Through Eighth Grade
• Relationship Between Kindergarten Organizational Climate and Teacher Burnout
• Parents and Kindergarten Decisions To Be Made
• Kindergarten and Education Expansion Programme Analysis
• Kindergarten for All: Long-run Effects of a Universal Intervention
• Teacher Interview and Observation of a Kindergarten Math
• Learning Activity That Has Been Designed for the Kindergarten
• Investigation Into Developed Sabis Curriculum in Kindergarten
• Teaching Young Children and Becoming a Kindergarten Teacher
• Child’s Development Analysis and Potential Interventions In the case of the child described in the paper, there was a normal transition – she started studying in kindergarten and a non-normal one – she experienced her parents’ divorce.
• Residential Mobility Across Early Childhood and Children’s Kindergarten Readiness
• Young Children’s Developmental Ecologies and Kindergarten Readiness
• Kindergarten and Child Primary Education
• Technology and the Classroom Starting With Kindergarten
• Kindergarten Through Sixth Grade Writing Effectiveness Instruction
• Children and Home Reading Before Kindergarten
• Early Kindergarten, Maternal Labor Supply, and Children’s Outcomes: Evidence From Italy
• Physical and Technological Resources in Kindergarten
• Full-Day Kindergarten Versus Half Day Kindergarten Reading Achievement
• Efficiency and Fair Access in Kindergarten Allocation Policy Design
• Student Engagement and Student Motivation in a Reading Classroom for the Kindergarten Level
• Why Is Partnership Between Parents and Kindergarten Teachers Necessary?
• What Is the Relationship Between Kindergarten and Primary School Teacher?
• How Does the Developed Sabis Curriculum Affect Children in Kindergarten?
• Why Should Foreign Language Teaching Begin in Kindergarten?
• How Non-native Speaking Children Learn the Chinese Language in Kindergarten
• Does Delaying Kindergarten Entrance Give Children a Head Start?
• What Is the Difference Between Elementary School and Kindergarten?
• Can Universal Pre-kindergarten Programs Improve Population Health and Longevity?
• What Are Free Kindergarten Educational Programs?
• Sharing Responsibility: What They Didn’t Teach You in Kindergarten?
• Why Do Kindergarten Teachers Need To Have at Least a Basic Degree?
• What Is the Relationship of Environmental Instability and the Behavior of Children in the Classroom in Kindergarten?
• What Do Kindergarten Teachers and University Professors Have in Common?
• Do Kindergarten Students Need Computer Science Classes?
• Why Does the Montana School System Require Sex Education for Kindergarten?
• How Do Preschool Programs Improve Literacy and Achievement?
• What Are the Duties of Kindergarten Teachers?
• How and Why Does Age at Kindergarten Entry Matter?
• What Is the Importance of Full-Day Kindergarten?
• How Do Kindergarten Prep Skills Contribute to Academic Achievement?

8 Genius Research Projects for K–2 Students You Will Definitely Want to Try

Turn your K–2 students into researchers and detectives with these fun classroom projects.

PebbleGo  is the award-winning database for reading and research for K-2. It makes learning fun while improving reading and research skills. Learn more about the six different databases—Animals, Science, Biographies, Dinosaurs, Social Studies  and the Spanish-language Animals. 

Research-based learning is often reserved for students in upper elementary or middle school, but this is a skill that kids can and do learn at an early age. Yes, you can teach kindergarteners how to do proper research (i.e. be awesome detectives and readers) . 

Here are eight inspiring research projects on subjects common for the K–2 age group. For each one, we give tips for LEARNING about the specific subject first with key research questions and tasks. Then, we offer a creative project idea, inspired by teachers and educators around the country, for DOING with your students.

1. The World of Bugs

SOURCE: Plain Vanilla Mom

It’s a big, enormous world out there—and there are   lots of bugs in it. This is a good one to start with if you’re teaching young elementary students how to research. Spiders, insects, and bugs will forever be fascinating subjects for kids. So this project should generate a lot of excitement.

LEARNING: Assign each of your students a different bug and have them answer very simple questions like: How many legs do they have? Where can you find them? How big are they?

DOING: This bug fossil activity is fantastic! All you need is modeling clay, plastic insects (which you can get at the dollar store), a magnifying glass, and tweezers or tongs. Your students will love making the little molds, and it will really encourage them to pay attention to detail!

2. Money, Money, Money

Source: 123 Homeschool 4 Me

Understanding the value of a dollar, counting, and even doing small math problems with money are all skills that your students will be doing for years to come. Here’s how you can get them going on concepts now.

LEARNING: Start with the basics and make sure your students know the value of each bill and coin. Once they understand this, talk to them about earning money, saving, and even the purpose of banks.

DOING: Get inspired by this money minibook. Either download a free one (see link above) or create your own version to meet your classroom needs. Create several books for your class or one for each student as a quick reference to help them really understand the value of money.

3. History and Fame

Source: Let’s Explore

Every grade level has history and biographies as part of its curriculum. It’s essential for students to learn about historymakers, inventors, artists, and other important people of the past, and there are lots of fun ways to do this.

LEARNING: The research comes first, so it’s a good idea to assign a famous person to each of your students. Have them do a little biography, answering questions like: When were they born? Why are they famous? Where did they live?

DOING: Now it’s time for the fun part, where students get to be creative in reporting their results. Some teachers have the students get up in front of the class to present on their specific person, while others make it an art project. We love biography poster collages, like the one pictured above, because they really encourage students to focus on the most essential biographical facts.

4. Learning Plant Life Cycle

Source: The Imagination Tree

Learning about plant life is always a popular classroom activity. It’s such a great opportunity to show students how things grow, and help them understand where their food comes from. 

LEARNING: Students can research farming and agriculture, and learn about where food comes from, both locally and around the world. Discover where tropical fruits like bananas and pineapple come from compared to crops in the United States like corn, potatoes, and beans. Help students understand that all plants have a similar start like the beans you will grow in class. 

DOING:  Plant your bean plants in a clear container like a jar. You can use paper towel or cotton balls for the planting so students will be able to see the roots grow and develop. Have students track the plant’s progress. They can measure it, take photos, or draw pictures every few days. Your students will love seeing how it changes so quickly. 

5. Animal Tracks

Source: Green Kids Crafts

Animals are such a big interest area for younger elementary students, and they make lessons instantly more popular. This really useful lesson covers animals, human anatomy, and animal habitats.

LEARNING: When your class studies animal tracks, students can learn a lot about animals. For instance, they can learn about an animal’s size. They can also compare the size of the animal track to their own handprints or footprints for an anatomy lesson. And students can learn about animal habitats, too! We can help our students understand how all of these items are connected.

DOING: Now that your students have learned about animal tracks, have them recreate the tracks using cardboard scraps and sponges. This will give them a real idea of the actual size and shape of different tracks in the wild.

6. Digging into Dinosaurs

Source: Inquiring Minds

Even though they’re now extinct, dinosaurs remain some of the most popular animals with kids. Once you get your students researching, they can learn so much about these magnificent animals that came before us.

LEARNING: Help your students define the words “paleontology” and “paleontologist.” Next, encourage your kids to research different types of dinosaurs. Have them answer questions like: What were some of the big ones? Which ones could fly? What did different types of dinosaurs eat? These will all be important questions to answer before you dive into a project.

DOING: You can steal the sponge idea mentioned above to also create dinosaur tracks. Or for the ambitious teacher, create your very own giant dinosaur skeleton. This teacher outlined the shape for her students and then let them use packing peanuts and empty cardboard tubes to fill the inside.

7. Environment and Pollution

Source: The Owl Teacher

Whether you’re looking for a good Earth Day activity or you just want to teach your students more about environmental issues we are facing around the world, you can bring home the message by studying water pollution. This is a topic that affects millions every single day.

LEARNING: First, learn about the different types of pollution with your students. Air and water pollution are two big ones to start with. Help your kids learn the difference between these two and what they look like. Then ask them a question like, how could pollution affect animals, humans, and the future? Questions like this might seem too big for little minds, but they can handle it!

DOING: It really helps to see this lesson firsthand, and this Freddie the Fish activity is perfect. You’ll definitely want to see this teacher’s step-by-step instructions  describing how she did it, but the basics involve a fish-shaped sponge, plastic containers, and adding different toxins to the water. Your students will really start to see how a little bit of water pollution can really get out of hand quickly.

8. Color Mixing 

Source: Preschool Inspirations  

Color mixing is always a popular activity, and it’s great for hands-on research. Your students will love being in charge of the colors and watching them change before their eyes. 

LEARNING: Talk to your students about primary colors and go over the basics of what happens when you blend colors together. Depending on age, talk to them about why this happens and/or what they are seeing. Work with them to come up with a list or anchor chart about the most common color combinations. 

DOING: There are so many great color-mixing activities out there, including mixing colorful ice cubes or having a color mixing station in the classroom. We also love this project from Preschool Inspirations,  where they make sensory bottles with color mixing. 

Make research for your K–2 students easier by using PebbleGo , a reading and research database specifically targeting younger elementary students.

You Might Also Like

Abraham Lincoln Facts, Biography, and More (Free Google Slides)

Learn about the 16th president's legacy. Continue Reading

Copyright © 2023. All rights reserved. 5335 Gate Parkway, Jacksonville, FL 32256

5 Research-based Practices for Kindergarten and First Grade

Here's what every kindergarten and first grade teacher should be doing..

Posted June 1, 2017

[Note: In this guest post, two renowned former kindergarten teachers who wrote about the extraordinary literacy successes of children in their classrooms (Feldgus & Cardonick, 1999) show how today’s cutting -edge research in cognitive psychology and neuroscience supports the best practices they and their colleagues have advocated and honed for three decades. What they discovered intuitively and through reflection and collaboration is now cutting-edge best practice in 21st century kindergartens.]

5 Powerful Research-Based Techniques for Exemplary Kindergartens Today

By Eileen Feldgus PhD and Isabell Cardonick MEd

The recent high-profile spotlight on a landmark study in Developmental Psychology has drawn attention to research by Canadian cognitive psychologists Gene Ouellette and Monique Sénéchal (2017). In some respects Ouellette and Sénéchal discovered what we, Eileen and Isabell, have advocated for decades: a powerful connection to improved end-of-first-grade reading scores through the use of early writing and invented spelling. The study’s title, “Invented Spelling in Kindergarten as a Predictor of Reading and Spelling in Grade 1: A New Pathway to Literacy, or Just the Same Road, Less Known?”(Ouellette and Sénéchal, 2017), reflects what exemplary kindergarten teachers have known about the powerful writing/reading connection for years—kid writing is a pathway to reading success. But this work is still not well known or universally practiced. This less-known pathway is the one we traveled. Starting out as passionate kindergarten teachers in the 1960’s and 70’s, we were ardent about creating classrooms that worked for children. We devoured the research of that era and became life-long learners throughout our careers. Early on we discovered better outcomes for children as we focused more on writing, encouraged invented spelling, developed innovative strategies for teaching phonics and eliminated boring worksheets. Today in 2017 five best-practice techniques we discovered in our practice are now wholly supported by research and recommended for today’s kindergartens and first grades.

1. Use Invented Spelling (Ouellette & Sénéchal, 2017). We found invented spelling to be joyful, motivational for our students, and wonderful in terms of providing opportunities for scaffolding and systematically teaching almost all important aspects of the kindergarten literacy curriculum including phonics, phonemic awareness, knowledge of the alphabet, writing conventions, and vocabulary development. But perhaps the most amazing discovery throughout our journey was that kids had remarkable capacities to make meaning if we supported them in the process and allowed their creative juices to flow. Early on we learned as we had read in Don Graves’ research (1983), that kids write best when we step back and allow them to choose their own topics and give them ownership and autonomy. We called our teaching model, “Kid Writing” (1999). Our model fit perfectly with a growing model now called Guided Reading for differentiated reading instruction (Fountas & Pinnell, 2012) and we put in a whole layer underpinning Lucy Calkins work (2003) by showing teachers exactly how to get started and how to move forward with writing workshop and formative assessment. Here are a few samples that illustrate kids’ capacity to grow and flourish as writers in kindergarten:

When I was born my mommy and daddy used to pay a lot of attention to me. But now they don’t pay a lot of attention to me. They pay a lot to Conner.

2. Abandon teaching “Letter of the Week (Reutzel, 1992, 2015). Teaching one letter per week was standard practice in kindergarten when we began teaching. We tried our best to jazz up our teaching of the alphabetic principle because we knew it was essential to breaking the code and reading. Our students sang for the letter, danced for the letter, cooked for the letter, and cut and pasted for the letter. We took elaborate measures to teach the alphabet and sounds because we knew it was important. One fond memory was our “P” Party:” we served foods beginning with P—pizza, pretzels, popcorn, pepperoni, and the like. But with letter of the week the pace was too slow, and as far back as 1992 researchers were noticing the same problem and cautioning teachers to “break the letter-a-week tradition.” (Reutzel, 1992)

So in our classrooms we began to use children’s names on the first day of kindergarten—from Albert to Zoie—and learned to focus on all the sounds and letters from the very beginning. In contrast to when we were using letter of the week our students mastered letters and sounds far sooner.

Today, as reported by Reutzel (2015), “research has identified six evidence- based alphabet letter learning orders through which young children may acquire knowledge of alphabet letter names and sounds (Justice, Pence, Bowles, & Wiggins, 2006 ).” And guess what? “The first learning order is called the own-name effect.” (Reutzel, 2015) We got it right before the research proved it!

3. Use Invented Spelling and a Developmental Writing Scale to monitor progress (Gentry, 2006, 2000). Even before we published the first book on Kid Writing, we were collaborating with Richard Gentry on how to use a developmental spelling/writing assessment along with a developmental rubric to show how young children’s progression through five phases of developmental spelling revealed—among other things—the individual child’s understanding of phonics and his or her invented spellings as evidence of what the child knew or did not know. We found this work to be much more powerful for targeting instruction and monitoring kindergartners’ progress than traditional spelling tests or even measures of phonemic awareness and alphabet knowledge. Progress monitoring by phase observation is now supported by empirical research! (Ouellette & Sénéchal, 2017)

When we started out as neophyte teachers, kids were simply memorizing words that we gave them on a list. We learned to scaffold what they were using in their invented spelling and to show them how English spelling works. Our teaching went from giving lists of what to spell to showing kids how to spell and invented spelling was our vehicle! Without getting into the particulars of an analysis, look at the following samples that show one kindergarten child’s remarkable progress from fall to spring of her kindergarten year.

September sample: It was a sunny day.

June sample: Tuesday my tooth was wiggling. When it was in my mouth, it bled. When it fell out, it stopped bleeding. My mom gently pulled it out with a paper towel and I was happy that it fell out.

4. Let go of worksheets! (Palmer & Invernizzi, 2015). We found that teaching and learning in our classrooms improved when we abandoned worksheets. Remember those nonsensical work sheets where children were to write the letter that the word for each picture would begin with? When we first began teaching we remember students who squirmed with sit-at-the-desk busy worksheets and struggled over the Y is for Yak worksheet wondering why Y was the match for the first sound in “goat” which is the picture they saw on the worksheet.

5. Teach children to stretch though a word with a moving target. (Feldgus, Cardonick, & Gentry, 2017) Research by Ouelette, validated our Stretching Through a Word with a Moving Target teaching methodology. Their research, “confirmed that facilitating invented spelling within a Vygotskian teaching approach can bring about benefits in learning to read and spell, and these benefits go beyond the expansion of alphabetic knowledge and phonological awareness.

Our stretching through technique, for example, helped kids move from l for lady in Phase 2 to lad in Phase 3 to ladee in syllable chunks in Phase 4 on the way to conventional lady . The stretching through technique met kids where they were and supported them in moving to higher levels of spelling sophistication from phase to phase.

Keep the Faith—Keep the Passion—Keep Your Kids Writing

One thing that hasn’t changed over the years is our passion for literacy-learning classrooms for beginners. Today as staff developers and authors, we continue to encounter kindergarten teachers all over America and beyond who share our passion, devotion to children, and vision for joyful, play-based, academic kindergarten and first grade classrooms. We believe implementing these five research-based strategies surrounding kid writing will be transformational in America. It is the answer to reversing the decades-old trend of flat-lined first grade reading scores!

For details on these five strategies and creating joyful kid-writing classrooms that work, check out our comprehensive guide for kindergarten and grade 1 teachers: Kid Writing in the 21st Century: A Systematic Approach to Phonics, Spelling and Writing Workshop (Hameray, 2017).

Link to Kid Writing to learn more.

Dr. J. Richard Gentry is the author of Raising Confident Readers, How to Teach Your Child to Read and Write–From Baby to Age 7 . Follow him on Facebook , Twitter , and LinkedIn and find out more information about his work on his website .

Calkins, L. M. (2003). The Nuts and Bolts of Teaching Writing. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Feldgus, E., Cardonick, I. & Gentry, J. R. (2017). Kid Writing in the 21st Century . Las Angeles, CA: Hameray Publishing Group.

Fountas, I. and Pinnell, G.S.(2013). The Reading Teacher. 66 (4) 268-284.

Gentry, R. (2006). Breaking the code: The new science of beginning reading and writing . Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Gentry, R. (2000). A retrospective on invented spelling and a look forward. The Reading Teacher . 54 (3) 318-332.

Graves, D. H. (1983). Writing: Teachers and Children at Work . Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Justice , L.M. , Pence , K. , Bowles , R.B. , & Wiggins , A. ( 2006 ). An investigation of four hypotheses concerning the order by which 4- year- old children learn the alphabet letters. Early Childhood Research Quarterly , 21 ( 3), 374 – 389 .

Ouelette, G. & Sénéchal, M. (2017). Invented spelling in kindergarten as a predictor of reading and spelling in grade 1: A new Pathway to literacy, or just the same road, less known? Developmental Psychology . 53 (1) 77– 88. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/dev0000179

Palmer, J. & Invernizzi, M. (2015). No More Phonics and Spelling Worksheets . Portsmouth NH: Heinemann.

Reutzel, D. R. (2015). Early literacy research: Findings primary-grade teachers will want to know. The Reading Teacher . 69, (1), 14–24. DOI: 10.1002/trtr.1387 © 2015 International Literacy Association

Reutzel , D.R. ( 1992 ). Breaking the letter- a- week tradition: Conveying the alphabetic principle to young children. Childhood Education , 69 ( 1 ), 20 – 23 .

J. Richard Gentry, Ph.D. , is an expert on childhood literacy, reading, and spelling. He is the author of Raising Confident Readers: H ow to Teach Your Child to Read and Write—Baby to Age 7 .

• Find a Therapist
• Find a Treatment Center
• Find a Psychiatrist
• Find a Support Group
• Find Teletherapy
• United States
• Brooklyn, NY
• Chicago, IL
• Houston, TX
• Los Angeles, CA
• New York, NY
• Portland, OR
• San Diego, CA
• San Francisco, CA
• Seattle, WA
• Washington, DC
• Asperger's
• Bipolar Disorder
• Chronic Pain
• Eating Disorders
• Passive Aggression
• Personality
• Goal Setting
• Positive Psychology
• Stopping Smoking
• Low Sexual Desire
• Relationships
• Child Development
• Therapy Center NEW
• Diagnosis Dictionary
• Types of Therapy

Understanding what emotional intelligence looks like and the steps needed to improve it could light a path to a more emotionally adept world.

• Coronavirus Disease 2019
• Affective Forecasting
• Neuroscience

• 2023 AERA in the News
• 2022 AERA in the News
• 2021 AERA In the News
• 2020 AERA In the News
• 2019 AERA In the News
• 2018 AERA In the News
• 2017 AERA In the News
• 2016 AERA In the News
• 2015 AERA In the News
• 2014 AERA In the News
• 2013 AERA In the News
• AERA Speaking Out on Major Issues
• 2023 AERA News Releases
• 2022 AERA News Releases
• 2021 AERA News Releases
• 2020 AERA News Releases
• 2019 AERA News Releases
• 2018 AERA News Releases
• 2017 AERA News Releases
• 2016 AERA News Releases
• 2015 AERA News Releases
• 2014 AERA News Releases
• 2013 AERA News Releases
• 2012 AERA News Releases
• 2011 News Releases
• 2010 News Releases
• 2009 News Releases
• 2008 News Releases
• 2007 News Releases
• 2006 News Releases
• 2005 News Releases
• 2004 News Releases
• AERA Research Archive
• Trending Topic Research Files
• Communication Resources for Researchers
• AERA Highlights Archival Issues
• AERA Video Gallery

Share 

Enable Teachers

Enabling parents and professionals to become better teachers.

This Is What 16 Research Articles Say About Literacy, Kindergarten, And Entrance Times

I was chatting with a group of friends about kindergarten recently, and realized that there’s been a lot of hype around how kindergarten should be run. Should we be teaching reading in kindergarten? How long should young children be at school? Are private schools with more play time better for development? Has full day kindergarten even helped our struggling readers?

It doesn’t take a lot of looking to find articles pointing out areas that are lacking with our current kindergarten practices. For instance, students in Finland are waiting until later to learn literacy, and their test scores are historically higher than the United States. Another article  by the Atlantic shows that our test scores really haven’t increased in 20 years, most likely due to our lack of teaching foundational knowledge for understanding subject matter (or background knowledge). 

So… Are literacy skills in kindergarten actually helping students long term?

The Controversy

The research below is by no way all inclusive. These articles are peer reviewed, were published in high quality journals, and are respected in the education community.

Research that shows increased rigor in kindergarten increases student success:

• Bruiss (2000) found mixed results whether full day kindergarten resulted in increased academic success, but did find higher test scores for students with disabilities or disadvantages (from poverty, less reading at home, etc.).
• Elicker (2000) was able to imply full day kindergarten gives academic achievement for longer periods of time with students from low economic status.
• Northwestern University is one of the only studies that I have found that finds a direct correlation between early skills leading to later academic skills. (However I wonder if this is just is pointing out that students who are “good” at school will still be “good” at school? Again more support that higher income families tend to continue to be successful at school.)
• Moore was able to find that more preschool increased student’s “emotional knowledge” in grade school when rated from their teachers.

Research that shows increased kindergarten rigor has no effect:

• Milligan (2012) found that full day kindergarten had no significant effect on reading or math success vs. half day kindergarten. Study was completed in California on a varied sample of students.
• Barnett (1987) used an economic analysis (widely accepted as the most credible statical methods) on several studies. They wanted to determine if it was cost effective to have early interventions. They found that very few research studies had sound enough statistical models to prove that interventions were cost effective. They did point out that these is still a lot of research left to be done.
• Hildebrand (2001) studied three different kindergarten schedules and found that length of time in school did not ensure greater test results.
• Cooper (2010) found that full day kindergarten has a significant effect on academics up until 3rd grade. At that point the effects become negligible. (This was sound similarly on a Head Start research in the 1980’s)
• Limited conclusions were drawn in Chicago after a long-term study on early interventions. The data was trending in the right direction, but they could not say conclusively if their interventions increased student success.
• Leow’s (2016) results found that full time head start preschool students did not fair better than half day head start preschool students in kindergarten.

Research that shows increased kindergarten rigor could be problematic:

• Shephard’s research does NOT point towards rigorous curriculum as causing a negative effect, rather they point out that rigorous academics are inappropriate for young children and that policies such as retention, pre-screening, and moving the age of kindergarten entrance, do more harm because they cause inflated academic rigor.
• A Special Report from the Annie E. Casey Foundation lays out the numbers and reading scores thoroughly. While this report says that early intervention CAN help students who are disadvantaged, it also points out that raising standards without increasing the quality of education and appropriate education actually widens the gap in performance between high income families and low income families.

Please note: These article’s results do not show direct harm from learning literacy in kindergarten. These found that there were in-advert consequences that could be negative. This is important to note so as not to make conclusions that kindergarten, early academic interventions, or literacy skills are inherently harmful.

Since publishing this article, I have found some research from the Alliance For Children saying that play based learning could actually harm children in the long term. However, I am not sure of the quality of their statical models since I was unable to access the actual research. To look at their reviews check out their article on play gaps and reading instruction.  Both articles site peer reviewed research on increased play time increasing academic success into adulthood. 

Research that found increased student success when children wait to start kindergarten:

• Datar (2006) found that delaying kindergarten by one year boosts test scores. (student enters school at kindergarten level though)

Research that found no difference when children wait to start kindergarten:

• Narahara, May (1998) was unable to find any difference in academic success by 2nd grade in students who started kindergarten between 4-6 years old.
• Using the National Education Longitudinal Survey, Lincove found no long term advantages to delaying kindergarten.
• Lubotsky (2016) found that while older kindergarten entrants tend to grow both cognitively and non cognitively (books smart and emotional smarts) quicker than their younger peers, everyone’s scored tend to even out by second grade.

Research that found waiting too long to start kindergarten could be harmful:

• Deming was able to conclude that there was no positive effects from delaying kindergarten when using IQ, earnings, and educational attainment as the test. They did however find evidence that delayed kindergarten can hurt outcomes by increasing the likely hood of high school drop out, and overall earnings by a delayed start into the labor market (statistical models were economics based).

Research that found harmful effects of starting kindergarten early:

• I do not have a link to the original research, but the Foundation for Economic Education reported increased ADHD diagnosis for students who entered school as the youngest were more likely to be diagnosed with ADHD. ( However this research is not causal, it’s pointing out a correlation. This means that adults could be over diagnosing children who are still developing.)
• A study from Australia done by Narahara found that early schooling helped students from low income families cognitively (or academically), but that early schooling hurt all (both low and high income) students in non-cognitive areas.

What Does This Research Mean?

After a lot of reading, I have formed a few opinions from our current understanding of rigorous academics in kindergarten :

• We do not have enough research with the most accurate statistical models that prove positive or negative results from increasing time and rigor of kindergarten. Most of these studies say their conclusions are limited.
• Early interventions in academics are most beneficial to students who are disadvantaged or have disabilities. However, it appears that these gains might even out by third grade. One scholar proposed placing more supports for those grade levels instead of early interventions.
• Overall, rigorous kindergarten is not harmful to students’ future academics, but could take away from other developmental skills like creativity, experiences that increase background knowledge of our world, and social/emotional skills. Background knowledge is leads to greater reading comprehension, and social/emotional skills have direct predictions for adult success. This implies that increased non cognitive skills teaching (like how to speak to an adult, work out problems, and other skills in a way that is most accepted in our country) is just as or more beneficial for disadvantaged students than academic interventions.
• Early academic interventions do not negatively impact students in the course of their life time. However there is research that could point to negative impacts when students miss out on creative and play based learning as children.
• Student success is still ultimately tied to family income and child exposure to vocabulary, books, and experiences to build on. No research has shown preschool, kindergarten timing, or rigor, to out weigh those family cultural effects on achievement.  There is some evidence that play based learning could be a better early intervention.

If The Research Is Somewhat Inconclusive, Why Is The United States Pushing Early Academics?

First, since the United States was first organized, public education was a viewed as an equalizer and a way to allow those in poverty to move up into a higher economic situation.

These ideals have not changed within the US. When Head Start was originally created, it showed huge IQ jumps for students who came from poverty. However they found later that these gains evened out by third grade. Today there is still a large achievement gap between students who are white verses a minority, and students who come from high income families verses low income families.

 Research also shows that students who struggle reading in third grade are at much higher risk for negative adult outcomes. A fantastic review of statistics around third grade reading, implications, and how to fix it, can be found from the free Annie E. Casey Foundation Report.  Another easy read about the danger of low reading scores is from HuffPost  and the Atlantic .

These facts coupled with the realization that SAT scores haven’t increased in 30 years , 4th grade reading scores have not significantly increased in the past 15 years, and that students who go to college are typically from middle class to upper class families , our government leaders are very concerned about our children who are disadvantaged. And up until this point, providing early interventions for those children is the “low hanging fruit.”

There’s also considerable research done on the amount of vocabulary a child is exposed to while young, directly impacts their academic achievement for the rest of their life. Providing early interventions help young children who are disadvantaged have access to the vocabulary they may be missing.

What do we choose?

Unless your student is showing early delays, you should feel comfortable making an early education decision that works best for your family. Most research is showing no quantifiable negative or positive effect of kindergarten and preschool on achievement.

Research looking at the amount of time spent at kindergarten or preschool did not show any difference in student success. It seemed that the intervention its self was more beneficial for students who were delayed, not the actual amount of time spent in the classroom. This implies that half day kindergarten or preschool is enough for children. On the other hand, full day kindergarten is not harmful, so feel comfortable doing what works best for your family.

The academic success in Finland may have more to do with their culture and less to do with their illiterate kindergarteners. Since wealth is such a strong predictor of success, it’s important note that in Finland, struggling families have more government programs to rely upon. Socialized programs may be allowing citizens less stress about “working their way out of poverty,” and more learning just for the love of it. (This is not a political statement for or against socialized programs or nations)

Other high scoring countries, like Singapore , highly encourage preschool and kindergarten schooling. The big difference between the US and Singapore is the length of the school day. Their school day is shorter than ours but schools typically go year round with about a month long break in the summer. Singapore also has a lot of wealth in their nation. Wealthy families produce situations where students can succeed easier.

Learning to read doesn’t harm our young students, but neglecting time to explore and experience our world could reduce long term comprehension and non cognitive/emotional skills. Additionally, as research on achievement and income point out, our culture puts an emphasis on middle class behaviors (talking “sassy” is disrespectful, looking people in the eye and shaking their hand is encouraged, etc.).

Families who emphasis these “norms” within their own homes are inherently going to help their children be successful. That said, we should still advocate for more non cognitive skills within our schools (or choose to put our children in a different setting that puts an emphasis on this), and include non cognitive skills within whole family interventions.

Implications for our country

Adding play and experiences into early education could help struggling students understand text easier. Comprehension is more tied to linking the text with our understanding of the world, rather than understanding the words we are reading (although, students first need foundational reading skills to even access the print). Increasing those experiences earlier could show overall gains for our disadvantaged students. (refer to this article for more information on changing our teaching for comprehension)

Focusing more on exposure to vocabulary, text and early literacy skills can help students catch up, but these interventions do not need to be in place for the entire day. The time spent in various settings did not show any gains for students. Early academic interventions have not shown to harm students.

Multiple scholars mentioned the need for non cognitive skills in early schooling, and that these skills are predictors for adult success. College graduates all similarly share these skill sets: interact/connect with others, deal with stress, and advocate for themselves. Since the length of time did not show increased achievement, the US education system should be able to find time to incorporate those skills. These skills should especially be emphasized with students who are disadvantaged.

Ultimately, what children need more than anything else, is a home where their parents are engaged and able to provide a safe environment. Families in poverty typically are unable to do that because they constantly in survival mode. If our nation really wants to increase student achievement, we need to focus first on educating and supporting our families who have disadvantages by giving whole family interventions.

Lastly, as a word of caution to parents, I would be careful about getting too tied to any new research claiming a correlation in education. Often times the statistics are not the most accurate and can have very limited results (they cannot be generalized to the entire nation).

As always, I invite comments, questions, and new ideas. 🙂

Research Citations

• Barnett, W., & Escobar, C. (1987). The Economics of Early Educational Intervention: A Review.  Review of Educational Research,57 (4), 387-414. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/1170429
• Christine Leow & Xiaoli Wen (2017) Is Full Day Better Than Half Day? A Propensity Score Analysis of the Association Between Head Start Program Intensity and Children’s School Performance in Kindergarten, Early Education and Development, 28:2, 224-239, DOI:  10.1080/10409289.2016.1208600
• Clark, P., Kirk, E., & Burriss, K. G. (2000). Review of research: All-day kindergarten.  Childhood Education ,  76 (4), 228-231.
• Cooper, H., Allen, A. B., Patall, E. A., & Dent, A. L. (2010). Effects of Full-Day Kindergarten on Academic Achievement and Social Development.  Review of Educational Research ,  80 (1), 34–70. https://doi.org/ 10.3102/0034654309359185
• Datar, A. (2006) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econedurev.2004.10.004
• Deming, D., Dynarski, S. (2008) The Lengthening of Childhood. The Journal of Economic Perspectives. 22(3) starting on page 71. Retrieved from http://content.ebscohost.com/ContentServer.asp?EbscoContent=dGJyMNLr40SeqLA4yNfsOLCmr1Gep7JSrqy4SK6WxWXS&ContentCustomer=dGJyMPGuskyurK5IuePfgeyx43zx1%2BqE&T=P&P=AN&S=R&D=buh&K=35061946
• Elicker, J. (2000).  Full-Day Kindergarten: Exploring the Research. From Inquiry to Practice . Phi Delta Kappa International, PO Box 789, Bloomington, IN 47402-0789.
• Hildebrand, C. (2001). Effects of three kindergarten schedules on achievement and classroom behavior. Phi Delta Kappa Center for Evaluation, Development, and Research. Research Bulletin, no. 31. Bloomington, IN: Phi Delta Kappa. 
• Jones D., Greenberg, M., Crowley, M. (2015) Early Social-Emotional Functioning and Public Health: The Relationship Between Kindergarten Social Competence and Future Wellness. AM J Public Health. 105(11). 2283-2290. Retrieved from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4605168/
• Milligan, C. (2012). Full-Day Kindergarten Effects on Later Academic Success.  SAGE Open . https://doi.org/ 10.1177/2158244012442677 
• Moore, J., Cooper, B., Rhoades, et al, The Effects of Exposure to an Enhanced Preschool Program on the Social-Emotional Functioning of At-Risk Children. Early Childhood Research Quarterly. 32 starting on page 37.
• Narahara, M. (1998) The Effects of School Entry Age and Gender on Reading and Math Achievement Scores on Second Grade Students. The US Department of Education Educational Resources Information Center.
• Shepard, L., & Smith, M. (1988). Escalating Academic Demand in Kindergarten: Counterproductive Policies.  The Elementary School Journal,89 (2), 135-145. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/1001920
• Suziedelyte, A., Zhu, A. (2015) Does Early Schooling Narrow Outcome Gaps For Advantaged and Disadvantaged Children? Economics of Education Review. 45, 76-88. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econedurev.2015.02.001
• Vinovskis, M. (1993). Early Childhood Education: Then and Now.  Daedalus,122 (1), 151-176. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/20027154
• Northwestern University brief: https://www.northwestern.edu/newscenter/stories/2007/11/duncan.html

Share this:

• Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Tumblr (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window)
• Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window)

One thought on “ This Is What 16 Research Articles Say About Literacy, Kindergarten, And Entrance Times ”

• Pingback: Should The United States Adopt Finland’s Play Based Kindergarten Method? – Enable Teachers

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed .

Discover more from Enable Teachers

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Type your email…

Continue reading

ORIGINAL RESEARCH article

Thinking about kindergarten thinking: a mixed methods study.

• Faculty of Education, Queen’s University, Kingston, ON, Canada

Metacognition, otherwise known as ‘thinking about one’s thinking,’ leads to greater academic success and is foundational. Given this importance, metacognitive behaviors need to be developed within early years contexts to provide young children the opportunity to practice these behaviors and receive feedback. However, literature continues to focus on the development of metacognition in later grades. This mixed methods study explored metacognition in eight Kindergarten classrooms. Participants included eight Kindergarten teachers, six early childhood educators (ECEs), and 80 students. Data collection was conducted at two time periods separated by 12 weeks. Data collection included the Children’s Independent Learning Development (CHILD) measure, semi-structured interviews, and classroom observations. The quantitative data from the CHILD were analyzed using a paired samples t -test in SPSS. All qualitative data were analyzed thematically. Qualitatively, three themes were identified: (1) Conceptualization of metacognition, (2) Barriers to developing metacognition, and (3) Operationalization of strategies to facilitate metacognitive development. Evidence demonstrated that participants had incomplete conceptualizations of metacognition. Some articulated simple understandings by reporting the literal translation and were unable to articulate more fulsome conceptions. However, some teachers had more developed conceptions of metacognition that included different facets such as planning and reflective thinking. All participants were forthcoming with identifying ways in which they struggled with implementing metacognitive practices or encouraging the development of metacognition. These barriers included large classroom sizes, developmental readiness, and wide student ability. Despite having an incomplete understanding of metacognition, early years educators were trying a variety of different strategies to help promote metacognitive thinking within their Kindergarten classrooms. Surprisingly, teacher ratings using the CHILD did not change significantly from Time 1 ( M = 1.88, SD = 0.744) to Time 2 ( M = 1.85, SD = 0.66), t (72) = 0.72, p > 0.05. A similar trend was observed for ECE ratings using the CHILD as they did not change significantly from Time 1 ( M = 1.89, SD = 0.70) to Time 2 ( M = 1.80, SD = 0.79), t (52) = 1.36, p > 0.05. This research highlights empirical practices that Kindergarten educators can use to help facilitate metacognitive thinking. Furthermore, it identifies a need to better support Kindergarten educators by integrating practices aimed at developing metacognitive thinking in their students through explicit examples of strategies.

Introduction

Scholars widely accept that the ability to be metacognitive and self-regulate is crucial for successful learning within the classroom ( Perry et al., 2018 ) and beyond ( Boekaerts and Cascallar, 2006 ). Furthermore, research suggests that components of metacognition and self-regulation (SR) begin to develop in young children. Hence, there is a need to support and further develop these skills throughout elementary school contexts and beyond. The following introduction will describe components of metacognition, discuss the relationship between metacognition and other regulatory behaviors, outline its development in the early years, and identify key facilitators impacting the development of metacognition.

Conceptualizing metacognition

Metacognition as a construct has evolved over the years from when it was originally defined as ‘Thinking about thinking’ by Flavell (1979) . Furthermore, metacognition was originally believed to be comprised of conscious actions ( Flavell, 1979 ). There were two main components of metacognition known as metacognitive knowledge (MK) and metacognitive regulation. The component of MK includes the beliefs and thoughts that an individual has about their own or another individual’s cognitive processes ( Flavell, 1979 ). Metacognitive regulation [also known as metacognitive skills (MS)] is a more active component that includes the process of monitoring, controlling, and evaluating learning outcomes ( Efklides, 2006 ). A third component of metacognition is known as metacognitive experiences (MEs) which encompasses the judgments and feelings that individuals have about learning ( Efklides, 2006 ; Ben-David and Orion, 2013 ).

These conceptualizations have expanded to include more social interactions that may help to facilitate the development of metacognition. For example, scholars acknowledge that metacognition is not necessarily an individual phenomenon and may be shaped by social interactions ( Moraitou and Metallidou, 2021 ). Additionally, there is ongoing intrigue regarding the interaction between metacognition and affect across the life span ( Moraitou and Metallidou, 2021 ). Specific to the level of consciousness required, Efklides proposed a model of metacognition which suggests that aspects of metacognition may occur at a non-conscious level ( Efklides, 2008 ).

Conceptual framework

This study was guided by the model of metacognition as described by Efklides (2008) . The multifaceted and multi-level model consists of three levels (object level, metalevel, and meta-metalevel) with opportunities for monitoring, reflection, and control. The object level includes processes specific to cognition and emotion that occur at a non-conscious level. Monitoring and control are two non-conscious regulatory systems involved in developing products at the metalevel. These products are elements of self-awareness such as emotions and thoughts alongside ME, MK, and MS. This is the level where thoughts and interpretations of the learning situation become conscious. Similarly, both control and regulatory systems are actively involved at the metalevel. More specifically, when control is required, MEs and MK may activate MS. Metacognitive feelings (a component of ME) play an important role whereby they can activate the regulatory loop as necessary. The final level, the social level, only includes metacognitive judgments which may be about the individual or others’ metacognition capacity (ME, MK, and MS). This level is also informed by the personal-awareness level and by interactions with others. The monitoring processes at this level are conscious and may be in the form of reflecting. Similarly, the control process is also conscious ( Efklides, 2008 ).

Relationship between metacognition, self-regulation, and self-regulated learning

Metacognition, SR, and self-regulated learning (SRL) have been closely intertwined for years. Some scholars have even used the terms interchangeably given the role of monitoring and regulatory processes ( Dinsmore et al., 2008 ). However, conceptually, developmentally, and about measurement, some scholars have identified differences between the three constructs. Yet, the debate continues as to which construct emerged first and whether there is an overarching construct ( Veenman et al., 2006 ; Gascoine et al., 2017 ). Given the complexity of these constructs and the lack of conceptual clarity around nesting within constructs, a hierarchical approach to studying metacognition is not appropriate ( Gascoine et al., 2017 ).

A self-regulated individual can control their thoughts, emotions, and behaviors as they work toward attaining their goals ( Zimmerman, 2000 ; McClelland and Cameron, 2012 ). SRL is a sub-component of SR whereby the cognitive, social, and behavioral processes are focused entirely on an individual’s learning ( Dinsmore et al., 2008 ). We know that metacognition is necessary to engage in successful SRL ( Boekaerts, 1999 ). Furthermore, MEs are particularly useful as evidenced in the model proposed by Efklides whereby ME can trigger the regulatory loop while learning.

Measurement of metacognition in early years

Earlier scholars believed that metacognition developed in older students typically between the ages of 8 and 10 ( Veenman et al., 2006 ). However, scholars have since challenged this understanding by examining SR development in younger children ( Bronson and Bronson, 2001 ). There has now been a keen interest in understanding the development of both metacognition and SR in the early years ( Blair and Razza, 2007 ; Dignath et al., 2008 ; Whitebread et al., 2010 ; Erdmann and Hertel, 2019 ; Perry, 2019 ). Alongside the interest in exploring metacognition in young children, comes an emphasis on using more developmentally appropriate methods for measuring metacognition ( Perry, 2019 ). Earlier research used self-report methods ( Winne and Perry, 2000 ) which were problematic given the reliance on accurate reporting of cognitive processes by respondents. However, this was even more problematic when used with young children who may have been incapable of reporting or verbalizing their thoughts and skills related to metacognition. Therefore, other methods of collecting data including observing the behaviors directly were recommended ( Winne and Perry, 2000 ; Whitebread et al., 2010 ). One systematic review examined how metacognition was assessed in children between the ages of 4 and 16 years and demonstrated that self-report measures were used by 61% of the studies included in the review but were only used with children of ages 7 and older ( Gascoine et al., 2017 ). Observational methods were used with children between the ages of 4 and 8 including think aloud protocol whereby the individual is prompted to explain their thinking verbally while completing an activity. Teacher ratings were used with children aged 4 and above whereas task-based methods were only used with children aged 7 and older ( Gascoine et al., 2017 ). This review highlights that teacher ratings and observational methods have been used with young children. To help understand the complex phenomenon of metacognition, a multi-method design has been recommended including observations of student behavior ( Veenman, 2005 ), which can then be triangulated with other measures.

Developing metacognition in the early years

Given that metacognition remains blurred conceptually and in practice with other concepts closely intertwined such as SR and SRL, there is no standard set of practices agreed upon by scholars that can be used to promote the development of metacognition ( Perry et al., 2018 ). Although given our conceptual understanding, we could expect educators would use strategies related to planning, evaluating, and regulating an individual’s performance ( Perry et al., 2018 ). Sometimes the strategies may be focused on a specific domain such as mathematics ( Dignath et al., 2008 ) or science ( Zohar and Barzilai, 2013 ). Researchers have also demonstrated the value of developing metacognition across the curriculum ( Perry et al., 2012 ). Some recommendations for facilitating the development of metacognition include that it should be embedded throughout lessons rather than teaching it through disconnected or singular lessons, the purpose including the focus on metacognition should be made explicit to the learners, and the learning should be longitudinal ( Veenman et al., 2004 ). Another suggested practice includes the integration of group work ( Perry et al., 2018 ), which encourages learning with and from others.

There are a variety of factors that have been identified as facilitating the development of metacognition such as the role of formative assessment. Assessment for Learning (AfL) is a component of formative assessment with increased student agency. AfL is the process of collecting data about student learning with the ultimate goal of co-constructing these practices ( Adie et al., 2018 ) and improving student learning ( Group, 2002 ). Assessment as Learning (AaL) practices, described as a subcomponent of AfL, includes the process by which students reflect and evaluate their learning to enhance their metacognition and SRL development ( Earl, 2013 ). The relationship between metacognition and AfL was explored empirically in 528 students ranging from grade four to six across seven Dutch elementary schools. Findings highlighted that monitoring strategies predicted planning activities. Monitoring and planning also had an effect size of 0.26 with scaffolding practices ranging between 0.25 and 0.36 in their effect sizes. Furthermore, scaffolding practices were positively correlated with the use of learning strategies and the evaluation of their learning. Finally, the use of metacognitive strategies facilitated the use of AfL strategies ( Baas et al., 2015 ). Another study conducted in Ontario, Canada explored the connections between assessment and metacognition through five purposefully selected interviews with elementary teachers. One key theme highlighted how teachers modified their practices to support the development of students’ metacognition. A two-way feedback process helped teachers to modify their practices as they often sought feedback from their students on how they could further support them. AaL practices were also described as essential when developing metacognition. This included assessment practices such as success criteria, descriptive and ongoing feedback, peer-assessment, self-assessment, conferencing, portfolio use, and reflective thinking activities for use to understand student thinking. All participants reported needing additional support to help them with increasing student agency and developing metacognition through assessment ( Braund and DeLuca, 2018 ). These two studies provide examples of a direct empirical connection between metacognition and formative assessment.

However, metacognitive skills at a young age need to be developed in collaboration with other individuals such as teachers who are well positioned to provide explicit instruction and modeling for how to use metacognitive strategies. A common method for encouraging students to think metacognitively is through the use of prompting questions. For example, Jacobs (2004) explored the metacognitive awareness of Kindergarten students through the writing process. The students would observe the teacher doing a think-aloud about different elements of the writing process and then were given time to work on their writing. The teacher worked with the students during the writing period and then peers provided feedback after the dedicated writing period. The researcher would then interview students to ask them questions prompting them to reflect on their thinking and writing. There were some answers to questions that students did not know originally but this changed over the course of the year. By the end of the year, all students demonstrated that they were capable of explaining their thinking using metacognitive terminologies such as “thought” or “mind” and were also able to provide examples of strategies that they had used during their writing time ( Jacobs, 2004 ). This study is one example demonstrating the potential for students to develop their metacognitive strategy use and metacognitive regulation over time and as young as the Kindergarten level. Although the Jacobs study was specific to literacy, many of the prompting questions could be adapted for use in other subject domains such as science or math where ‘thinking aloud’ can be very beneficial for the development of metacognition in young children as a means for making educator thinking visible. This study also reiterates the important role that educators play in the development of metacognition, especially for young children at the Kindergarten grade level.

A more recent study conducted by Dörr and Perels (2019) examined the effectiveness of an intervention designed to improve metacognitive skills in 137 children in Kindergarten. Teachers and parents received training on specific strategies that they could use in the classroom (for teachers) and in the home environment (for caregivers) to develop metacognition in their children. The children then were filmed while completing a problem-solving task which was later coded for metacognitive behaviors by two observers. The categories for coding behaviors related to monitoring, control, and lack of monitoring and control. Their findings highlighted that students were able to demonstrate an improvement in the control aspect of metacognition; however, monitoring seemed to be more challenging. However, the authors acknowledge that it is easier to observe control strategies than monitoring strategies which may act as a limitation ( Venitz and Perels, 2019 ). Despite the importance of developing these skills in the early years, much of the research continues to focus on metacognition at later stages of development such as in secondary and post-secondary contexts. Therefore, this mixed methods study explored the development of metacognition in Kindergarten classrooms and was guided by the following questions: (1) How do early childhood educators (ECEs) conceptualize and articulate metacognition? and (2) How do young children’s metacognition and self-regulatory behaviors evolve across two time periods as measured by educators?

Materials and methods

This concurrent mixed methods ( Creswell and Plano Clark, 2011 ) study explored metacognition development in Kindergarten. Given the complexity of metacognition and the evolving understanding in the early years, the research design required a complex intersection of data sources ( Plano Clark and Ivankova, 2016 ). The quantitative data described the evolution of metacognition behaviors, whereas the qualitative data provided some context for why these behaviors may occur and how they are developed. It is important to note that these data were collected as part of a larger dissertation study.

This study was conducted in Ontario, Canada where a play-based approach is mandated across Kindergarten classrooms in the public education system. Kindergarten students attend school daily and are supported by a teaching team that includes one Kindergarten teacher and one registered ECE ( OME, 2016 ).

Participants

A total of eight Kindergarten teachers and six ECEs agreed to participate in this study during the 2018–2019 year. All teachers and ECEs self-selected to participate and indicated that they had an interest in SR. Demographic information for the teachers and ECEs has been previously reported ( Braund et al., 2021 ). Teachers and ECEs were recruited from one Ontario school board, across five publicly funded elementary schools. Despite recruiting from only one school board, the participating schools were purposefully diverse with some located in the city and one located rurally. Additionally, the schools were sampled across socioeconomic status (SES) with some schools in higher SES areas, a school located in a moderate SES area, and one school located in a low SES area. A snowball sampling technique was used where the recruitment message was circulated to the early years and assessment coordinators within the school board who passed along the information to principals and teachers. To help increase the likelihood of representation, teachers and ECEs were diverse and had a range of practice experiences. All teachers and ECEs provided informed written consent. Once they had consented, the teacher from each participating class shared the Letter of Information with the parents of students in their classes. Parents were made aware that having their children participate was voluntary and were asked to provide written consent for their child to participate. Additionally, oral assent was also collected from each student before any tasks were administered. Participants were able to withdraw from the study up until July 2019 after which withdrawal was no longer possible. None of the participants withdrew from the study. A total of 80 students were recruited to participate across the eight classrooms. However, due to attrition, only 77 students participated across both time periods. There was a fairly even split across the data with 39 female students and 41 male students. A similar breakdown was observed according to grades with 40 students in Junior Kindergarten and 40 students in Senior Kindergarten (SK).

Data collection procedures

There were two time periods for data collection. Time 1 was in the winter of 2019, whereas Time 2 was in the spring of 2019. There were approximately 12 weeks in-between Time 1 and Time 2 to try and facilitate the development of student metacognition and SR. The researcher spent an orientation day in each of the eight classrooms to learn more about the context and familiarize herself with the students, teacher, and ECE. Following the orientation day, a total of 3 days were spent in each classroom during each time period. This amounted to 448 h spent collecting data across the eight classrooms. Additional data sources were collected as part of the larger dissertation study that is beyond the scope of this paper. The independent semi-structured interviews with teachers and ECEs were conducted on the 3rd day in each classroom for each time period. A total of 16 interviews were conducted with teachers and eight with ECEs. Two of the ECEs opted to not participate in the semi-structured interviews. The Children’s Independent Learning Development (CHILD) measure was given ahead of time to teachers and ECEs. They were asked to complete it for each participating student in preparation for each time period.

The researcher hired six research assistants (RAs) to help with data collection. All RAs were trained in how to observe teachers, ECEs, and students. A few were also trained in how to conduct semi-structured interviews. However, most interviews were conducted by the researcher except for when there were scheduling conflicts.

Three measures were used to collect data for this study: semi-structured interviews, classroom observations, and observations collected using the Children’s Independent Learning Development (CHILD) measure ( Whitebread et al., 2009 ). The semi-structured interviews had protocols specific to each time period. At Time 1, the focus of the interviews was on understanding conceptions of classroom assessment, SR, and the relationship between these constructs. For example, educators were asked to describe what a student who is able to self-regulated looks like in their classroom and to discuss the relationship (if any) between formative assessment and SR. Additionally, educators were also asked to identify any challenges impacting their ability to promote SR and recommend any resources or supports that would help them with developing SR. The interview at Time 2 was more focused on identifying examples of assessment practices and efforts to develop SR. Educators were asked to answer a number of questions including sharing their understanding of metacognition and examples of how it was operationalized in their classrooms. They were also asked about the use of self-assessment and to share examples of how they had integrated the assessment practice. The interview protocols were developed by a team of assessment and SR experts and then piloted before use in the current study. This helps to enhance the trustworthiness of the data collected and inferences made as a result of the interview protocols. The interview protocols and additional details on piloting have been published previously ( Braund et al., 2021 ). The interviews were conducted in either the staff room or in the classroom when students and others were not present. All interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. The interviews lasted on average 41 min for Time 1 and 24 min for Time 2.

The classroom observations did not follow a structured protocol given that many of the other measures used in the larger study were very structured. The observation periods were used as an opportunity to capture important contextual information and concrete practices used to develop metacognition and SR. More specifically, the observations were used to document field notes that related to assessment and SR practices as demonstrated by educators (teacher or ECE) or students. Although it is important to note that only classroom observations pertaining to metacognition are presented in this paper. Therefore, for teachers, it captured example practices of ways in which they were encouraging the students to self-regulate. An example related to metacognition was observing and documenting the use of a think-aloud protocol in math by one Kindergarten teacher. The mechanism for identifying changes in behavior was by comparing observations at Time 1 and Time 2. In addition to the field notes, direct quotations were captured when possible. All RAs shadowed the researcher for at least one day in a classroom to understand how to observe students, teachers, and ECEs. During this shadowing process, the RAs and researcher would document classroom observations independently and then compare their notes. The researcher would provide the RA with additional feedback and guidance as necessary. This modeling and scaffolding process helped to increase the trustworthiness of the data collected and inferences made as a result of the classroom observations.

The CHILD measure ( Whitebread et al., 2009 ) is an observation protocol that was used to record students’ self-regulatory behaviors. This measure consists of 35 statements informed by metacognition and SR literature. It was previously validated by the developers and demonstrated an ability to discriminate between three levels (high, intermediate, and low) of metacognition/SR/independence. However, they continued with further piloting and finalized a 22-item shorter protocol. These items were grouped across four areas of SR: emotional (five items), prosocial (five items), cognitive (seven items), and motivational (five items). The 22 items were pilot tested a total of 576 times across 192 children. Their reliability analysis identified a high level of internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.97). The authors outlined three ways that they addressed issues of validity when developing the CHILD including collecting the data within the classroom context or the natural environment, involving teachers in the analysis process given their expertise in classroom contexts, and recording the data for additional analysis ( Whitebread et al., 2009 ).

This protocol was modified by the researcher to help the current participants with interpreting the items. The modification consisted of adding numbers to the frequency categories. Therefore, teachers and ECEs were asked to report the frequency of students’ self-regulatory behaviors as always (3), usually (2), sometimes (1), or never (0). In addition to providing the frequency for each item, participants were also provided with the space to add comments related to each item. The narrative comments were optional. They sometimes provided additional context for why the educators had rated that level of frequency for the item. As an additional reliability and validity measure, the researcher met with each teacher and ECE to discuss the measure before they completed the protocol. More specifically, the researcher discussed each item in detail and explained that the protocol was an overview of what they had observed to date for each item. This measure was entirely completed by the teacher and ECE for each participating student.

Data analysis procedures

Quantitative.

All quantitative data were entered into an Excel spreadsheet once data collection had finished. All descriptive and inferential statistics were performed using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS, Version 27). When there were instances of missing data, the quantitative analyses were run listwise. The level of significance was set at .05 for all quantitative analyses. The researcher checked for internal consistency every time the CHILD measure was used and values suggesting a high level of internal consistency were found across participants including for ECEs at Time 1 (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.97,) ECEs at Time 2 (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.97,) Teachers at Time 1 (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.98) and Teachers at Time 2 (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.97). These high levels of internal consistency help to provide validity evidence specific to the internal structure of the 22 items grouped together for the CHILD measure. For the Children’s Independent Learning Development (CHILD) measure, a total score was calculated for each time period. The highest score per item was 3 and there was a total of 22 items. Therefore, the maximum possible total score that a student could have received was 66. A total score was calculated for the teacher ratings per child at each time period. This variable was calculated again for the ECE ratings per child at each time period. A mean score was computed for each child at Time 1 and again at Time 2. The mean score was calculated for the teacher ratings and then again for the ECE ratings. A paired t- test was used to identify changes in students’ scores on the CHILD across time periods for teacher ratings. A paired t -test was also used to identify changes in students’ scores on the CHILD across time periods for ECE ratings. Data were analyzed using a listwise approach. Therefore, due to missing data (e.g., students moving away), a total of 73 students were included in the quantitative dataset for teachers and only 53 for ECEs. It is important to remember that only four of the possible eight ECEs participated hence the lower number of students. Demographics were reported according to sex (male and female) and grade level (junior kindergarten and SK).

Qualitative

All transcripts and classroom observations were uploaded into NVivo (Version 12) for analysis. Data were analyzed using an inductive thematic approach ( Braun and Clarke, 2006 ). All transcripts and classroom observations were read in full before the coding process commenced. To enhance trustworthiness, a second researcher coded 20% of the data independently which was then compared with the primary researcher. This process included a selection of diverse transcripts which once coded were compared line by line. An inter-coder reliability level of 94% was calculated by documenting the number of times that the two researchers agreed on each line of coding divided by the number of times the two researchers disagreed and then multiplied by 100 to obtain the percentage. This dialog and reflexive process resulted in a consensus-built codebook. Given the high level of agreement, it seemed appropriate for the primary research to complete the remainder of the coding using the consensus-built codebook ( Cofie et al., 2022 ). Three levels of coding were performed. The smallest unit of analysis was a code. For the first level of coding, each transcript and affiliated classroom observations were coded individually. This process of open coding resulted in the assignment of a code to each segment of text. After open coding was complete across all transcripts and classroom observations, all documents were analyzed again with a focus on creating subthemes. To identify subthemes, similar codes were grouped together. The final level of selective coding consisted of reviewing all qualitative data with a focus on grouping similar subthemes together to form broad themes across the data. The researcher maintained an audit trail of any new codes that were added, any codes that were renamed, and any codes that were merged with the rationale for every change made. Thematic saturation was reached after analyzing five of the eight teachers and after the third ECE.

Trustworthiness and researcher reflexivity

The researcher made ongoing efforts to increase trustworthiness throughout the research process. The four criteria of rigor guided these efforts including credibility, transferability, dependability, and confirmability ( Guba, 1981 ). The first criterion, credibility suggests that the results are true, credible, and believable. Some strategies for this include prolonged engagement in the setting. This was achieved by spending 448 h across the classrooms observing and interviewing participants. Piloting the interview protocol and the CHILD measure as described earlier also helped to enhance the credibility. Dependability is centered around the extent to which the study could be replicated. The rich description of the study methods aids with replicability. Additionally, inter-coder reliability processes can enhance dependability as described earlier following recommended guidelines ( Cofie et al., 2022 ). Confirmability is the extent to which other researchers could confirm the findings. Maintaining a reflexive process contributes to this rigor. The researcher maintained a research journal throughout the entire research process right from idea conception through to dissemination. This journal was used to identify common patterns, unique findings, document questions for discussion with her dissertation committee, note possible biases, and make fieldnotes from the interviews and classroom observations. The process of triangulating across measures also contributes to confirmability. Therefore, two measures were used to collect this data. The classroom observations were used to confirm what educators reported in their interviews but also to capture practices not described in the interviews. All participants were also offered the opportunity to review key findings from their transcripts as a form of member-checking but only one teacher acknowledged the findings and confirmed the interpretation. Finally, transferability refers to the extent to which the results could be applied to other contexts. Purposeful sampling aids with transferability and was thus used in this study. All educators were interested in SR, therefore, increasing the likelihood that they would integrate practices aimed at developing student metacognition.

The findings are organized below according to the two research questions. For the qualitative data (classroom observations and interviews), sample quotations have been provided in-text. However, additional quotations are available in Supplementary Appendix A . ECE will represent quotations from ECEs. Finally, classroom observations will be clearly outlined in brackets following the direct example.

Research question (1) how do early childhood educators conceptualize and articulate metacognition?

Qualitatively, a total of three themes were identified from the classroom observations and interviews with early educators: (1) Conceptualization of metacognition, (2) Barriers to developing metacognition, and (3) Operationalization of strategies to facilitate metacognitive development.

Theme 1: Conceptualization of metacognition

Findings demonstrated that both teachers and ECEs had incomplete conceptualizations of metacognition. Some articulated simple understandings by reporting the literal translation and were unable to articulate more fulsome conceptions. For example, this teacher simply said, “thinking about thinking” (Teacher 4, Time 2) when she was asked to describe metacognition. One teacher asked for the definition of metacognition indicating a lack of understanding. Another teacher mentioned one component “Understanding your thinking” (Teacher 5, Time 2) highlighting more than just the literal translation of the construct. However, a small sample of educators had more developed conceptions of metacognition that suggested metacognition was multi-faceted and included multiple components such as planning and reflective thinking. One teacher shared a resource that she used relating to metacognition:

I love the book, “Pedagogical Documentation in Early Childhood.” This book relates to metacognition and the importance of reflection of observations made in tracking student success and behaviors (Teacher 3, Time 2).

One of the most discussed facets of metacognition was awareness. Sometimes the awareness was in relation to “the prior knowledge they need to possess” as described by ECE2 at Time 2. Educators also described the importance of having an awareness of how you process information. Multiple educators also mentioned awareness of thinking as described by this educator “being aware of your thought processes” (ECE4, Time 2). A different educator shared how metacognition related to other constructs as explained here “I feel it is important for the upper levels of Maslow’s [Hierarchy of Needs] including a strong growth mindset and connections to mental health and resiliency ” (Teacher 7, Time 2). Discussing metacognition beyond the literal translation and identifying key components suggested a deeper understanding of the construct. The last subtheme centered around student capacity. Most educators in this study reported that Kindergarten students were able to be metacognitive. For example, this teacher explained further “I think they’re much more capable than you would maybe imagine” (Teacher 3, Time 1). However, one teacher readily identified the sophistication of the skill below:

Developmental readiness to a degree because I feel…even as an adult when I think about myself for me to have reflective practice and to think about “What am I doing? What can I be better at as a teacher? What can I be better at as a learner?” That’s a pretty sophisticated, complex skill (Teacher 1, Time 1).

Despite the complexity of metacognition, the same teacher was able to identify students in her classroom who were capable and “I’ve had kids who in the past who have been really good at that. And they can look at things and say, “well next time I’m going to do this” or “I’m going to try this differently” (Teacher 1, Time 1). However, not all teachers were convinced that students at the Kindergarten level were capable. A few indicated that they wanted to give it more thought.

Theme 2: Barriers to developing metacognition

All participants were forthcoming with identifying ways in which they struggled with implementing metacognitive practices or encouraging the development of metacognition. These barriers included common classroom ones such as large classroom sizes which were grouped into the subtheme of competing demands. When one teacher was asked about any barriers to encouraging metacognition, one simply said “Developmental readiness to a degree” (Teacher 1, Time 1). One barrier related to developmental readiness was being too reactive as described by this ECE:

In our classroom I feel that many of our children are not aware of their thought processes as they are often reactive to situations around them and don’t stop to think things through to understand the why and how (ECE4, Time 2).

Some educators were quick to admit that the development of metacognition was often overlooked by them and other Kindergarten educators. This teacher explained further “Often overlooked by educators, ‘not enough time,’ ‘difficult to mark/assess,’ ‘not as important as the hard skills”’ (Teacher 7, Time 2). This quotation emphasizes competing priorities and potentially a devaluing of metacognition for some educators. Another teacher admitted that metacognition was not a priority as described below.

I’m worried about kids falling through the cracks. So as much as I want you to become self-reflective and metacognitive about all of those things. It’s just one of those things. There’s only so many hours in a day, I just feel like I don’t get to it for some reason (Teacher 1, Time 1).

A different barrier was a lack of play time and having too much structured learning time. This ECE explained further “I feel the structured learning environment and limited play-based learning in our classroom leaves little time” (ECE 2, Time 1). However, it was promising to observe more effort toward the development of metacognition during the second time period including through the use of think-aloud protocols, ongoing dialog, and prompting (Time 1 and 2, Classroom Observation, Teacher 1, 4, and 7; ECE 1, 3, and 4).

Theme 3: Operationalization of strategies to facilitate metacognitive development

Despite reporting struggling with developing metacognition in their students, most educators were able to provide examples of practices that they implemented to promote the development of metacognition. Sometimes these strategies were described in relation to a specific context such as math with one educator explaining how they encouraged students to verbalize their strategies during number talks (Classroom Observation, Teacher 1, Time 1) or about literacy where a different educator discussed sharing book predictions. Educators tended to emphasize the need for explicit modeling of strategies through thinking out loud. This teacher explained, “… if we don’t show that thinking part out loud or talking out loud for them, they’re not going to develop those skills” (Teacher 8, Time 2). A different teacher consistently asked students to explain their thinking when they provided an answer (Classroom Observation, Teacher 2, Time 1). One teacher explained that “Children are learning how best to complete tasks” (Teacher 5, Time 2) in her classroom. This teacher shared examples observed during play:

I sometimes see that in terms of children actually having little out loud conversations with themselves. They’ll be building a tower of blocks and how can I put this one? I’ve got this, It fell off and they could try the same thing again. It fell off and they try the same thing and it fell off. And sometimes I hear them going, oh, this one’s got a curvy edge. It’s falling off. I’m going to try this one. So sometimes I actually hear kids reasoning through those things themselves, or I will hear things. They’re building something and they’ve got a car in a little ramp. Wow, this ramp is higher, that car went faster (Teacher 1, Time 2).

Other educators reiterated the role that play-based learning can have when working to develop student metacognition. One teacher reported that she did not have as much time as she would have liked to encourage the development of metacognition. She explained further:

It is a goal that I had hoped to reach more this year. I am working with a new ECE and needed this year to build that relationship. Hopefully, we will be able to put a system into place for next year where we can target specific children on certain days of the week to create time and space for [focusing] on deep reflective practice (Teacher 3, Time 2).

Another key subtheme centered around providing feedback after students had the opportunity to try strategies independently. Sometimes this feedback was provided by the educators while other times it was shared by peers. This teacher shared an example of providing more informal feedback during a conversation:

And I have conversations sort of informally with children about pieces of that. So for example, writing their name and “I notice that you’ve done this, you’re using all capital letters that’s shouting. We need to keep working on this. Get your name card.” And so having those conversations with kids (Teacher 1, Time 1).

Another mechanism for providing feedback included co-constructing with students as explained by this teacher:

…we take for granted that we can process everything in our head and then really quickly and have an idea. So I think for us, we tried to do everything with the kids [and] develop a learning chart with the kids (Teacher 8, Time 2).

KWL charts were also used by one teacher and ECE pair to help support metacognition. More specifically, the teacher and ECE would ask students to identify what they knew about a topic and write it down. They would then write down what the students wanted to learn. After completing the lesson, the educator would document what the students learned (Classroom Observation, Teacher 6 and ECE 5, Time 1). Finally, educators also provided students with the necessary vocabulary when sharing feedback. This teacher elaborated “… so in Kindergarten I think giving them the language and explaining sort of terms and things, you know, vocabulary” (Teacher 4, Time 2). Educators described how they used prompting through questioning to promote the development of metacognition as shared by this ECE “… what were you thinking about that? you know, asking those questions of you know, well, why do you think the Caterpillar did this?” (ECE1, Time 2). Another form of prompting was through the use of symbols to help students progress through steps. Many participants also emphasized the importance of a growth mindset and encouraging students to make mistakes. Despite having an incomplete understanding of metacognition, early years educators were trying a variety of different strategies to help promote metacognitive thinking within their Kindergarten classrooms.

Research question (2) how do young children’s metacognition and self-regulatory behaviors evolve across two time periods as measured by educators?

The demographic variables explored were sex (male or female) and grade level (SK or SK). A complete overview of descriptive findings is available in Supplementary Appendix B . At Time 1, all means across items were higher for female students than male students when rated by the teachers except for one item. The one item was a motivational one where male students ( M = 1.74) enjoyed solving problems more than female students ( M = 1.71). Similarly, there was one motivational item at Time 2 where male students were rated more highly than female students by teachers. More specifically, male students ( M = 2.18) initiated activities more than female students ( M = 2.15). At Time 1, all means across items were higher for SK than JK students. This was also the case for Time 2 for teacher ratings.

At Time 1, all means across items were higher for female students than male students when rated by the ECEs. However, when looking at grade level, there were three prosocial items where junior kindergarten (JK) students had higher means than those in SK. More specifically, JK students ( M = 1.60) were better able to resolve social problems with peers than those in SK ( M = 1.5). For another prosocial item, JK students ( M = 2.40) were better able to engage in independent cooperative activities with peers than their SK colleagues ( M = 2.36). Finally, JK students ( M = 2.08) were more aware of the feelings of others and helped and comforted others than their SK peers ( M = 2.07). Similarly, at Time 2, all means across items were higher for female students than male students when rated by the ECEs. There was only one item at Time 2 where JK students had a higher mean than SK students according to the ECEs. The item was again a prosocial one whereby JK students ( M = 1.56) were better able to resolve social problems with peers than SK students ( M = 1.54).

Surprisingly, teacher ratings using the CHILD did not change significantly from Time 1 ( M = 1.88, SD = 0.744) to Time 2 ( M = 1.85, SD = 0.66), t (72) = 0.72, p > 0.05. Furthermore, teacher ratings decreased slightly from Time 2 to Time 1. A similar trend was observed for ECE ratings using the CHILD as they did not change significantly from Time 1 ( M = 1.89, SD = 0.70) to Time 2 ( M = 1.80, SD = 0.79), t (52) = 1.36, p > 0.05. ECE ratings also decreased slightly from Time 2 to Time 1.

This mixed methods study aimed to explore the development of metacognition in eight Kindergarten classrooms. A combination of classroom observations, interviews, and educator ratings provided insight into metacognitive behaviors in young children. When examining conceptions of metacognition, it was clear that both teachers and ECEs in the current study had a developing understanding of metacognition. They were able to provide the literal translation and the odd time articulate different components such as reflective thinking or planning. Furthermore, MEs were not mentioned at all by these educators. They tended to focus more on the awareness component. This is concerning when considering the model of metacognition described earlier given that MEs are key across the three levels. More specifically, it is proposed that MEs may activate the regulatory loop ( Efklides, 2008 ). Without this activation, metacognition is not being developed to its fullest capacity in these young children.

The lack of a deeper conceptual understanding may not be surprising as previous studies have found similar results. For example, one study examining the connection between assessment and metacognition at the elementary level reported teachers conceptualizing metacognition as the ability to understand one’s thinking ( Braund and DeLuca, 2018 ). They also noted a similar gap with little to no mention of MEs ( Braund and DeLuca, 2018 ). A different study examining assessment in Kindergarten classrooms demonstrated that only 5 of 20 teachers mentioned metacognition in relation to SR and defined it as understanding an individual’s learning ( DeLuca et al., 2020 ).

Additionally, the Kindergarten curriculum in Ontario is centered around SR with some consideration for metacognition. A recent document analysis of this curriculum document was conducted to better understand how SR was operationalized throughout the document. One of their conclusions was the need to move toward a more holistic conceptualization of metacognition with the inclusion of all three components (metacognitive regulation, metacognitive awareness, and ME). This was identified as a need given that the policy document focused on the use of language to share one’s learning without considering planning, monitoring, or evaluating behaviors ( Braund and Timmons, 2021 ). Given the focus of the Kindergarten curriculum document, it makes sense why the educators in this study emphasized sharing one’s thinking and providing students with the necessary vocabulary to describe their thinking. One educational implication is that we need to provide in-service teachers with additional programming around the different facets of metacognition to help with the development of a more fulsome conceptualization. Additionally, this should begin in pre-service programming so that new teachers entering the system have stronger conceptions of metacognition.

Educators in the current study also reported a few key barriers that impacted their ability to integrate metacognition into their classrooms. These barriers included competing demands and the developmental readiness of students. It is well understood that teachers have a lot that they need to accomplish in the classroom including the development of SR, facilitating learning, and assessing learners. Even with two adults in the room (a teacher and ECE), the Kindergarten classroom remains chaotic with young learners. A few educators in the current study also reiterated the role that developmental readiness plays. This is interesting given that previous research has demonstrated that children are capable of metacognitive and self-regulatory behaviors ( Blair and Razza, 2007 ; Dignath et al., 2008 ; Whitebread et al., 2010 ; Erdmann and Hertel, 2019 ; Perry, 2019 ). It may be that educators lack many examples of concrete practices aimed to develop metacognition. Furthermore, some practices may not be developmentally appropriate for learners in Kindergarten. Therefore, educators need to be exposed to concrete practices that are appropriate for Kindergarten students. This includes providing educators with concrete examples of how MEs can be developed in the Kindergarten classroom for more substantiative metacognitive development. Educators in the current study used prompting and questioning as one technique to promote the development of metacognition. This is in alignment with another study that explored the use of metacognitive questions across three schools in the early years during literacy lessons. The questions were largely phrased around “how” and “why” encouraging students to explain their thinking. However, in the lessons that were analyzed, these types of questions comprised 5–15% of the total number of questions analyzed ( Gourlay et al., 2020 ). This low frequency suggests that metacognitive questions could be used to a greater extent in early years classrooms and across subjects.

Other strategies used in the current study included the provision of feedback related to metacognition. Multiple educators explained that feedback was ongoing throughout the day and that they would provide students with the opportunity to try strategies independently before providing them with feedback. One study examined the impact of providing different types of feedback on student learning in grade 5 classrooms. Corrective feedback helped students to work toward their immediate goals; however, metacognitive feedback better prepared students for other learning activities even after metacognitive support was removed. However, the authors clearly emphasized the need for students to receive explicit instruction on metacognitive strategies and be allowed to practice using the strategies. Otherwise, the metacognitive feedback may not help novice learners who had little prior knowledge ( Tan et al., 2006 ).

Related to educator ratings, generally, female students outperformed male students across the metacognition and SR items in the CHILD. However, in the few instances where male students were rated more highly for SR and metacognition behaviors, they were for motivational items. One study found significant differences according to gender in Grade 8 students. The differences were observed for specific metacognition items such as “My performance depends on my will and my effort” and “I know what teachers expect me to learn” ( Liliana and Lavinia, 2011 ). The first item may involve motivational processes and thus aligns with the current study that found differences among male students even at the Kindergarten level, although the differences in the current study were descriptive trends rather than significant differences.

Similar trends were observed as to how teachers and ECEs rated students using the CHILD. This concordance of ratings helps to provide additional validity evidence for the use of the measure in different educator groupings. Surprisingly, the teacher and ECE ratings did not differ significantly at Time 2 when compared to Time 1 for the current study. The study was originally designed to capture changes in SR and assessment practices across the 12 weeks. Yet, there is a chance that 12 weeks were not enough to capture changes in these students’ behaviors. It may be posited that a change in metacognition and SR behaviors could be observed if Time 1 was in September and Time 2 was closer to the end of the school year such as in May. There may also be events in the lives of students for the current study that may have caused them to struggle with regulation at Time 2 when compared to Time 1.

One mixed methods study compared metacognitive beliefs and practices for pre-service ( n = 43) and in-service ( n = 45) teachers. Both groups of teachers recognized the importance of metacognition however, in-service teachers reported greater integration than pre-service teachers. In-service teachers tended to report more concrete strategies such as explicit instruction, use of think-aloud protocols, and students as active agents, whereas pre-service teachers tended to be more idealistic without concrete examples from their practice. Additionally, in-service teachers tended to have deeper conceptualizations of metacognition making connections to higher order thinking and the use of metacognitive strategies across domains ( Braund and Soleas, 2019 ). These findings reiterate the importance of not just teaching about metacognition but also how to integrate metacognition across grade levels. Educators seem to agree on the importance of metacognition but continue to struggle with its implementation. Kindergarten is of particular interest because it sets the foundation for later learning. It may be that Kindergarten teachers need examples of how metacognition practices could be adapted for use in their classrooms. It was clear in the current study that all educators wanted to integrate more metacognition practices in their classrooms but struggled with competing demands. Perhaps if they were provided with examples of how these strategies could be applied across subject domains it may help with their integration.

Limitations

This mixed methods study had several limitations including that all data were collected from one school board. There was diversity across schools and students. Additionally, only six of the eligible eight ECEs participated in the study. Therefore, some of their perspectives may not have been captured relating to the development of metacognition. Specific to the measurement, the CHILD measure was completed by educators who may have interpreted the items differently without having more formal training. This emphasizes the need for triangulating across measures for metacognition in children.

Future research

Future research should add additional timepoints including measuring metacognition and SR behaviors at the beginning of the year to capture a baseline. More studies need to take a longitudinal approach in the early years focused on understanding the development of metacognition as children develop. Given that the gender and sex differences were observed for select items, future work should continue to explore metacognitive behaviors according to gender or sex. Measures need to be triangulated to ensure an accurate demonstration of metacognition such as through the use of think-aloud protocols, classroom observations, interviews, and self-report items. Additionally, as we understand more about how metacognition is operationalized in the early years, interventions can be designed and implemented to facilitate the development in Kindergarten.

This research highlights empirical practices that Kindergarten educators can use to help facilitate metacognitive thinking. Despite having barriers impacting their implementation, educators in the current study worked to encourage metacognitive thinking using developmentally appropriate strategies. Furthermore, findings highlight a need to better support Kindergarten educators with developing metacognitive thinking in their students through explicit examples of strategies for use across subject domains and substantiating their conceptualization.

Data availability statement

The datasets presented in this article are not readily available because additional ethics approval would be required to share raw data beyond the research team specified in the original ethics application. Requests to access the datasets should be directed to HB, [email protected] .

Ethics statement

The studies involving human participants were reviewed and approved by General Research Ethics Board at Queen’s University. Written informed consent to participate in this study was provided by the participants or their legal guardian/next of kin.

Author contributions

HB lead the study design with input from her dissertation committee, collected and analyzed all data, wrote this manuscript herself, and is accountable for the accuracy and integrity of the work.

HB was supported in part by funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council (Award # 752-2016-1858).

Acknowledgments

The author thanks all RAs who helped to collect the data and all educators who participated in this study. The author also thanks my doctoral committee including Christopher DeLuca, Liying Cheng, and Kristy Timmons who remained supportive throughout the dissertation and beyond.

Conflict of interest

The author declares that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Publisher’s note

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Supplementary material

The Supplementary Material for this article can be found online at: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.933541/full#supplementary-material

Adie, L. E., Willis, J., and Van der Kleij, F. M. (2018). Diverse perspectives on student agency in classroom assessment. Austral. Educ. Res. 45, 1–12. doi: 10.1007/s13384-018-0262-2

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Baas, D., Castelijns, J., Vermeulen, M., Martens, R., and Segers, M. (2015). The relation between assessment for learning and elementary students’ cognitive and metacognitive strategy use. Br. J. Educ. Psychol. 85, 33–46. doi: 10.1111/bjep.12058

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Ben-David, A., and Orion, N. (2013). Teachers’ voices on integrating metacognition into science education. Int. J. Sci. Educ. 35, 3161–3193. doi: 10.1080/09500693.2012.697208

Blair, C., and Razza, R. P. (2007). Relating effortful control, executive function, and false belief understanding to emerging math and literacy ability in kindergarten. Child Dev. 78, 647–663. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8624.2007.01019.x

Boekaerts, M. (1999). Self-regulated leearning: where we are today? Int. J. Educ. Res. 31, 445–457. doi: 10.1016/S0883-0355(99)00014-2

Boekaerts, M., and Cascallar, E. (2006). How far have we moved toward the integration of theory and practice in self-regulation? Educ. Psychol. Rev. 18, 199–210. doi: 10.1007/s10648-006-9013-4

Braun, V., and Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qual. Res. Psychol. 3, 77–101. doi: 10.1191/1478088706qp063oa

Braund, H., and DeLuca, C. (2018). Elementary students as active agents in their learning: an empirical study of the connections between assessment practices and student metacognition. Austral. Educ. Res. 45, 65–85. doi: 10.1007/s13384-018-0265-z

Braund, H., DeLuca, C., Panadero, E., and Cheng, L. (2021). Exploring formative assessment and co-regulation in kindergarten through interviews and direct observation. Front. Educ. 6:732373. doi: 10.3389/feduc.2021.732373

Braund, H., and Soleas, E. (2019). “The struggle is real,” in Teachers’ Professional Development in Global Contexts , eds J. Mena, A. García-Valcárcel, and F. J. G. Peñalvo (Paderborn: Brill Sense), 105–124.

Google Scholar

Braund, H., and Timmons, K. (2021). Operationalization of self-regulation in the early years: comparing policy with theoretical underpinnings. Int. J. Child Care Educ. Policy 15:8. doi: 10.1186/s40723-021-00085-7

Bronson, M. B., and Bronson, M. (2001). Self-Regulation in Early Childhood: Nature and Nurture. New York, NY: Guilford press.

Cofie, N., Braund, H., and Dalgarno, N. (2022). Eight ways to get a grip on intercoder reliability using qualitative-based measures. Can. Med. Educ. J. 13, 73–76. doi: 10.36834/cmej.72504

Creswell, J. W., and Plano Clark, V. (2011). Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods Research , 2nd Edn. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

DeLuca, C., Pyle, A., Braund, H., and Faith, L. (2020). Leveraging assessment to promote kindergarten learners’ independence and self-regulation within play-based classrooms. Assess. Educ. 27, 394–415. doi: 10.1080/0969594X.2020.1719033

Dignath, C., Buettner, G., and Langfeldt, H.-P. (2008). How can primary school students learn self-regulated learning strategies most effectively? Educ. Res. Rev. 3, 101–129. doi: 10.1016/j.edurev.2008.02.003

Dinsmore, D. L., Alexander, P. A., and Loughlin, S. M. (2008). Focusing the conceptual lens on metacognition, self-regulation, and self-regulated learning. Educ. Psychol. Rev. 20, 391–409. doi: 10.1007/s10648-008-9083-6

Dörr, L., and Perels, F. (2019). Improving metacognitive abilities as an important prerequisite for self-regulated learning in preschool children. Int. Electron. J. Elem. Educ. 11, 449–459.

Earl, L. M. (2013). Assessment as Learning: Using Classroom Assessment to Maximize Student Learning. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin press.

Efklides, A. (2006). Metacognition and affect: what can metacognitive experiences tell us about the learning process? Educ. Res. Rev. 1, 3–14. doi: 10.1016/j.edurev.2005.11.001

Efklides, A. (2008). Metacognition. Eur. Psychol. 13, 277–287. doi: 10.1027/1016-9040.13.4.277

Erdmann, K. A., and Hertel, S. (2019). Self-regulation and co-regulation in early childhood – development, assessment and supporting factors. Metacogn. Learn. 14, 229–238. doi: 10.1007/s11409-019-09211-w

Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring. Am. Psychol. 34, 906–911. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.34.10.906

Gascoine, L., Higgins, S., and Wall, K. (2017). The assessment of metacognition in children aged 4-16 years: a systematic review. Rev. Educ. 5, 3–57. doi: 10.1002/rev3.3077

Gourlay, C., Mushin, I., and Gardner, R. (2020). Young children’s responses to teachers’ metacognitive questions. Int. J. Early Years Educ. 29, 371–390. doi: 10.1080/09669760.2020.1742671

Group, A. R. (2002). Assessment for Learning: 10 Pricinples. Cambridge, MA: University of Cambridge.

Guba, E. G. (1981). Criteria for assessing the trustworthiness of naturalistic inquiries. Educ. Commun. Technol. J. 29, 75–91. doi: 10.1007/BF02766777

Jacobs, G. (2004). A classroom investigation of the growth of metacognitive awareness in kindergarten children through the writing process. Early Childhood Educ. J. 32, 17–23. doi: 10.1023/B:ECEJ.0000039639.70536.13

Liliana, C., and Lavinia, H. (2011). Gender differences in metacognitive skills. A study of the 8th grade pupils in romania. Proc. Soc. Behav. Sci. 29, 396–401. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.11.255

McClelland, M. M., and Cameron, C. E. (2012). Self-regulation in early childhood: improving conceptual clarity and developing ecologically valid measures. Child Dev. Perspect. 6, 136–142. doi: 10.1111/j.1750-8606.2011.00191.x

Moraitou, D., and Metallidou, P. (2021). Trends and Prospects in Metacognition Research across the Life Span: A Tribute to Anastasia Efklides. Berlin: Springer. doi: 10.1007/978-3-030-51673-4

OME (2016). The Kindergarten Program. Available online at: http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/curriculum/elementary/kindergarten.html (accessed April 20, 2022).

Perry, J., Lundie, D., and Golder, G. (2018). Metacognition in schools: what does the literature suggest about the effectiveness of teaching metacognition in schools? Educ. Rev. 71, 483–500. doi: 10.1080/00131911.2018.1441127

Perry, N. E. (2019). Recognizing early childhood as a critical time for developing and supporting self-regulation. Metacogn. Learn. 14, 327–334. doi: 10.1007/s11409-019-09213-8

Perry, V., Albeg, L., and Tung, C. (2012). Meta-analysis of single-case design research on self-regulatory interventions for academic performance. J. Behav. Educ. 21, 217–229. doi: 10.1007/s10864-012-9156-y

Plano Clark, V., and Ivankova, N. V. (2016). Mixed Methods Research: A Guide to the Field. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications Inc. doi: 10.4135/9781483398341

Tan, J., Biswas, G., and Schwartz, D. (2006). “Feedback for metacognitive support in learning by teaching environments,” in Proceedings of the 28th Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society , Vancouver.

Veenman, M. V. J. (2005). “The assessment of metacognitive skills: what can be learned from multi-method designs?,” in Lernstrategien und Metakognition: Implikationen für Forschung und Praxis , eds C. Artelt and B. Moschner (Münster: Waxmann), 75–97.

Veenman, M. V. J., Van Hout-Wolters, B. H. A. M., and Afflerbach, P. (2006). Metacognition and learning: conceptual and methodological considerations. Metacogn. Learn. 1, 3–14. doi: 10.1007/s11409-006-6893-0

Veenman, M. V. J., Wilhelm, P., and Beishuizen, J. J. (2004). The relation between intellectual and metacognitive skills from a developmental perspective. Learn. Instr. 14, 89–109. doi: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2003.10.004

Venitz, L., and Perels, F. (2019). The promotion of self-regulated learning by kindergarten teachers: differential effects of an indirect intervention. Int. Electron. J. Element. Educ. 11, 437–448. doi: 10.26822/iejee.2019553340

Whitebread, D., Almeqdad, Q., Bryce, D., Demetriou, D., Grau, V., and Sangster, C. (2010). “Metacognition in young children: current methodological and theoretical developments,” in Trends and Prospects in Metacognition Research , eds A. Efklides and P. Misailidi (Berlin: Springer), 233–258. doi: 10.1007/978-1-4419-6546-2_11

Whitebread, D., Coltman, P., Pasternak, D. P., Sangster, C., Grau, V., Bingham, S., et al. (2009). The development of two observational tools for assessing metacognition and self-regulated learning in young children. Metacogn. Learn. 4, 63–85. doi: 10.1007/s11409-008-9033-1

Winne, P. H., and Perry, N. E. (2000). Measuring Self-Regulated Learning. Cambridge, MA: Academic Press. doi: 10.1016/B978-012109890-2/50045-7

Zimmerman, B. J. (2000). “Attaining self-regulation: a social cognitive perspective,” in Handbook of Self-Regulation , eds M. Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrich, and M. Zeidner (Cambridge, MA: Academic Press).

Zohar, A., and Barzilai, S. (2013). A review of research on metacognition in science education: current and future directions. Stud. Sci. Educ. 49, 121–169. doi: 10.1080/03057267.2013.847261

Keywords : metacognition, teacher, early years, self-regulation, Kindergarten

Citation: Braund H (2022) Thinking about Kindergarten thinking: A mixed methods study. Front. Psychol. 13:933541. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.933541

Received: 01 May 2022; Accepted: 04 August 2022; Published: 02 September 2022.

Reviewed by:

Copyright © 2022 Braund. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY) . The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

*Correspondence: Heather Braund, [email protected]

Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

• Skip to main content
• Keyboard shortcuts for audio player

A top researcher says it's time to rethink our entire approach to preschool

Anya Kamenetz

Dale Farran has been studying early childhood education for half a century. Yet her most recent scientific publication has made her question everything she thought she knew.

"It really has required a lot of soul-searching, a lot of reading of the literature to try to think of what were plausible reasons that might account for this."

And by "this," she means the outcome of a study that lasted more than a decade. It included 2,990 low-income children in Tennessee who applied to free, public prekindergarten programs. Some were admitted by lottery, and the others were rejected, creating the closest thing you can get in the real world to a randomized, controlled trial — the gold standard in showing causality in science.

The Tennessee Pre-K Debate: Spinach Vs. Easter Grass

Farran and her co-authors at Vanderbilt University followed both groups of children all the way through sixth grade. At the end of their first year, the kids who went to pre-K scored higher on school readiness — as expected.

But after third grade, they were doing worse than the control group. And at the end of sixth grade, they were doing even worse. They had lower test scores, were more likely to be in special education, and were more likely to get into trouble in school, including serious trouble like suspensions.

"Whereas in third grade we saw negative effects on one of the three state achievement tests, in sixth grade we saw it on all three — math, science and reading," says Farran. "In third grade, where we had seen effects on one type of suspension, which is minor violations, by sixth grade we're seeing it on both types of suspensions, both major and minor."

That's right. A statewide public pre-K program, taught by licensed teachers, housed in public schools, had a measurable and statistically significant negative effect on the children in this study.

Farran hadn't expected it. She didn't like it. But her study design was unusually strong, so she couldn't easily explain it away.

"This is still the only randomized controlled trial of a statewide pre-K, and I know that people get upset about this and don't want it to be true."

Why it's a bad time for bad news

It's a bad time for early childhood advocates to get bad news about public pre-K. Federally funded universal prekindergarten for 3- and 4-year-olds has been a cornerstone of President Biden's social agenda, and there are talks about resurrecting it from the stalled-out "Build Back Better" plan. Preschool has been expanding in recent years and is currently publicly funded to some extent in 46 states. About 7 in 10 4-year-olds now attend some kind of academic program.

This enthusiasm has rested in part on research going back to the 1970s. Nobel Prize-winning economist James Heckman, among others, showed substantial long-term returns on investment for specially designed and carefully implemented programs.

To put it crudely, policymakers and experts have touted for decades now that if you give a 4-year-old who is growing up in poverty a good dose of story time and block play, they'll be more likely to grow up to become a high-earning, productive citizen.

What went wrong in Tennessee

No study is the last word. The research on pre-K continues to be mixed. In May 2021, a working paper (not yet peer reviewed) came out that looked at Boston's pre-K program. The study was a similar size to Farran's, used a similar quasi-experimental design based on random assignment, and also followed up with students for years. This study found that the preschool kids had better disciplinary records and were much more likely to graduate from high school, take the SATs and go to college, though their test scores didn't show a difference.

Farran believes that, with a citywide program, there's more opportunity for quality control than in her statewide study. Boston's program spent more per student, and it also was mixed-income, whereas Tennessee's program is for low-income kids only.

So what went wrong in Tennessee? Farran has some ideas — and they challenge almost everything about how we do school. How teachers are prepared, how programs are funded and where they are located. Even something as simple as where the bathrooms are.

In short, Farran is rethinking her own preconceptions, which are an entire field's preconceptions, about what constitutes quality pre-K.

Do kids in poverty deserve the same teaching as rich kids?

"One of the biases that I hadn't examined in myself is the idea that poor children need a different sort of preparation from children of higher-income families."

She's talking about drilling kids on basic skills. Worksheets for tracing letters and numbers. A teacher giving 10-minute lectures to a whole class of 25 kids who are expected to sit on their hands and listen, only five of whom may be paying any attention.

A Harsh Critique Of Federally Funded Pre-K

"Higher-income families are not choosing this kind of preparation," she explains. "And why would we assume that we need to train children of lower-income families earlier?"

Farran points out that families of means tend to choose play-based preschool programs with art, movement, music and nature. Children are asked open-ended questions, and they are listened to.

5 Proven Benefits Of Play

This is not what Farran is seeing in classrooms full of kids in poverty, where "teachers talk a lot, but they seldom listen to children." She thinks that part of the problem is that teachers in many states are certified for teaching students in prekindergarten through grade 5, or sometimes even pre-K-8. Very little of their training focuses on the youngest learners.

So another major bias that she's challenging is the idea that teacher certification equals quality. "There have been three very large studies, the latest one in 2018, which are not showing any relationship between quality and licensure."

Putting a bubble in your mouth

In 2016, Farran published a study based on her observations of publicly funded Tennessee pre-K classrooms similar to those included in this paper. She found then that the largest chunk of the day was spent in transition time. This means simply moving kids around the building.

Partly this is an architectural problem. Private preschools, even home-based day cares, tend to be laid out with little bodies in mind. There are bathrooms just off the classrooms. Children eat in, or very near, the classroom, too. And there is outdoor play space nearby with equipment suitable for short people.

Putting these same programs in public schools can make the whole day more inconvenient.

"So if you're in an older elementary school, the bathroom is going to be down the hall. You've got to take your children out, line them up and then they wait," Farran says. "And then, if you have to use the cafeteria, it's the same thing. You have to walk through the halls, you know: 'Don't touch your neighbor, don't touch the wall, put a bubble in your mouth because you have to be quiet.' "

One of Farran's most intriguing conjectures is that this need for control could explain the extra discipline problems seen later on in her most recent study.

"I think children are not learning internal control. And if anything, they're learning sort of an almost allergic reaction to the amount of external control that they're having, that they're having to experience in school."

In other words, regularly reprimanding kids for doing normal kid stuff at 4 years old, even suspending them, could backfire down the road as children experience school as a place of unreasonable expectations.

We know from other research that the control of children's bodies at school can have disparate racial impact. Other studies have suggested that Black children are disciplined more often in preschool, as they are in later grades. Farran's study, where 70% of the kids were white, found interactions between race, gender, and discipline problems, but no extra effect of attending preschool was detected.

Preschool Suspensions Really Happen And That's Not OK With Connecticut

Where to go from here.

The United States has a child care crisis that COVID-19 both intensified and highlighted. Progressive policymakers and advocates have tried for years to expand public support for child care by "pushing it down" from the existing public school system, using the teachers and the buildings.

Farran praises the direction that New York City, for one, has taken instead: a "mixed-delivery" program with slots for 3- and 4-year-olds. Some kids attend free public preschool in existing nonprofit day care centers, some in Head Start programs and some in traditional schools.

But the biggest lesson Farran has drawn from her research is that we've simply asked too much of pre-K, based on early results from what were essentially showcase pilot programs. "We tend to want a magic bullet," she says.

"Whoever thought that you could provide a 4-year-old from an impoverished family with 5 1/2 hours a day, nine months a year of preschool, and close the achievement gap, and send them to college at a higher rate?" she asks. "I mean, why? Why do we put so much pressure on our pre-K programs?"

We might actually get better results, she says, from simply letting little children play.

• Categories Literacy , S.T.E.A.M. , Science , Social Studies

Research Projects In Kindergarten

• Greg Smedley-Warren
• October 13, 2023
• No Comments

When Common Core standards were introduced several years ago, one of those standards was research and writing. The standards said students should participate in shared research and writing.  I found this standard to be terrifying.  I mean, what could go wrong with kindergartners researching something on Google?!  That’s where our research projects were born. While the standards might have changed, these research projects still meet state standards and, thus, are still applicable in all classrooms!  And they help make research and writing fun and developmentally appropriate!

Research Projects In The Classroom

As a teacher, I believe in doing what’s best for my students, but I also do what my district asks of me.  This means providing tools and scaffolding so my students can be successful.   So, if research and writing are standards, I want to find a way to make that goal accessible to my students in ways that they can be successful.   I decided that research projects should be a fun, engaging way to research and write in kindergarten.   So here’s how it works in our classroom!

The research projects are completed during our ELA time or literacy block.  This allows us to integrate science and social studies standards while meeting ELA standards such as research and writing.   The actual research is done through read-alouds and videos.  The information is discussed and recorded on graphic organizers.  Students then use the graphic organizers to do their writing.  Our ELA block is designed for a 30-minute whole-group lesson.  Our research projects use that time to be completed.  The read-aloud/video and graphic organizers are done in 15-20 minutes, and the students then work on their research journals independently.   We do one activity or graphic organizer each day.

Research Journals

Each research project includes a research journal.  The research journals are where students record their learning.  They write, do labeling, sorting, etc.  The journals give students ownership of their learning and are a source of pride.

Schema Maps

Each research project begins with a schema map.  Students share their schema or what they already know about the topic.  Every piece of schema they share is recorded on a post-it note and placed on the schema map.  The post-it notes allow us to organize our thinking much like our brains organize information.

When creating our schema map, I always draw a fun picture.  This helps introduce the topic and makes the learning fun!

We add our new learning to the schema map as we progress through our research projects.  At the end of the research project, we re-visit our schema and address misconceptions.  Misconceptions might be wrong, or they might be something where our thinking needs to be adjusted.  We move misconceptions to the misconceptions area of the schema map while discussing why it’s a misconception.

Graphic Organizers

The research portion of our research projects uses read-alouds and videos.  As we read, we record our learning on graphic organizers. We use turn-and-talk strategies and questioning to access the information.  The students also have to share the information in complete sentences.  Our research projects include can/have/are charts,  t-charts, circle charts, Venn Diagrams,  and more.   Note: each research project includes suggested read-aloud books and some research projects include video suggestions!

We record the information DURING the read-aloud.  We do not wait until the end of the read-aloud because doing it after the read-aloud makes it an assessment, and we don’t want it to be that.

The students take the information from our graphic organizers and use it to write in their research journals.  Differentiated journals use sentence frames for student writing.  Students copy information from the charts, and they are encouraged to write on their own.  As the year goes on and they build their writing skills, independent writing becomes much more natural for them.  It’s also important to note that students might not be ready to write or copy so they can draw pictures and dictate their learning to you!  

We also use the writing to work on the mechanics of writing.  I use one-on-one conferences to help them improve their writing.  Students are encouraged to use inventive/phonetic spelling when writing.

Vocabulary And Higher Order Thinking

We use labeling as part of our research projects to work on vocabulary.  We label a class chart, and then students label their pictures in their research journals.  The labels allow for conversations about adaptations and how each part helps or works.  Our research projects are aligned with the science of reading and are a powerful tool to teach vocabulary explicitly.  We know vocabulary is a MUST-have piece of the reading puzzle, and these research projects bring vocabulary instruction to the forefront!

For higher-order thinking, we use a true-false sort.  This higher-order thinking activity allows students to discuss what they’ve learned.  For false statements, we discuss why it’s false, and we change it into a truth statement.  Students then use the true statements to write about their topic.

Additional Activities 

Each research project also contains activities specific to that topic.  There might be clothing sorts for seasons.  A lesson on the water cycle or a life cycle activity.  For push and pull, we drew things we could push and pull.  The students make a forecast for our weather research project.  These additional activities allow us to target specific science and social studies standards.

All of our research projects are ALWAYS Buy 1 Get 1 50% off with code: RPBOGO50 . ONLY AT TKSSTORE.com

Our research projects:

Each one can be purchased individually OR you can purchase them as a bundle and save 50%!!

For more information, check out these posts:

Blog Categories

Related posts, end of the year ideas for kindergarten: shrinky dinks keychains.

Want to know one of my favorite end-of-year ideas for kindergarten?  SHRINKY DINKS!  When I was a kid I LOVED Shrinky Dinks!   I remember

Parent Gift Ideas

Are you looking for parent gift ideas?  These family gifts can be for Christmas, Valentine’s Day, Mother’s Day, and the end of the school year!

Kindergarten Measurement Activities, Vowels, And Space: Schedulin’ Sunday

Week 32 of kindergarten is all about measurement activities, vowels with Vowel Bootcamp, more continents, and space! It’s also state testing, which means there are

Join Our Newsletter

Subscribe to get our latest content by email.

Success! Thank you for joining our newsletter. You will not receive a confirmation email.

There was an error submitting your subscription. Please try again.

join our newsletter!

Copyright ©2024 – All Rights Reserved by The Kindergarten Smorgasboard | Built and managed by EyeCandy Creative

Advertisement

Research on early childhood mathematics teaching and learning

• Survey Paper
• Open access
• Published: 23 June 2020
• Volume 52 , pages 607–619, ( 2020 )

Cite this article

You have full access to this open access article

• Camilla Björklund   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-5436-537X 1 ,
• Marja van den Heuvel-Panhuizen 2 , 3 &
• Angelika Kullberg 1  

62k Accesses

25 Citations

4 Altmetric

Explore all metrics

This paper reports an overview of contemporary research on early childhood mathematics teaching and learning presented at recent mathematics education research conferences and papers included in the special issue (2020–4) of ZDM Mathematics Education . The research covers the broad spectrum of educational research focusing on different content and methods in teaching and learning mathematics among the youngest children in the educational systems. Particular focus in this paper is directed to what lessons can be drawn from teaching interventions in early childhood, what facilitates children’s mathematical learning and development, and what mathematical key concepts can be observed in children. Together, these themes offer a coherent view of the complexity of researching mathematical teaching and learning in early childhood, but the research also brings this field forward by adding new knowledge that extends our understanding of aspects of mathematics education and research in this area, in the dynamic context of early childhood. This knowledge is important for future research and for the development of educational practices.

Similar content being viewed by others

Evolution and Revolution in Artificial Intelligence in Education

Ido Roll & Ruth Wylie

Teaching with digital technology

Alison Clark-Wilson, Ornella Robutti & Mike Thomas

A critical orientation to numeracy across the curriculum

Vince Geiger, Helen Forgasz & Merrilyn Goos

Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.

1 Introduction

Early childhood mathematics education is a rich field of study and practice that includes the provision of stimulating activities and learning environments, organized and orchestrated by teachers, care-takers and other professionals with the aim of offering young children experiences that extend their knowledge and development of mathematical concepts and skills. Generally, early childhood mathematics education involves children aged 3–6 years, but in many countries even the youngest toddlers go to early childhood centres. Therefore, contemporary research on early mathematics education focuses on children from birth until they enter formal schooling in the first grade. To develop this field of research, a strong foundation of theory and methodology is necessary, along with consideration of the practical settings of young children’s learning as well as the societal needs and relevant educational policy frameworks. Moreover, from a didactical perspective, it also requires consideration of the essence of the mathematics to be taught to young children.

High-quality research grounded in theory is necessary for all areas of mathematics education, in order to move forward and contribute to the generation of new knowledge from which the educational practice can benefit. Since there is much evidence that later development in mathematics is laid in the early years (e.g., Duncan et al. 2007 ; Krajewski and Schneider 2009 ; Levine et al. 2010 ), such high-quality research is especially critical for early childhood mathematics education. Research involving young children entails certain challenges that cannot simply be solved by adopting research designs that are used with older students. The aim of gaining deep knowledge of how young children’s mathematical understanding can be fostered places high demands on research methods. As early as 40 years ago, Donaldson ( 1978 ) stated that children act differently in their everyday situations than they do in experiment situations, and this has been confirmed by many others since then. Thus, gaining knowledge about teaching and learning mathematics in the early years requires research that is conducted in various learning environments and that acknowledges that these learning environments are complex, multifaceted, and dynamic.

Research in mathematics education is a relatively recent scientific discipline beginning in the last century (Kilpatrick 2014 ). Investigating young children’s mathematical learning and teaching became part of this discipline much later. Early childhood mathematics has long been the research field of developmental psychology and cognitive sciences. From the studies of mental abilities and thinking in mathematical problem-solving carried out in these disciplines, we have gained knowledge about the influence of working memory and attention span (e.g., Ashcraft et al. 1992 ; Passolunghi and Costa 2016 ; Stipek and Valentino 2015 ), as well as about the role of innate abilities of numerical awareness in children’s mathematical performance (e.g., Butterworth 2005 ; Wynn 1998 ). Yet, these studies lack a deeper investigation of the mathematics that is performed and how it is developed by children. Neither do such investigations address why certain mathematical competencies are important or why some activities stimulate their development and others do not. Contrary to psychological research, mathematics education research has a didactic perspective, which means that it is linked to the perspective of the learning child, the teaching teacher, and the environment offering learning opportunities in which the teaching and learning take place. Above all, didactic research distinguishes itself from psychological research because it deals explicitly with the question of what the mathematics is in early childhood activities, both within and outside formal education.

2 A brief overview of the current field of early mathematics education research

As shown by the many publications on teaching and learning of mathematics in early childhood that have been released in the past few years, this area of mathematics education research has increasingly become a mature discipline. The same is reflected by the special interest groups, working groups, and research fora dedicated to mathematics education in the early years. No self-respecting conference today can afford not to pay attention to the area of early mathematics, and there are now also communities and conferences that focus exclusively on early childhood mathematics education. All these communities and conferences are the epicentres where the latest developments in this field are brought together. To set the scene for research on early childhood mathematics teaching and learning, without it being complete, we first provide a brief overview of recently presented and discussed early mathematics education research. As an orientation point for this overview, we used what has recently been presented by researchers at three international meetings.

2.1 CERME 11 thematic working group (TWG) on early years mathematics

A conference that already has a considerable track record for including early childhood mathematics as a fixed part of its programme is the biennial conference of the European Society for Research in Mathematics Education (ERME). This conference started in 2009 with a Thematic Working Group (TWG) on Early Years Mathematics. Since then, the number of participants in this group has grown consistently. In 2019, this TWG (that is, TWG13) consisted not only of European researchers but also attracted participants from Canada, Japan, and Malawi. The most dominant theme presented there involved studies of children’s emerging number knowledge. Many of these presentations were traditional in design, including giving children tasks that had to be solved both individually when the children were interviewed and when they worked in groups in a classroom setting. Based on these studies, researchers formulated descriptions of the children’s knowledge. Sometimes, learning trajectories could be generated from these empirical observations. However, within this TWG several examples of studies with more innovative designs and research settings were also presented, including different modes of exploring and expressing numbers, which can extend our knowledge of early childhood mathematics education. An example of such research is Bjørnebye’s ( 2019 ) study, in which a dice game including elements of multiple representations and embodiment of counting strategies opened up the possibility of observing how children’s actions and responses reflect their understanding. Other studies investigated how affordances of manipulatives and applications encouraged children to develop new ways of thinking about numbers either by working in a digital environment (Bakos and Sinclair 2019 ) or by using their fingers to represent numbers (Lüken 2019 ; Björklund and Runesson Kempe 2019 ).

A characteristic of the research community gathered at CERME11 TWG13 is that the participants generally had in common an interest in better understanding the mathematical thinking of the child. Therefore, it was considered crucial that research establish clues for how to recognize mathematical thinking in the early years. For this purpose, Sprenger and Benz ( 2019 ) used eye-tracking data, as this platform was considered to contribute to the analysis of children’s perception of structure in the process of determining quantities. Yet, what Sprenger and Benz discovered is that data from technological devices still need to be interpreted, and that other expressions of children’s perceptions and reasoning are necessary assets for drawing valid conclusions.

A further important issue that was present at CERME11 TWG13 was related to teaching practice. Specifically, several presentations addressed the questions of how mathematics education should be orchestrated in early childhood education and what opportunities to learn should be offered to children. For example, Breive ( 2019 ) investigated the link between inquiry-based education and open-ended problem-solving, and the role of the teacher in orchestrating such conditions for mathematical exploration. In her paper, Breive described the teachers’ behaviour in terms of the degrees of freedom offered to the children with respect to their actions related to the mathematical content and context. Based on the data she collected, Breive concluded that teachers’ ways of acting, and the accompanying learning opportunities, should be given more attention within early mathematics education research. Similarly, Vogler ( 2019 ), who observed teacher–child group interactions, concluded that so-called indirect learning (which can be found as a common approach in many preschool settings) may induce an obstacle to learning mathematics embedded in activities if there is not a mutual understanding of what learning content is the aim of the activity. In line with these two studies, other researchers who focused on teachers’ interactions with children also highlighted critical issues for educational practice and supported further research inquiries.

Another source for learning about the latest developments in early childhood mathematics education research is the POEM conferences (Mathematics education perspective on early mathematics learning between the poles of instruction and construction). The latest conference, POEM4, was held in 2018. The presentations published in the conference proceedings (Carlsen et al. 2020 ) all, in one way or another, reflect the question “In what way—and how much—should children be ‘educated’ in mathematics before entering primary school?” This was also the recurring question in the discussions between the participating scholars. Among the contributions, three themes stood out: children’s mathematical reasoning, early mathematics teaching, and parents’ role in children’s mathematical development. There was a strong interest in children’s reasoning abilities and strategies in problem-solving. For example, Tsamir et al. ( 2020 ) investigated how children express their understanding of patterning. For this purpose, the researchers provided preschoolers with patterns to be copied and compared, while observing their strategies. Children’s strategy use was also observed in relation to play situations. Bjørnebye and Sigurjonsson ( 2020 ) observed them in teacher-led outdoor games, while Lossius and Lundhaug ( 2020 ) observed child-initiated play activities. Some researchers used their observations of children’s encounters with mathematical content for theoretical discussions on how to understand children’s meaning-making, for example by taking the semiotic mediation perspective (e.g., Bartolini Bussi 2020 ) or through the lens of attentional processes (Verschaffel et al. 2020 ).

With respect to early mathematics teaching, at POEM4 it was discussed that teachers’ educational work largely concerns how to empower children in the learning process, assuming that children have agency in their learning (Radford 2020 ). Some of the presented studies (e.g., Palmér and Björklund 2020 ) specifically chose children's perspectives and problematized how seriation was made a content for learning in a children’s story. They showed how different manipulatives and tools used in teaching have different implications for what is made possible for the children to learn. A critical but essential notion was expressed by Tzekaki ( 2020 ), who underlined that whether children act and think mathematically and learn mathematical concepts depends on what is defined to be mathematical thinking and acting. In line with this perspective, Keuch and Brandt ( 2020 ) and Bruns et al. ( 2020 ) also raised the issue that teachers’ and student teachers’ knowledge of mathematics in early childhood education affects their readiness to exploit the content in ways that facilitate children’s mathematical learning.

The issue of the knowledge of mathematics in early childhood was also addressed in papers on the role of parents in children’s learning of mathematics. Parents are recognized as young children’s first educators, contributing to their mathematical understanding and skills. One example of this research focus is Lembrér’s ( 2020 ) study. In order to know what experiences children bring with them into preschool education and thus might inform their encounter with mathematics, she investigated what parents value in the mathematics activities in which their children are engaged at home.

2.3 ICME-13 monograph “Contemporary research and perspectives on early childhood mathematics education”

The ICME-13 Monograph “Contemporary research and perspectives on early childhood mathematics education” (Elia et al. 2018 ) is the third source for becoming informed about the state of the art in the field of teaching and learning mathematics in early childhood. This book, which has its foundations in the ICME-13 (International Congress on Mathematical Education) Topic Study Group 1 (TSG1) “Early childhood mathematics education” held in 2016, contains chapters on a broad range of topics grouped into five key themes: pattern and structure, number sense, embodied action and context, technology, and early childhood educators’ professional issues and education.

Within these themes, the domain-overarching theme of pattern and structure played a prominent role. As Mulligan and Mitchelmore ( 2018 ) showed in a series of studies, children’s awareness of mathematical structures turned out to be crucial for acquiring mathematical competence. Particularly children’s structuring skills were found to be critical to developing coherent mathematical concepts and relationships. These findings are in line with Lüken and Kampmann’s ( 2018 ) intervention study with first graders, in which 5 months of explicit teaching of pattern and structure during regular mathematics lessons resulted in significant differences between pre- and post-test arithmetic achievement scores in the intervention group. Moreover, the intervention was most beneficial to the low-achieving children.

The research within the theme number sense examined a large variety of different aspects of number development. For example, there was a study about children’s enumeration skills when making lists for designating and representing collections of objects (Dorier and Coutat 2016 ). Also, attention was paid to the use of numerical finger gestures and other bodily-based communication in order to facilitate the learning process (Rinvold 2016 ), children’s spontaneous focusing on numerosity (SFON) (Rathé et al. 2018 ; Bojorque et al. 2018 ), and the link between writing skills and number development (Adenegan 2016 ). Furthermore, an exploration of children’s ability to operate with numbers revealed that 5-year-olds were able to solve multiplication and division problems when they were presented in familiar contexts (Young-Loveridge and Bicknell 2016 ).

In the theme embodied action and context , Karsli’s ( 2016 ) video-ethnographic research in a pre-kindergarten classroom showed that young children’s hand and body movements hold rich potential for engaging them in mathematics, and underlined the importance of early childhood teachers’ attention to the embodied ways in which children engage with mathematics, with potential for creating teachable moments. Other studies investigated children’s engagement in the context of play. In Henschen’s ( 2016 ) study free play was examined, while Nakken et al. ( 2016 ) compared free with guided play, of which the latter resulted in the children exhibiting deeper mathematical thinking, and engagement with more specific mathematical concepts. Anderson and Anderson ( 2018 ) broadened the scope by investigating children’s learning of mathematics in their home environment. Thom’s ( 2018 ) and Elia’s ( 2018 ) research on geometrical and spatial thinking in early childhood offered further insights into the crucial role of the body and other semiotic resources (language, drawings, and artefacts) by which young children develop and communicate spatial-geometrical thinking. A general conclusion within this theme was that the limited ways in which young children are invited to engage with geometrical, spatial, and measurement concepts undervalue the embodied, gestural, in-context nature of their mathematical thinking.

The theme technology specifically addressed the integration of technology into early childhood mathematics teaching and learning both at school and at home. The focus was mostly on touch-screen tablet-based applications. Because this new technology significantly differs from the traditional physical aid materials, professional development is needed to help educators identify and implement effective uses of these applications. To learn more about the role of the educator (teacher or parent) in the child’s interaction with the software, Baccaglini-Frank ( 2018 ) carried out an analysis of student-software-teacher relations, revealing how the teacher’s goal of helping the children experience success actually limited their development of numerical abilities. The use of technology also opened a window to a new perspective in early childhood mathematics, namely by exposing young children to advanced mathematics such as understanding symmetric transformation (Fletcher and Ginsburg 2016 ) and dealing with large numbers (also in symbolic form) and ordinality (Sinclair 2018 ).

In the theme early childhood educators’ professional issues and education , Cooke and Bruns ( 2018 ) provided a comprehensive overview of the various contributions in TSG1, for which they proposed to distinguish conditions at three levels that influence opportunities for young children to develop mathematical understanding and skills. At the macro level, curricula provide a framework (aims, content to learn, and activities) for mathematics teaching and learning in early childhood, with varying views. Several papers mentioned the tensions regarding new curricula and frameworks that may impose mathematical content rather than allowing the child to develop understanding of mathematical concepts through play. At the meso level, with focus on the teachers’ competence, all involved papers agreed as to the importance that the teacher possess a fundamental understanding of mathematics as the basis for high-quality early mathematics education. However, different studies used different conceptualizations and instruments to measure teachers’ mathematical competence. The micro level refers to the mathematics educational programmes and materials, as well as to the required training for teachers to develop their ability to effectively select and implement such programmes that address children’s mathematical needs (Fritz-Stratmann et al. 2016 ).

In sum, the common themes that stand out from the three international meetings are children’s learning through play, and concerns regarding how to apply content-focused teaching, with or without technology. We found that a great deal of the research is on children’s mathematical thinking and learning, including two main areas concerning children’s emerging number knowledge and children’s learning of patterns. It is noteworthy that in both areas, how children perceive structure or how they manifest structuring abilities were analysed in several of the studies. There were also a number of studies that focused on how finger patterns, gestures, or bodily-based communication may facilitate children’s learning of numbers.

Children’s learning through free or guided play is also a main issue that was discussed. Teachers’ guiding interaction with children in play was shown to contribute more to deeper mathematical thinking and engagement with specific mathematical content. How teaching affects children’s learning opportunities in preschool was furthermore of great concern in several of the studies. A conclusion drawn from this research is that teachers’ ways of acting and the learning opportunities created for children should be given more attention. In what way, and how much, children should be educated before entering primary school remains a central issue.

3 The contributions of this special issue

In this special issue of ZDM Mathematics Education (Issue 2020–4), contemporary research on early childhood mathematics teaching and learning is discussed by researchers from all over the world. The initiative emanated from the 42nd PME conference in Umeå, Sweden (July 2018), where we had the opportunity to organize a Research Forum in which researchers involved in the field of early childhood mathematics education gathered to present and discuss theoretical and methodological challenges and outcomes of studies on learning and teaching arithmetic skills in early years (Björklund et al. 2018 ; Van den Heuvel-Panhuizen 2018 ). The conclusion of the Research Forum was that early childhood mathematics education research is key, but that more efforts are needed to bring together the state of the art within this field as a foundation for moving early childhood mathematics education research forward. This special issue again provides a window into the contemporary field of research on early childhood mathematics teaching and learning. To discuss what this special issue adds to this field and reflect on the challenges that lie ahead for research on early childhood mathematics education, in the next section we synthesize the themes that emerge from the 15 papers included in this special issue. Each theme highlights the papers’ shared knowledge and contributions to research methods. Many papers are related to several themes, but for our discussion we chose those papers that predominantly belong to a particular theme. In total, we identified three recurring themes: the early interventions and their effects, the facilitating factors for learning and development, and the mathematical key concepts that can be observed in children. Together, these themes bring to the fore aspects that are essential for understanding the learning and teaching of mathematics in the early years.

3.1 What lessons can be drawn from interventions?

Research shows that children’s development of mathematical skills and knowledge is often influenced by socio-economic and curricular factors, and by social interaction in both short- and long-term perspectives (Pruden et al. 2011 ). Thus, there is a raised awareness of the impact early childhood education may have on reducing differences in conditions for learning and on increasing and securing equal opportunities for a good foundation in learning for all children. Based on their meta study of early mathematics education research, Duncan et al. ( 2007 ) stated that early intervention counts and numerous references to the same study indicate that this is an important standpoint in research. Why else indulge in the challenging task of researching learning among the youngest in our education systems, if one does not believe that efforts made through teaching are significant for children’s wellbeing and lifelong learning path?

Research on teaching and learning mathematics often shares a common research design in which interventions are implemented (designed, conducted, and the outcomes assessed) with the aim of finding ways to improve teaching practice for the benefit of the learning child, and often to reduce socio-economic inequality. Intervention studies can be objects of research in different ways, focusing on the children’s learning outcomes or the teaching practices. Nevertheless, the goal is to enhance learning through improved teaching. In the papers in this special issue we find efforts to implement well-designed interventions, explicitly focusing on how to teach. Some implement and analyse fine-grained differences in (teaching) actions and the effects on children’s attention to certain content (Paliwal and Baroody 2020 ; Mulligan et al. 2020 ), while others study the effects of attentiveness to children’s experiences and knowledge and the related choices of tasks (Clements et al. 2020 ; Grando and Lopes 2020 ). Nevertheless, essential to studying intervention success or failure is how learning outcomes are measured and interpreted, which is also an important aspect of early childhood mathematics education research (Li et al. 2020 ).

How teaching is framed to present mathematical content to young children, in order for it to be meaningful to them, and in order to be attentive to children’s experiences and knowledge, is investigated and discussed by Grando and Lopes ( 2020 ). Through narratives provided by early childhood teachers, they find insights into how teachers chose to frame the subjects of statistics and probability in ways that engaged children and were responsive to the children’s own experiences, rather than using materials provided by textbooks. Unconventional teaching methods whereby teachers turned their mathematics classroom into a space of creative insubordination are discussed in this paper in relation to the opportunities they offer children to become equipped with critical thinking. The authors argue that the specific content—statistics and probability—demands problematizing activities and experimentation with uncertain outcomes of problems in order to develop probabilistic thinking. This study highlights an essential issue in didactical research: that the content to be taught is not indifferent to how the teaching is designed. The study particularly raises concerns that the design of teaching cannot be random but rather has to be linked to the educational environment and the students attending that particular environment. Consequently, the generalizability of intervention programmes and teaching methods has to be taken into serious consideration if they are to be implemented in different educational settings.

Clements et al. ( 2020 ) set out to investigate the efficacy of implementing an intervention programme in which instructions and progression are grounded in a research-based learning trajectory. Even though the programme itself had previously been found to have positive outcomes for preschool children’s mathematics learning, the goal of the current study was to investigate how to teach in the most successful way. For this purpose, the authors used the same programme but adapted the choices of the tasks’ difficulty level to the children’s current knowledge levels. How to teach was then related to what to teach individual children. Results indicate that skipping difficulty levels to shorten the steps to the learning goals was not successful. This thorough investigation of teaching by adapting the complexity of the content to the child’s ability to learn best what is intended draws attention to the delicate work of teaching in early childhood education. The study supports child-centred approaches that are sensitive to the individual needs and potential of the child, while simultaneously aiming for the learning goals set by the curriculum.

While Clements et al. investigated the effects of an intervention programme covering broader numerical knowledge, Paliwal and Baroody ( 2020 ) aimed to investigate what conditions for learning the cardinality principle are most effective and how subitizing abilities impact on cardinality knowledge achievement. Their efforts were directed towards a fine-grained analysis of how to teach this aspect of the number concept, and what learning processes different approaches elicit in children. What stands out in their study is that they used a highly advanced research design, which allowed them to examine the effects of different ways of directing children’s attention to seeing numbers’ cardinality. In their paper, they point out the importance of directing children’s attention to various ways of seeing numbers’ cardinality, as follows: as a constructing act by adding units to get a number; as an act starting from naming the whole set with a counting word and then differentiating the added units by counting; and a third condition, attending only to single units in a counting act. Thus, their intervention was designed with explicit rigour as to what was made possible for the children to experience, and their investigation concerned the learning outcomes of the different conditions. While this attention in Paliwal and Baroody’s study to the different conditions can at first glance be considered subtle and far from the instruction children encounter in their mathematics education, the study offers insight into the importance of teachers’ awareness of their way of directing children’s attention to certain meanings of the content.

In another paper focusing on the effects of an intervention programme, Mulligan et al. ( 2020 ) analysed children’s written answers to pattern tasks in order to identify differences and changes in their structural awareness. They found a positive effect on the children’s development of awareness of mathematical pattern and structure (AMPS), and showed how the levels changed as an effect of a 37-week intervention programme. Mulligan et al. add to the field of early childhood mathematics knowledge of a particular ability (structural awareness), how it can be identified among young children, and also how the ability changes over a prolonged period of time (during an intervention), which may provide insight into what children actually learn while taking part in an intervention programme.

Children’s learning is of course at the centre of attention in intervention studies, and Li et al. ( 2020 ) pay explicit attention to how to interpret results from a pre- and post-diagnostic test. In their study, Li et al. investigated the development of mathematics problem-solving skills among kindergarteners by analysing their responses to a cognitive diagnostic test. As in most large-scale analyses, it can be shown in quantitative terms how children develop in producing correct answers that indicate growth in knowledge within certain domains that are tested for. However, Li et al. take a step further in their inquiry and illustrate how two children who scored similarly on the cognitive diagnostic test before an intervention had made different progress during the intervention period. Li et al. suggest that the reason for this difference may lie in how children understand and approach tasks, indicating different understanding even though similar answers are produced. Quantitative measures alone do not reveal such differences. The study thus shows the significance of paying attention to how children reason in order to solve a task. Based on their study, Li et al. recommend that children’s learning outcomes from participating in interventions be seen in the light of how the effects of interventions are measured, as it is observed that some developed skills do not endure over time and similar outcomes among children may conceal different learning paths.

3.2 What facilitates children’s learning and development?

Today, it is undisputed that the development of mathematical skills and the teaching of emerging skills in the early years are essential for mathematics education and developmental progress in the long term (Aunio and Niemivirta 2010 ; Duncan et al. 2007 ; Krajewski and Schneider 2009 ). However, in contrast to this perspective, a recent overview of the long-term effects of preschool mathematics education and interventions (Watts et al. 2018 ) challenges this almost taken-for-granted assumption, as most early interventions have a substantial fadeout effect. Thus, there is a need to revisit our current knowledge of teaching and learning, and scrutinize what seems to make a difference. Some of the papers in the special issue particularly consider this issue in their efforts to ascertain what facilitates children’s mathematical learning and development, and focus on influential aspects found in play settings (Reikerås 2020 ; Tirosh et al. 2020 ), verbal communication in teaching practices (Hundeland et al. 2020 ), and the home numeracy environment (Rathé et al. 2020 ).

Hundeland et al. ( 2020 ) raise the question of how children learn to use and understand the canonical language of mathematics, and study this aspect in terms of mathematical discourses taking place in kindergarten teaching sessions. They take a sociocultural stance (see Vygotsky 1987 ), seeing communication as the link between internal communication (thinking) and external communication (interaction). Therefore, children’s opportunities to contribute ideas and arguments are vital for their (mathematical) learning processes. Earlier research has also shown that care-takers’ talk influences not only children’s vocabulary but also, for instance, their spatial problem-solving (Pruden et al. 2011 ). The deeper knowledge that the study by Hundeland et al. ( 2020 ) provides regarding the quantity and quality of mathematical talk in which children are involved, offers us better opportunities also to organize supportive and stimulating conditions for knowledge growth.

What differs in the study by Hundeland et al. compared to most others with similar research questions is their focus on the kind of interaction that the mathematical discourse induces, which, based on the chosen sociocultural theoretical framework, should be crucial for positive learning outcomes. However, what they study and compare is the impact on the mathematical discourse that a certain in-service training has. This places mathematics in the spotlight of mathematics education research. While psychological and cognitive research provides us with important knowledge of mental processes and developmental advancement, studies like the one by Hundeland et al. have a clear direction towards understanding, and not least improving, the conditions for children’s learning and development, either by implementing teachers’ professional development or through curriculum improvements.

It is commonly agreed that young children’s learning is often situated in play. In a large-scale observation study, Reikerås ( 2020 ) conducted a thorough examination of the kind of play in which toddlers engage, for the purpose of learning how play skills may be related to early mathematical skills. It was found that competencies that allow the child to be active in solitary and parallel play, as well as children’s ability to initiate and remain in a play activity, correlated positively with the toddlers’ mathematical skills. The kind of play skills that showed the highest correlation with mathematical skills was their competence to interact in play. General social play skills thus seem to have an impact on mathematical learning, but Reikerås’ study cannot reveal how these are connected or any causal effects. An effort to better understand the interaction going on in toddlers’ play is made by Tirosh et al. ( 2020 ), investigating the challenges toddlers may face as they practise one-to-one correspondence in a playful context, and how different individuals participate in the playful mathematical context. Here, interaction and social skills become one issue with an impact on the learning opportunities arising in the play.

In many cases, the messy context of children’s play is a methodological challenge. It is not possible to control influencing variables to the same extent as in an experimental design. On the other hand, findings from the messy settings are more likely to bring to the fore aspects that were not anticipated, which raises new questions for research and theory development. Design research supports this kind of knowledge contribution, as several cycles are conducted, each developed based on insights from the previous cycle. These cycles adhere to children’s initiatives such as practising one-to-one correspondence in a setting the table task by putting one spoon inside each cup instead of placing one spoon beside each cup (see Tirosh et al. 2020 ); thus, the child is expressing an understanding of the concept, but is expressing it differently than how the task suggests. This highlights the importance of directing attention to instructions used in research studies, and particularly to the language of mathematics and the spatial aspects of props used in a task, related to the possibilities involved as young children interpret and execute a task.

Children take part in cultural life, where today numerical aspects are an inevitable part of the everyday environment. Nevertheless, there are differences in the extent to which children attend to these aspects, and consequently in how they learn the meaning of numbers, graphical representations of numbers, and how to use numbers. A common assumption is that home numeracy environment is a strong factor (LeFevre et al. 2009 ; Skwarchuk et al. 2014 ), which is reflected not least in the abundance of studies regarding socio-cultural background and demographic factors as a pre-cursor for learning progress. Rathé et al. ( 2020 ) put the common assumption to the test—that home environment has an influence on children’s progress in mathematical development—by comparing young children’s tendency to focus spontaneously on numeracy and numerical symbols in their home numeracy environment. Concerning this specific directionality to numbers, which is assumed to have an impact on children’s arithmetic skills in later years (see McMullen et al. 2015 ), based on their study they propose that the home numeracy environment does not seem to have any significant impact.

3.3 What mathematical key concepts can be observed in children?

A great deal of research in the field of early childhood mathematics education studies what mathematics children understand and how this understanding evolves. This knowledge is crucial in designing teaching that contributes to more advanced thinking and problem-solving strategies that support conceptual growth. Therefore, children’s utterances and how they act are the centre of interest for many researchers. Also, in this special issue, much attention is paid to the mathematical key concepts that can be attributed to children’s thinking, resulting in papers addressing children’s understanding of similarity in mathematical objects (Palmér and Van Bommel 2020 ), their understanding and use of structures (Sprenger and Bentz 2020 ; Kullberg and Björklund 2020 ), their understanding of the concept of cardinality and ordinality (Askew and Venkat 2020 ), and the underlying structure of their quantitative competencies (Van den Heuvel-Panhuizen and Elia 2020 ).

Children’s expressions, and how they are allowed to express themselves, are critical for our understanding of the learning of mathematics. Children’s problem posing is one aspect that can tell us about their understanding of mathematics (Cai et al. 2015 ). In the special issue, this is particularly addressed in the paper by Palmér and Van Bommel ( 2020 ), who investigated children’s understanding of similarity in mathematical objects. They analysed how children themselves created tasks in three-dimensional geometry that were similar to a previous problem-solving task they had worked on. It is suggested that this finding sheds light on the children’s interpretation of the specific mathematical features of the original task.

How children perceive structure has been shown to play an important role in how they, for example, determine a number of objects or solve an arithmetic problem (Ellemor-Collins and Wright 2009 ; Resnick 1983 ). In line with these earlier studies, Sprenger and Bentz ( 2020 ) investigated how 5-year-olds perceive structures in visually presented sets. By having the children determine the number of eggs in a 10-egg box while using an eye-tracking device (and recording the children’s utterances and gestures), they were able to analyse the children’s gaze when determining the cardinality of the set, and thereby gain insight into the process of perception. The eye-tracking data showed, for example, that many of the children were able to see structures (e.g. 4 + 1 or 3 + 2) and use them to determine a quantity without having to count all the objects. The authors argue that children’s ability to perceive structures in sets and use them to determine cardinality is central for their further arithmetic learning, as how children perceive sets (e.g., as individual objects, as a composite whole, or in structured part-whole relations) affects the strategies they use for solving arithmetic tasks.

Similar ideas are found in the study by Kullberg and Björklund ( 2020 ), who studied 5-year-olds’ use of finger patterns to structure number relations while solving an arithmetic problem. They identified two major ways of structuring the task: only structuring, and counting and structuring. In the group that both structured using their fingers and counted on some fingers, some ways were found to be more powerful. Children who solved the arithmetic task (3 + _ = 8) by creating a finger pattern of eight raised fingers and simultaneously identifying (‘seeing’) the missing part (5) on two hands (3 + (2 + 3) = 8) were more successful in solving arithmetic tasks, even in a later follow-up assessment. It is suggested that a possible reason for this later success is that these children were able to see numbers as parts included in other numbers, which has been found in earlier research (Resnick 1983 ) to be important for developing arithmetic skills.

Baccaglini-Frank et al. ( 2020 ) also argue that the appropriate use of fingers can contribute to developing children’s number sense. They studied how 4-year-olds interacted (verbally and using finger patterns) when using the application TouchCounts. The app combines multi-touch with audile, visual, and symbolic representation, and several solution strategies are possible, affording the simultaneous experience of, for example, finger patterns on the screen, with the number both seen and spoken. In their paper the authors emphasize how multimodal affordances may encourage children to use different strategies in response to different tasks, and thus experience a broad range of abilities related to number sense, including both cardinality and ordinality.

Askew and Venkat ( 2020 ) examined children’s understanding of the concept of cardinality and ordinality in connection with their awareness of additive and multiplicative number relations. To investigate this topic, first graders (6- and 7-year-olds) in South Africa were asked to position the numerals 1–9 on a bounded 0–10 number line. The children were able to do this in the correct order, with the fewest errors at the upper and lower ends of the number range. Furthermore, evidence was found that awareness of ordinality and that of cardinality develop alongside each other. However, the logarithmic scale, predicted in earlier research, which is considered to indicate a multiplicative structuring of number relationships, was not confirmed in the South African data. Instead, when the numerals grew larger the intervals became more stretched out rather than compressed. In fact, the children’s responses were closer to the linear model, which is considered to indicate an additive structuring of number relationships. Also, the use of unit sizes that did not take into account the length of the number line, together with the underestimation of the position of 5 on the 0–10 line, offered limited evidence of the children’s awareness of the multiplicative structure of the cardinality of numbers. More research is needed to disclose the deep interconnections between children’s understanding of cardinality and ordinality, and their understanding of multiplicative and additive number relations.

Another effort to unravel the complex nature of children’s early number understanding was carried out by Van den Heuvel-Panhuizen and Elia ( 2020 ), investigating the structure of the quantitative competence repertoire of kindergartners. Based on a literature review, they arrived at a model consisting of two constituent parts: quantification (the ability to connect a number to a given collection of objects) and quantitative reasoning (the ability to think and operate with quantities). Quantification was split up into counting and subitizing, and quantitative reasoning into additive and multiplicative reasoning. Although this model is partly in line with models found in earlier research, it also extends previously developed models by including multiplicative reasoning. Data were collected in the Netherlands and Cyprus. A series of confirmatory factor analyses showed that the hypothesized four-factor model fitted the empirical data of the Netherlands, but not those of Cyprus, which clearly challenges the model’s generalizability. A comparison of the component performances in the Dutch sample revealed that, in accordance with other studies, the lowest scores were found for multiplicative reasoning and that the competence of subitizing seems to develop before counting. This was partly confirmed by a statistical implicative analysis at item level. Although this analysis resulted in different implicative chains in the two countries, in both samples the multiplicative reasoning and conceptual subitizing items were found at the top of the chain and the counting and perceptual subitizing items at the end. Also, more research is necessary here, particularly concerning the generalizability of the model to other countries.

4 Future directions for research on early mathematics teaching and learning

After the Research Forum at PME42 we concluded that to move early childhood mathematics education research forward, more efforts are needed to bring together the state of the art within this field. Thus, we proposed a special issue on the theme Research on early childhood mathematics teaching and learning for the purpose of opening up further discussion and inquiry. In this article, the 15 papers included in the special issue are synthesized and discussed in terms of their contribution to the current field of research in early mathematics teaching and learning along with recent research presented at international mathematics education research conferences. Naturally, these do not cover the worldwide field of research, but they at least give a general idea of the current research interests and challenges.

All the papers in this special issue address aspects of early mathematics education and its underlying theories and research methodologies. They share common interests and challenges concerning how to gain knowledge of the youngest children’s mathematical development, and they identify prosperous teaching approaches. Our appeal to researchers participating in the special issue was to cover the broad span of mathematical ideas that are relevant in early childhood education. Nevertheless, we see a strong direction towards research on the learning and teaching of number concepts and basic arithmetic. This is in line with Alpaslan and Erden ( 2015 ) review of early mathematics research published in 2000–2013 in high-ranked scientific journals in the field of mathematics education, in which the most frequently reported research topics were number systems and arithmetic. The same trend is also found in the research addressed in the latest meetings of ICME, ERME, and POEM. We believe further research should widen this scope, and consider and investigate mathematical topics that are currently less highlighted. There is a need for deeper insight into what mathematics means to young children, and also how the foundations can be laid for the domains of spatial and geometric thinking and measurement, as well as for the domains of structures and patterns, data handling, problem-solving and mathematical reasoning.

Moving an educational field forward, however, is not solely based in covering a broad field of content. To strengthen the field, we need to scrutinize the research designs and methods that are used and the knowledge that is generated. Here, new technologies may open up opportunities for designing tools for investigating children’s competencies. However, this initiative goes beyond choosing digital tools or concrete building blocks; it concerns children’s opportunities to express themselves within different environments and make use of tools and manipulatives that may reveal new insights into their competencies and open up for innovative research questions to be posed. What is made available to experience surely has an impact on children’s expressions of knowledge. And expressions in both words and gestures are important keys here to interpreting the youngest children’s knowledge and skills. We can see this in the recent ICME, ERME, and POEM meetings’ presentation of a large variety of research designs and in the papers of this special issue. Many innovative research designs have been developed that allow thorough investigation of children’s mathematical competence and understanding. What we see, for example, is that subtle differences in expression (e.g. gaze, finger use, or ways of posing questions) reveal new and important insights for developing knowledge of children’s mathematical learning. These innovations in methodology allow for the thorough investigation of key features of learning mathematics that go beyond the broad content areas and highlight how mathematical aspects such as cardinality, ordinality, and number structure are experienced by children. Several of the papers in the special issue particularly attend to these aspects, and do so by creating and using new methodologies and technologies.

The consensus in the field of early mathematics education, reflected in the papers and conference presentations, is strong concerning the impact of early interventions on children’s opportunities to thrive as mathematics learners. From longitudinal studies, we know that early knowledge and skills seem to follow through the child’s development; that is, weak mathematical skills in early childhood years are likely to predict weak mathematics performance in later school years (Reikerås and Salomonsen 2019 ; Hannula-Sormunen et al. 2015 ). This means that early intervention and knowledge of how to offer all children a good start for their mathematical learning are essential to the field of early childhood mathematics education. However, it cannot be assumed that simply participating in education, whether it is framed as free or guided play or problem-solving, or stimulating interactive environments, will result in successful learning outcomes, even though most interventions do have a positive impact and most children develop their knowledge to some extent (Wang et al. 2016 ). Common research objectives, therefore, concern intervention implementation, and analyses of children’s learning outcomes from participating in differently designed activities. These studies are of high importance, as they connect the teaching to the learning and provide insights into what seem to be key aspects in the teaching practice. Nevertheless, researching interventions is delicate work, and it is essential to maintain scientific rigor in the design and analysis. Because early childhood education most often takes place in dynamic settings, the conditions under which children learn vary greatly. This diversity is observed in many studies in which children’s engagement in play, both self-initiated and guided, is used as data for analysing their mathematics competencies and learning of mathematics. This phenomenon means that the conditions offered to explore mathematical concepts and principles should be critically examined, along with how learning from interventions is measured and valued. There is a need to determine what works, what seems critical, and what aspects serve as particular challenges. In research, also special attention has to be given to the nature of the teaching practices. What we learn from intervention studies, both those included in the special issue and those in other contemporary research, is the importance of situating research in the current field of knowledge and the context in which the research is conducted. Each study broadens the picture of the teaching–learning relationship, which is by no means one-directional. There are many aspects to consider that potentially influence this relationship, and all of them cannot be included in one study alone.

Early childhood mathematics education research often attends to the opportunities and conditions that are offered for learning. There is no doubt that children’s activities and interaction with others, already from an early age, offer many opportunities to learn mathematical concepts and basic principles, but our ability to discern what children actually learn from the mathematical learning environments offered to them places high demands on the interpretation process. How to understand the processes going on in play and interaction, and what impacts the children’s learning outcomes—what is made possible to learn—often remains an unsolved issue, as the interaction between teacher and children is dynamic, and particularly as play is multidirectional in nature. Studies of interaction in both formal and informal contexts are nevertheless important, as they are conducted in the complex of social and cultural settings that do influence, through norms and individuals’ experiences, what is possible for children to learn.

Adenegan, K. E. (2016). An investigation into the writing and computational skills of school pupils of age 3–6: Implications for early childhood numeracy. In Paper presented at the 13th International Congress on Mathematical Education, Hamburg, Germany .

Alpaslan, Z. G., & Erden, F. T. (2015). The status of early childhood mathematics education research in the last decade. In CERME9—Ninth Congress of the European Society for Research in Mathematics Education (pp. 1933–1939). Charles University in Prague, Faculty of Education; ERME, Feb 2015, Prague, Czech Republic.

Anderson, A., & Anderson, J. (2018). Math-in-context: The types of math preschoolers ‘do’ at home. In I. Elia, J. Mulligan, A. Anderson, A. Baccaglini-Frank, & C. Benz (Eds.), Contemporary research and perspectives on early childhood mathematics education (pp. 183–202). Cham: Springer Nature.

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Ashcraft, M. H., Donley, R., Halas, M. A., & Vakali, M. (1992). Working memory, automaticity and problem difficulty. In J. I. D. Campbell (Ed.), The nature and origins of mathematical skills, advances in psychology, vol. 91 (pp. 301–329). Amsterdam: North-Holland.

Askew, M., & Venkat, H. (2020). Deconstructing South African Grade 1 learners’ awareness of number in terms of cardinality, ordinality and relational understandings. ZDM . https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-020-01132-2 . (This issue) .

Article   Google Scholar  

Aunio, P., & Niemivirta, M. (2010). Predicting children’s mathematical performance in grade one by early numeracy. Learning and Individual Differences, 20 (5), 427–435.

Baccaglini-Frank, A. (2018). What schemes do preschoolers’ develop when using multi-touch applications to foster number sense (and why)? In I. Elia, J. Mulligan, A. Anderson, A. Baccaglini-Frank, & C. Benz (Eds.), Contemporary research and perspectives on early childhood mathematics education (pp. 223–243). Cham: Springer Nature.

Baccaglini-Frank, A., Carotenuto, G., & Sinclair, N. (2020). Eliciting preschoolers’ number abilities using open, multi-touch environments. ZDM . https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-020-01144-y . (This issue) .

Bakos, S., & Sinclair, N. (2019). Pips (times) Pods: Dancing towards multiplicative thinking. In Eleventh Congress of the European Society for Research in Mathematics Education (CERME11) , Utrecht University, Feb 2019, Utrecht, Netherlands.

Bartolini Bussi, M. G. (2020). Early years mathematics: Semiotic and cultural mediation. In M. Carlsen, I. Erfjord, & P. S. Hundeland (Eds.), Mathematics education in the early years. Results from the POEM4 conference, 2018 (pp. 1–21). Berlin: Springer.

Google Scholar  

Björklund, C., Kullberg, A., Runesson Kempe, A., Reis, M., Clements, D., Sarama, J., Levenson, E., Barkai, R., Tirosh, D., Tsamir, P., Askew, M., Venkat, H., & Hannula-Sormunen, M. (2018). Learning and teaching of arithmetic skills in early years. (Research Forum). In E. Bergqvist, M. Österholm, C. Granberg & L. Sumpter (Eds.), Proceedings of the 42nd Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (vol. 1) (pp. 125–155). Umeå, Sweden: PME.

Björklund, C., & Runesson Kempe, U. (2019). Framework for analysing children’s ways of experiencing numbers. In Eleventh Congress of the European Society for Research in Mathematics Education (CERME11) , Utrecht University, Feb 2019, Utrecht, Netherlands.

Bjørnebye, M. (2019). Pre-schoolers’ ability to synchronise multiple representations of numerosity in embodiment of a counting-on-strategy. In Eleventh Congress of the European Society for Research in Mathematics Education (CERME11) , Utrecht University, Feb 2019, Utrecht, Netherlands.

Bjørnebye, M., & Sigurjonsson, T. (2020). Young children’s cross-domain mapping of numerosity in path navigation. In M. Carlsen, I. Erfjord, & P. S. Hundeland (Eds.), Mathematics education in the early years. Results from the POEM4 conference, 2018 (pp. 109–126). Cham: Springer.

Bojorque, G., Torbeyns, J., Hannula-Sormunen, M. M., Van Nijlen, D., & Verschaffel, L. (2018). Ecuadorian kindergartners’ spontaneous focusing on numerosity development: Contribution of numerical abilities and quality of mathematics education. In I. Elia, J. Mulligan, A. Anderson, A. Baccaglini-Frank, & C. Benz (Eds.), Contemporary research and perspectives on early childhood mathematics education (pp. 69–86). Cham: Springer Nature.

Breive, S. (2019). Kindergarten teachers’ orchestration of mathematical learning activities: The balance between freedom and structure. In Eleventh Congress of the European Society for Research in Mathematics Education (CERME11) , Utrecht University, Feb 2019, Utrecht, Netherlands.

Bruns, J., Carlsen, M., Eichen, L., Erfjord, I., & Hundeland, P. S. (2020). Situational perception in mathematics (SPiM)—Results of a cross-country study in Austria and Norway. In M. Carlsen, I. Erfjord, & P. S. Hundeland (Eds.), Mathematics education in the early years. Results from the POEM4 conference, 2018 (pp. 317–332). Cham: Springer.

Butterworth, B. (2005). The development of arithmetical abilities. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 46 (1), 3–18. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7610.2005.00374.x .

Cai, J., Hwang, C., Jiang, C., & Silber, S. (2015). Problem-posing research in mathematics education: Some answered questions and unanswered questions. In F. M. Singer, N. F. Ellerton, & J. Cai (Eds.), Mathematical problem posing: From research to effective practice (pp. 3–34). New York: Springer.

Carlsen, M., Erfjord, I., & Hundeland, P. S. (Eds.). (2020). Mathematics education in the early years. Results from the POEM4 conference, 2018 . Berlin: Springer.

Clements, D. H., Sarama, J., Baroody, A. J., & Joswick, C. (2020). Efficacy of a learning trajectory approach compared to a teach-to-target approach for addition and subtraction. ZDM . https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-019-01122-z . (This issue) .

Cooke, A., & Bruns, J. (2018). Early childhood educators’ issues and perspectives in mathematics education. In I. Elia, J. Mulligan, A. Anderson, A. Baccaglini-Frank, & C. Benz (Eds.), Contemporary research and perspectives on early childhood mathematics education (pp. 267–289). Cham: Springer Nature.

Donaldson, M. (1978). Children's minds . Glasgow: Fontana/Collins.

Dorier, J. L., & Coutat, S. (2016). Conceptualizing order in early school. In Paper presented at the 13th International Congress on Mathematical Education, Hamburg, Germany .

Duncan, G. J., Dowsett, C. J., Claessens, A., Magnuson, K., Huston, A. C., Klebanov, P., et al. (2007). School readiness and later achievement. Developmental Psychology, 43 (6), 1428–1446. https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.43.6.1428 .

Elia, I. (2018). Observing the use of gestures in young children’s geometric thinking. In I. Elia, J. Mulligan, A. Anderson, A. Baccaglini-Frank, & C. Benz (Eds.), Contemporary research and perspectives on early childhood mathematics education (pp. 159–182). Cham: Springer Nature.

Elia, I., Mulligan, J., Anderson, A., Baccaglini-Frank, A., & Benz, C. (Eds.). (2018). Contemporary research and perspectives on early childhood mathematics education. ICME-13 monographs . Cham: Springer Nature.

Ellemor-Collins, D., & Wright, R. (2009). Structuring numbers 1–20: Developing facile addition and subtraction. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 21 (2), 50–75.

Fletcher, N., & Ginsburg, H. (2016). Teaching symmetry in the early childhood classroom: Using software to facilitate discourse and promote understanding of symmetric transformations. In Paper presented at the 13th International Congress on Mathematical Education, Hamburg, Germany .

Fritz-Stratmann, A., Ehlert, M., & Herzog, A. (2016). From thought to reality— Implementation of an in-school mathematics training in South Africa. In Paper presented at the 13th International Congress on Mathematical Education, Hamburg, Germany .

Grando, R. C., & Lopes, C. E. (2020). Creative insubordination of teachers proposing statistics and probability problems to children. ZDM . https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-020-01166-6 . (This issue) .

Hannula-Sormunen, M. M., Lehtinen, E., & Räsänen, P. (2015). Preschool children’s spontaneous focusing on numerosity, subitizing, and counting skills as predictors of their mathematical performance seven years later at school. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 17 (2–3), 155–177. https://doi.org/10.1080/10986065.2015.1016814 .

Henschen, E. (2016). Mathematical content of play activities in kindergarten, exemplified on blockplay activities. In Poster presented at the 13th International Congress on Mathematical Education, Hamburg, Germany .

Hundeland, P. S., Carlsen, M., & Erfjord, I. (2020). Qualities of mathematical discourses in Kindergartens. ZDM . https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-020-01146-w . (This issue) .

Karsli, E. (2016). Young children’s embodied mathematical practices in a pre-K classroom. In Paper presented at the 13th International Congress on Mathematical Education, Hamburg, Germany .

Keuch, S., & Brandt, B. (2020). ‘You are already bigger than the giraffe!’ The use of adjectives in measurement activities in Kindergarten. In M. Carlsen, I. Erfjord, & P. S. Hundeland (Eds.), Mathematics education in the early years. Results from the POEM4 conference, 2018 (pp. 369–384). Cham: Springer.

Kilpatrick, J. (2014). History of research in mathematics education. In S. Lerman (Ed.), Encyclopedia of mathematics education . Dordrecht: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-4978-8_71

Krajewski, K., & Schneider, W. (2009). Early development of quantity to number-word linkage as a precursor of mathematical school achievement and mathematical difficulties: Findings from a four-year longitudinal study. Learning and Instruction, 19 (6), 513–526.

Kullberg, A., & Björklund, C. (2020). Preschoolers’ different ways of structuring part-part-whole relations with finger patterns when solving an arithmetic task. ZDM . https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-019-01119-8 . (This issue) .

LeFevre, J.-A., Skwarchuk, S.-L., Smith-Chant, B. L., Fast, L., Kamawar, D., & Bisanz, J. (2009). Home numeracy experiences and children’s math performance in the early school years. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science, 41 , 55–66. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0014532 .

Lembrér, D. (2020). Parents’ valuing of mathematics for young children. In M. Carlsen, I. Erfjord, & P. S. Hundeland (Eds.), Mathematics education in the early years. Results from the POEM4 conference, 2018 (pp. 403–420). Cham: Springer.

Levine, S., Suriyakham, L. W., Rowe, M., Huttenlocher, J., & Gunderson, E. (2010). What counts in the development of young children’s number knowledge? Developmental Psychology, 46 (5), 1309–1319.

Li, L., Zhou, X., Gao, X., & Tu, D. (2020). The development and influencing factors of Kindergarteners’ mathematics problem solving based on cognitive diagnosis assessment. ZDM . https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-020-01153-x . (This issue) .

Lossius, M., & Lundhaug, T. (2020). Mathematical problem-solving visualised in outdoor activities. In M. Carlsen, I. Erfjord, & P. S. Hundeland (Eds.), Mathematics education in the early years. Results from the POEM4 conference, 2018 (pp. 127–141). Cham: Springer.

Lüken, M. (2019). Using finger patterns—The case of communicating age. In Eleventh Congress of the European Society for Research in Mathematics Education (CERME11) , Utrecht University, Feb 2019, Utrecht, Netherlands.

Lüken, M., & Kampmann, R. (2018). The influence of fostering children’s patterning abilities on their arithmetic skills in Grade 1. In I. Elia, J. Mulligan, A. Anderson, A. Baccaglini-Frank, & C. Benz (Eds.), Contemporary research and perspectives on early childhood mathematics education (pp. 55–66). Cham: Springer Nature.

McMullen, J., Hannula-Sormunen, M. M., & Lehtinen, E. (2015). Preschool spontaneous focusing on numerosity predicts rational number conceptual knowledge 6 years later. ZDM, 47 (5), 813–824. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-015-0669-4 .

Mulligan, J. T., & Mitchelmore, M. C. (2018). Promoting early mathematical structural development through an integrated assessment and pedagogical program. In I. Elia, J. Mulligan, A. Anderson, A. Baccaglini-Frank, & C. Benz (Eds.), Contemporary research and perspectives on early childhood mathematics education (pp. 17–33). Cham: Springer Nature.

Mulligan, J., Oslington, G., & English, L. (2020). Supporting early mathematical development through a ‘pattern and structure’ intervention program. ZDM . https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-020-01147-9 . (This issue) .

Nakken, A., Grimeland, Y., Nergard, B., & Thiel, O. (2016). Young children’s play in a mathematics room. In Poster presented at the 13th International Congress on Mathematical Education, Hamburg, Germany .

Paliwal, V., & Baroody, A. J. (2020). Cardinality principle understanding: The role of focusing on the subitizing ability. ZDM . https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-020-01150-0 . (This issue) .

Palmér, H., & Björklund, C. (2020). Preschoolers’ ways of using fingers in numerical reasoning. In M. Carlsen, I. Erfjord, & P. S. Hundeland (Eds.), Mathematics education in the early years. Results from the POEM4 conference, 2018 (pp. 93–107). Cham: Springer.

Palmér, H., & Van Bommel, J. (2020). Young students posing problem-solving tasks: What does posing a similar task imply to students? ZDM . https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-020-01129-x . (This issue) .

Passolunghi, M. C., & Costa, H. M. (2016). Working memory and early numeracy training in preschool children. Child Neuropsychology, 22 (1), 81–98.

Pruden, S., Levine, S., & Huttenlocher, J. (2011). Children’s spatial thinking: does talk about the spatial world matter? Developmental Science, 14 (6), 1417–1430.

Radford, L. (2020). Play and the production of subjectivities in preschool. In M. Carlsen, I. Erfjord, & P. S. Hundeland (Eds.), Mathematics education in the early years. Results from the POEM4 conference, 2018 (pp. 43–60). Cham: Springer.

Rathé, S., Torbeyns, J., De Smedt, B., Hannula-Sormunen, M. M., & Verschaffel, L. (2018). Kindergartners’ spontaneous focus on number during picture book reading. In I. Elia, J. Mulligan, A. Anderson, A. Baccaglini-Frank, & C. Benz (Eds.), Contemporary research and perspectives on early childhood mathematics education (pp. 87–99). Cham: Springer Nature.

Rathé, S., Torbeyns, J., De Smedt, B., & Verschaffel, L. (2020). Are children’s spontaneous number focusing tendencies related to their home numeracy environment? ZDM . https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-020-01127-z . (This issue) .

Reikerås, E. (2020). Relations between play skills and mathematical skills in toddlers. ZDM . https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-020-01141-1 . (This issue) .

Reikerås, E., & Salomonsen, T. (2019). Weak mathematical skills at an early age: Persistent or temporary? Children with weak mathematical skills and their development from toddlers to preschoolers. Early Child Development and Care, 189 (4), 670–682. https://doi.org/10.1080/03004430.2017.1337753 .

Resnick, L. B. (1983). A developmental theory of number understanding. In H. Ginsburg (Ed.), The development of mathematical thinking (pp. 109–151). New York: Academic Press.

Rinvold, A. R. (2016). The difficulty of learning the three first numerosities. In Poster presented at the 13th International Congress on Mathematical Education, Hamburg, Germany .

Sinclair, N. (2018). Time, immersion and articulation: Digital technology for early childhood mathematics. In I. Elia, J. Mulligan, A. Anderson, A. Baccaglini-Frank, & C. Benz (Eds.), Contemporary research and perspectives on early childhood mathematics education (pp. 205–221). Cham: Springer Nature.

Skwarchuk, S.-L., Sowinski, C., & LeFevre, J.-A. (2014). Formal and informal home learning activities in relation to children’s early numeracy and literacy skills: The development of a home numeracy model. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 121 , 63–84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2013.11.006 .

Sprenger, P., & Bentz, C. (2020). Children’s perception of structures when determining cardinality of sets: Results of an eye-tracking study with five-year-old children. ZDM . https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-020-01137-x . (This issue) .

Sprenger, P., & Benz, C. (2019). Perceiving and using structures in sets—The contribution of eye-tracking in a three-level evaluation process. In Eleventh Congress of the European Society for Research in Mathematics Education (CERME11) , Utrecht University, Feb 2019, Utrecht, Netherlands.

Stipek, D., & Valentino, R. A. (2015). Early childhood memory and attention as predictors of academic growth trajectories. Journal of Educational Psychology, 107 (3), 771–788. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000004 .

Thom, J. S. (2018). (Re)(con)figuring space: Three children’s geometric reasonings. In I. Elia, J. Mulligan, A. Anderson, A. Baccaglini-Frank, & C. Benz (Eds.), Contemporary research and perspectives on early childhood mathematics education (pp. 131–158). Cham: Springer Nature.

Tirosh, D., Tsamir, P., Levenson, E. S., & Barkai, R. (2020). Setting the table with toddlers: A playful context for engaging in one-to-one correspondence. ZDM . https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-019-01126-9 . (This issue) .

Tsamir, P., Tirosh, D., Barkai, R., & Levenson, E. (2020). Copying and comparing repeating patterns: Children’s strategies and descriptions. In M. Carlsen, I. Erfjord, & P. S. Hundeland (Eds.), Mathematics education in the early years. Results from the POEM4 conference, 2018 (pp. 63–78). Cham: Springer.

Tzekaki, M. (2020). Mathematical activity in early childhood and the role of generalization. In M. Carlsen, I. Erfjord, & P. S. Hundeland (Eds.), Mathematics education in the early years. Results from the POEM4 conference, 2018 (pp. 301–313). Cham: Springer.

Van den Heuvel-Panhuizen, M. (2018). Theories, methodologies, results in early arithmetic research. In Presented at PME 42, in Research Forum: Learning and teaching of arithmetic skills in early years , Umeå, Sweden, 3–8 July, 2018.

Van den Heuvel-Panhuizen, M., & Elia, I. (2020). Mapping kindergartners’ quantitative competence. ZDM . https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-020-01138-w . (This issue) .

Verschaffel, L., Rathé, S., Wijns, N., Degrande, T., Van Dooren, W., De Smedt, B., et al. (2020). Young children’s early mathematical competencies: The role of mathematical focusing tendencies. In M. Carlsen, I. Erfjord, & P. S. Hundeland (Eds.), Mathematics education in the early years. Results from the POEM4 conference, 2018 (pp. 23–42). Cham: Springer.

Vogler, A-M. (2019). Chances and obstacles of ‘indirect’ learning processes in situations with preschool teachers. In Eleventh congress of the European Society for Research in Mathematics Education (CERME11) , Utrecht University, Feb 2019, Utrecht, Netherlands.

Vygotsky, L. S. (1987). The collected works of L.S. Vygotsky, Vol. 1: Problems of general psychology, including the volume Thinking and Speech. Edited by R. W. Rieber and A. S. Carton; translated by N. Minick. New York: Plenum.

Wang, A., Firmender, J., Power, J., & Byrnes, J. (2016). Understanding the program effectiveness of early mathematics interventions for prekindergarten and kindergarten environments: A meta-analytic review. Early Education and Development, 27 (5), 692–713.

Watts, T. W., Duncan, G. J., Clements, D. H., & Sarama, J. (2018). What is the long-run impact of learning mathematics during preschool? Child Development, 89 (2), 539–555. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12713 .

Wynn, K. (1998). Numerical competence in infants. In C. Donlan (Ed.), The development of mathematical skills . Hove: Psychology Press.

Young-Loveridge, J., & Bicknell, B. (2016). Tens awareness: A framework for early place value learning. In Poster presented at the 13th International Congress on Mathematical Education, Hamburg, Germany .

Download references

Acknowledgements

Open access funding provided by University of Gothenburg.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden

Camilla Björklund & Angelika Kullberg

Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands

Marja van den Heuvel-Panhuizen

Nord University, Bodø, Norway

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Camilla Björklund .

Additional information

Publisher's note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Björklund, C., van den Heuvel-Panhuizen, M. & Kullberg, A. Research on early childhood mathematics teaching and learning. ZDM Mathematics Education 52 , 607–619 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-020-01177-3

Download citation

Accepted : 18 June 2020

Published : 23 June 2020

Issue Date : August 2020

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-020-01177-3

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

tag manager container

• Employee Hub
• Directories

Early Childhood Education Institute

Research Topics | Early Childhood Education Institute

Research Topics

Adoption/fostering.

Benton, A. L. (2020). An Autoethnographic Tale of One Louisiana Mother’s Personal Journey of Fostering and Adopting: The Impact of the Fostering Process Versus the Fostering Process in Classrooms. Journal of Foster Care, 1(1), 23-35.

DiCarlo, C. & Ota, C. (2017). Advocacy in early childhood teacher preparation (Chapter 5). In Advocacy in Academia and the Role of Teacher Preparation Programs (Thomas, U. Ed). IGI Global.

Reames, H. Sistrunk, C., Prejean, J., & DiCarlo, C.F. (2016). Advocating for recess: Preservice teachers perspectives on the advocacy process. Journal for Service-Learning, Leadership, and Social Change.

Attention/Engagement

DiCarlo, C., Baumgartner, J., Ota, C., & Brooksher, M. (in review). Recommended practice in whole-group instruction: Increasing child attention. International Journal of Early Years Education.

DiCarlo, C., Deris, A., & Deris, T. (in review). mLearning versus paper & pencil practice for telling time: Impact for attention & accuracy. Journal of Elementary Education.

DiCarlo C. F., Baumgartner, J. J., Ota, C.L., Deris, A.R. & Brooksher, M.H. (2020) Recommended practice in whole-group instruction: Increasing child attention. Child & Family Behavior Therapy, DOI: 10.1080/00168890.2020.184840

DiCarlo, C.F., Baumgartner, J., Ota, C., & Geary, K. (2016). Child sustained attention in preschool-aged children. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 30(2), 143-152.

DiCarlo, C.F., Geary, K. E., & Ota, C.L.  (2016). The impact of choice on child sustained attention in the preschool classroom. Journal of Research Childhood Education.

DiCarlo, C.F., Baumgartner, J., Pierce, S.H., Harris, M.E., & Ota, C. (2012). Whole group instruction practices and young children’s attention: A preliminary report. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 26(2), 154-168.

DiCarlo, C., Pierce, S., Baumgartner, J.J., Harris, M., & Ota, C. (2012). Whole-group instruction practices and children’s attention: A preliminary report. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 26(2), 154-168.

DiCarlo, C., Baumgartner, J., Schellhaas, A., & Pierce,S., (2012). Using Structured Choice to Increase Child Engagement in Low Preference Centers. Early Child Development & Care, 183(1), 109-124.

Isbell, D. (2019). Intermediate and High School Band. In Conway, C., Stanley, A., Pelligrino, K., and West, C. (Eds.), Handbook of Preservice Music Teacher Education. Oxford Publishing

Isbell, D. and Stanley, A. M. (2011).  Keeping instruments out of the attic: The concert band experiences of the non-music major. Music Education Research International,5, 22-32

Isbell, D. (2006). The Steamboat Springs high school ski band 1935-2005.  Journal of Historical Research in Music Education, 28(1), 21-37.

Caregiver Health and Identity

Baumgartner, J., Carson, R., Ota, C., DiCarlo, C., Bauer, R. (in review). Using Ecological Momentary Assessment to Examine the Relationship Between Childcare Teachers’ Stress, Classroom Behaviors, and Afterhours Professionalism Activities. Early Child Development and Care.

Bergen, D., Lee, L., Dicarlo, C. & Burnett, G. (2020). Enhancing Young Children’s Brain Development in Infants and Young Children: Strategies for Caregivers and Educators. New York, NY: Teacher’s College Press.

DiCarlo, C., Meaux, A., & LaBiche - Hebert, E. (in press). The impact of mindfulness practices on classroom climate and perceived teacher stress. Early Childhood Education Journal.

Chiang, C.J.,Jonson-Reid, M., & Drake, B. (2020). Caregiver physical health and child maltreatment reports and re-reports. Children and Youth Services Review, 108, 104671.

Baumgartner, J., & DiCarlo, C.F. (2013). Reducing workplace stress. Childcare Exchange. May/June, 60-63.

Ota, C.L., Baumgartner, J.J., & Austin, A.M.B. (2013). Provider stress and children's active engagement. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 27, 1-13. doi: 10.1080/02568543.2012.739588

Baumgartner, J., DiCarlo, C., & Apavaloie, L. (2011). Finding more joy in teaching children. Dimensions, 39(2), 34-38.

Isbell, D. (2008) Musicians and Teachers: The Socialization and Occupational Identity of Preservice Music Teachers. Journal of Research in Music Education, 56(2). 162-178.

Child Health

Shon, E., Choe, S, Lee, L., & Ki, Y. (In Press). Influenza Vaccination among U.S. College or University Students: A Systematic Review. American Journal of Health Promotion.

Fowler L.A., Grammer A.C., Staiano A.E., Fitzsimmons-Craft E.E., Chen L., Yaeger L.H., & Wilfley D.E. (2021). Harnessing technological innovations for childhood obesity prevention and treatment: A systematic review and meta-analysis of current applications. International Journal of Obesity.

Kepper M.M., Walsh-Bailey C., Staiano A.E., Fowler L., Gacad A., Blackwood A., Fowler S., & Kelley M. (2021). Health Information Technology use among healthcare providers treating children and adolescents with obesity: A systematic review. Current Epidemiology Reports.

Staiano, A.E., Shanley, J.R., Kihm, H., Hawkins, K.R., Self-Brown, S., Hӧchsmann, C., Osborne, M., LeBlanc, M.M., Apolzan, J.W., & Martin, C.K. (2021). Digital tools to support family-based weight management for children: Mixed methods pilot and feasibility study. Pediatrics and Parenting. 4(1) doi: 10.2196/24714 PMID: 33410760

Antczak, D., Lonsdale, C., Lee, J., Hilland, T., Duncan, M.J., del Pozo Cruz, B., Hulteen, R.M., Parker, P. and Sanders, T. (2020). Physical Activity and Sleep are Weakly Related in Children: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Sleep Medicine Reviews, 51, doi: 10.1016/j.smrv.2020.101278 

Olson KL, Neiberg R, Espeland M, Johnson K, Knowler W, Pi-Sunyer X, Staiano AE, Wagenknecht L, & Wing RR. (2020) Waist circumference change during intensive lifestyle intervention and cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in the Look AHEAD trial. Obesity.

Kracht CL, Katzmarzyk PT, & Staiano AE. (2020) Comparison of abdominal visceral adipose tissue measurements in adolescents between magnetic resonance imaging and dual energy x-ray absorptiometry. International Journal of Obesity.

Kracht CL, Webster E, & Staiano AE. (2020). A natural experiment of state-level physical activity and screen-time policy changes: Early childhood education (ECE) centers and child physical activity. BMC Public Health.

Fearnbach SN, Johannsen NM, Martin CK, Beyl RA, Hsia DS, Carmichael CT, & Staiano AE. (2020) A pilot study of cardiorespiratory fitness, adiposity, and cardiometabolic health in youth with overweight and obesity. Pediatric Exercise Science.

Webster E, & Staiano AE. (2020) Extended heavy television viewing may impact weight long-term in adolescents. Journal of Adolescent Health.

Kepper MM, Staiano AE, Katzmarzyk PT, Reis RS, Eyler AA, Griffith DM, KendallML, ElBanna B, Denstel KD, & Broyles ST. (2020). Using mixed methods to understand women’s parenting practices related to their child’s outdoor play and physical activity among families living in diverse neighborhood environments. Health and Place.

Kracht CL, Joseph ED, & Staiano AE. (2020). Video games, obesity, and children. Current Obesity Reports.

Kracht CL, Champagne CM, Hsia DS, Martin CK, Newton RL, Katzmarzyk PT, & Staiano AE. (2020). Association between meeting physical activity, sleep, and dietary guidelines and cardiometabolic risk factors and adiposity in adolescents. Journal of Adolescent Health.

Hulteen, R.M., Waldhauser, K.J. and Beauchamp, M.R. (2019). Promoting Health-Enhancing Physical Activity: A State-of-the-Art Review of Peer-Delivered Interventions. Current Obesity Reports, 8, 341-353. doi: 10.1007/s13679-019-00366-w (invited)

Kracht CL, Chaput JP, Martin CK, Champagne CM, Katzmarzyk PT, & Staiano AE. (2019). Associations of sleep with food cravings, diet, and obesity in adolescence. Nutrients.

Joseph E, Kracht CL, St. Romain J, Allen AT, Barbaree C, Martin CK, & Staiano AE. (2019). Young children’s screen-time and physical activity: Perspectives of parents and early care and education center providers. Global Pediatric Health.

Staiano AE, Adams MA, & Norman GJ. (2019). Motivation for Exergame Play Inventory:  Construct validity and test-retest reliability. Cyberpsychology: Journal of Psychosocial Research on Cyberspace.

Hawkins KR, Apolzan JW, Staiano AE, Shanley JR, & Martin CK. (2019). Efficacy of a home-based parent training-focused weight management intervention for preschool children: The DRIVE randomized controlled pilot trial. Journal of Nutrition Education and Behavior.

Sandoval P, Staiano AE, & Kihm H. (2019). The influence of visual and auditory stimuli on intensity of physical activity in school-aged children. The Physical Educator.

Webster EK, Martin CK, & Staiano AE. (2019) Fundamental motor skills, physical activity, and screen-time in preschoolers. Journal of Sport and Health Science.

Staiano AE, Beyl RA, Hsia DS, Katzmarzyk PT, & Newton R.L. (2018). A 12-week randomized controlled pilot study of dance exergaming in a group: Influence on psychosocial factors in adolescent girls. Cyberpsychology: Journal of Psychosocial Research on Cyberspace.

Katzmarzyk PT, Denstel KD, Beals K, Carlson J, Crouter SE, McKenzie TL, Pate RR, Sisson SB, Staiano AE,Stanish H, Ward DS, Whitt-Glover M, & Wright C. (2018). Results from the United States 2018 Report Card on Physical Activity for Children and Youth. Journal of Physical Activity & Health.

Staiano AE, Kihm H, & Sandoval P. (2018). The use of competition to elicit high intensity physical activity during children’s exergame play. Journal of Family & Consumer Sciences.

Flynn, R.M.,Staiano, A.E., Beyl, R., Richert, R.A., Wartella, E. & Calvert, S.L. (2018). The influence of active gaming on cardiorespiratoryfitness in Black and Hispanic youth. Journal of School Health.

Staiano, A.E., Webster, E.K., Allen, A.T., Jarrell, A.R., & Martin, C.K. (2018). Screen-time policies and practices in early care and education centers in relationship to child physical activity. Childhood Obesity.

Staiano, A.E., Martin, C.K., Champagne, C.M., Rood, J.C., & Katzmarzyk, P.T. (2018). Sedentary time, physical activity, and adiposity in a longitudinal cohort of non-obese young adults. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition.

Staiano, A.E., Beyl, R.A., Guan, W., Hendrick, C.A., Hsia, D.S., & Newton, R.L. (2018). Home-based exergaming among children with overweight and obesity: A randomized clinical trial. Pediatric Obesity.

Staiano, A.E., Allen, A.T., Fowler, W., Gustat, J., Kepper, M.M., Lewis, L., Martin, C.K., St. Romain, J., & Webster, E.K. (2018). State licensing regulations on screen-time in childcare centers: An impetus for participatory action research. Progress in Community Health Partnerships:  Research, Education, and Action.

Heerman, W.J., Bennett, W.L., Kraschnewski, J.L., Nauman, E., Staiano, A.E., & Wallston, K.A. (2018) Willingness to participate in weight-related research among patients in PCORnet Clinical Data Research Networks. BMC Obesity.

Cohen, K.E., Morgan, P.J., Plotnikoff, R.C., Hulteen, R.M. and Lubans, D.R. Psychological, social and physical environmental mediators of the SCORES intervention on physical activity among children living in low-income communities. (2017). Psychology of Sport & Exercise, 32, 1-11. doi: 10.1016/j.psychsport.2017. 05.001

Katzmarzyk, P.T., & Staiano, A.E. (2017). Relationship between meeting 24-hour movement guidelines and cardiometabolic risk factors in children. Journal of Physical Activity & Health.

Staiano, A.E., Beyl, R.A., Hsia, D.S., Katzmarzyk, P.T., Mantzor, S., Newton, R.L., Jarrell, A., & Tyson, P. (2017). Step tracking with goals increases children’s weight loss in a behavioral intervention. Childhood Obesity

Staiano, A.E., Marker, A.M., Liu, M., Hayden, E., Hsia, D.S., & Broyles, S.T. (2017). Childhood obesity screening and treatment practices of pediatric healthcare providers. Journal of the Louisiana State Medical Society

Baranowski, T., Blumberg, F., Gao, Z., Kato, P.M., Kok, G., Lu, A.S., Lyons, E.J., Morrill, B.A., Peng, W., Prins, P.J., Snyder, L., Staiano, A.E., & Thompson, D. (2017) Getting research on games for health funded. Games for Health Journal.

Wilfley, D.E., Staiano, A.E., Altman, M., Lindros, J., Lima, A., Hassink, S.G., Dietz, W.H., & Cook, S. (2017). Improving Access and Systems of Care for Evidence-Based Childhood Obesity Treatment Conference W. Improving access and systems of care for evidence-based childhood obesity treatment: Conference key findings and next steps. Obesity.

Kihm H, Staiano AE, & Sandoval P. (2017) Project IPAL: To enhance the well-being of elementary school children. Journal of Family & Consumer Sciences 109(1) 54-56.

Staiano AE, Marker AM, Beyl RA, Hsia DS, Katzmarzyk PT, & Newton RL. (2017). A randomized controlled trial of dance exergaming for exercise training in overweight and obese adolescent girls. Pediatric Obesity. 12(2) 120-128.

Staiano AE, Marker AM, Frelier JM, Hsia DS, & Broyles ST. (2017). Family-based behavioral treatment for childhood obesity: Parent-reported barriers and facilitators. The Ochsner Journal. 17(1):83-92.

Staiano AE, Beyl RA, Hsia DS, Katzmarzyk PT, & Newton RL. (2017). Twelve weeks of dance exergaming in overweight and obese adolescent girls: Transfer effects on physical activity, screen time, and self-efficacy. Journal of Sport and Health Science.

Katzmarzyk PT, Denstel KD, Beals K, Bolling C, Wright C, Crouter SE, McKenzie TL, Pate RR, Saelens BE, Staiano AE, Stanish HI, & Sisson SB. (2016). Results from the United States of America's 2016 report card on physical activity for children and youth. Journal of Physical Activity and Health.

Staiano AE, Morrell M, Hsia DS, Hu G, & Katzmarzyk PT. (2016) The burden of obesity, elevated blood pressure, and diabetes in uninsured and underinsured adolescents. Metabolic Syndrome and Related Disorders. 14(9), 437-441.

Staiano AE, Marker AM, Martin CK, & Katzmarzyk PT. (2016). Physical activity, mental health, and weight gain in a longitudinal observational cohort of nonobese young adults. Obesity, 24(9), 1969-1975.

Staiano AE, Marker AM, Frelier JM, Hsia DS, & Martin CK. (2016). Influence of screen-based peer modeling on preschool children's vegetable consumption and preferences. Journal of Nutrition Education and Behavior, 48(5), 331-335

Mackintosh KA, Standage M, Staiano AE, Lester L, & McNarry MA. (2016). Investigating the physiological and psychosocial responses of single-and dual-player exergaming in young adults. Games for Health Journal, 5(6), 375-381

Baranowski T, Blumberg F, Buday R, DeSmet A, Fiellin LE, Green CS, Kato PM, Lu AS, Maloney AE, Mellecker R, Morrill BA, Peng W, Shegog R, Simons M, Staiano AE, Thompson D, & Young K. (2016). Games for health for children-current status and needed research. Games for Health Journal, 5(1), 1-12.

Michel, G. F., Marcinowski, E. C., Babik, I., Nelson, E. L., & Campbell, J. M. (2015). An Interdisciplinary Biopsychosocial Perspective on Infant Development. In S. Calkins (Ed.) Handbook of Infant Development: A Biopsychosocial Perspective, 427-446. 

Staiano AE, Broyles ST, & Katzmarzyk PT. (2015). School term vs. school holiday: Associations with children's physical activity, screen-time, diet and sleep. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 12(8), 8861-8870.

Staiano AE, Harrington DM, Johannsen NM, Newton RL, Jr., Sarzynski MA, Swift DL, & Katzmarzyk PT. (2015). Uncovering physiological mechanisms for health disparities in type 2 diabetes. Ethnicity and Disease, 25(1), 31-37.

Marker AM, & Staiano AE. (2015) Better together: Outcomes ofcooperation versus competition in social exergaming. Games for Health Journal, 4(1), 25-30.

Carson V, Staiano AE, & Katzmarzyk PT. (2015). Physical activity, screen time, and sitting among U.S. adolescents. Pediatric Exercise Science, 27(1), 151-159.

Pere, C., Ginn, R., Hill, N., & DiCarlo, C.F. (2015). Childhood Obesity prevention: A service-learning advocacy project. Journal for Service-Learning, Leadership, and Social Change.

Harshaw, C., Marcinowski, E. C., & Campbell, J. M. (2014). Communicating Developmental Psychobiology to the Masses: Why Psychobiologists Should Contribute to Wikipedia. Developmental Psychobiology, 56 (7), 1439-1441. 

Staiano AE, & Flynn R. (2014). Therapeutic uses of active videogames: A systematic review. Games for Health Journal, 3(6), 351-365.

Staiano AE. (2014). Learning by playing: Video gaming in education-a cheat sheet for games for health designers. Games for Health Journal, 3(5), 319-321.

Flynn RM, Richert RA, Staiano AE, Wartella E, & Calvert SL. (2014). Effects of exergame playon EF in children and adolescents at a summer camp for low income youth. Journal of Educational and Developmental Psychology, 4(1), 209-225.

Katzmarzyk PT, Barlow S, Bouchard C, Catalano PM, Hsia DS, Inge TH, Lovelady C, Raynor H, Redman LM, Staiano AE, Spruijt-Metz D, Symonds ME, Vickers M, Wilfley D, & Yanovski JA. (2014). An evolving scientific basis for the prevention and treatment of pediatric obesity. International Journal of Obesity, 38(7), 887-905.

Staiano AE, Gupta AK, & Katzmarzyk PT. (2014). Cardiometabolic risk factors and fat distribution in children and adolescents. Journal of Pediatrics, 164(3), 560-565.

Baranowski T, Adamo KB, Hingle M, Maddison R, Maloney A, Simons M, & Staiano AE. (2013). Gaming, adiposity, and obesogenic behaviors among children. Games for Health Journal, 2(3), 119-126.

Michel, G. F., Babik, I., Nelson, E. L., Campbell, J. M., & Marcinowski, E. C. (2013). How the development of handedness could contribute to the development of language. Developmental Psychobiology, 55(6), 608-20. 

Staiano AE, Broyles ST, Gupta AK, Malina RM, & Katzmarzyk PT. (2013). Maturity-associated variation in total and depot-specific body fat in children and adolescents. American Journal of Human Biology, 25(4), 473-479.

Staiano AE, Broyles ST, Gupta AK, & Katzmarzyk PT. (2013) Ethnic and sex differences in visceral, subcutaneous, and total body fat in children and adolescents. Obesity, 21(6), 1251-1255.

Harrington DM, Staiano AE, Broyles ST, Gupta AK, & Katzmarzyk PT. (2013). BMI percentiles for the identification ofabdominal obesity and metabolic risk in children and adolescents: Evidence in support of the CDC 95th percentile. European Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 67(2), 218-222.

Staiano AE, Harrington DM, Broyles ST, Gupta AK, & Katzmarzyk PT. (2013). Television, adiposity, and cardiometabolic risk in children and adolescents. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 44(1), 40-47.

Calvert SL, Staiano AE, & Bond BJ. (2013). Electronic gaming and the obesity crisis. New Directions for Child and Adolescent Development, 139,51-57.

Harrington DM, Staiano AE, Broyles ST, Gupta AK, & Katzmarzyk PT. (2013). Waist circumference measurement site does not affect relationships with visceral adiposity and cardiometabolic risk factors in children. Pediatric Obesity, 8(3), 199-206.

Barreira TV, Staiano AE, & Katzmarzyk PT. (2013). Validity assessment of a portable bioimpedance scale to estimate body fat percentage in white and African-American children and adolescents. Pediatric Obesity, 8(2), 29-32.

Staiano AE, Abraham AA, & Calvert SL. (2012). The Wii Club: Gaming for weight loss in overweight and obese youth. Games for Health Journal, 1(5), 377-380.

Broyles ST, Staiano AE, Drazba KT, Gupta AK, Southern M, & Katzmarzyk PT. (2012). Elevated C-reactive protein in children from risky neighborhoods: Evidence for a stress pathway linking neighborhoods and inflammation in children. PloS One, 7(9)

Staiano AE, Katzmarzyk PT. (2012). Ethnic and sex differences in body fat and visceral and subcutaneous adiposity in children and adolescents. International Journal of Obesity, 36(10), 1261-1269.

Staiano AE, & Calvert SL. (2012).  Digital gaming and pediatric obesity: At the intersection of science and social policy. Social Issues and Policy Review, 6(1), 54-81.

Staiano AE, & Calvert SL. (2011). Exergames for physical education courses: Physical, social, and cognitive benefits. Child Development Perspectives, 5(2),93-98.

Child Trauma

Kim, H., Jonson-Reid, M., Kohl, P., Chiang, C. J., Drake, B., Brown, D., McBride, T., & Guo, S. (2020).Latent class analysis risk profiles: An effective method to predict a first re-report of maltreatment. Evaluation and Program Planning, 101792.

Jonson-Reid, M., Chiang, C.J., Kohl, P., Drake, B., Brown, D., Guo, S., & McBride, T. (2019). Repeat reports among cases reported for child neglect: A scoping review. Child Abuse & Neglect, 92, 43-65.

Chiang, C. J.,& Ma, T. J. (2013). Working experiences with children witnessed domestic homicide, Taiwanese Social Work, 11, 115-144

Lee, L., Miller, C., & Caballero, J, (In Progress). Community-based, social justice-oriented experiences in ethnically, socio-economically diverse preschools: Early childhood pre-service teachers’ perspectives.

Drake, B., Jonson-Reid, M., Kim, H., Chiang, C. J., & Davalishvili, D. (2021) Disproportionate Need as a Factor Explaining Racial Disproportionality in the CW System. In Racial Disproportionality and Disparities in the Child Welfare System (pp. 159-176). Springer, Cham.

Kracht CL, Webster EK, & Staiano AE. (2019). Sociodemographic differences in young children meeting 24-hour movement guidelines. Journal of Physical Activity & Health.

Lee, L. (2018). Korean mode of color-blind perspectives on ethnic diversity: A case study of Korean Elementary teachers. International Journal of Diversity of Education, 18(1), 27-38.

Lee, L. (2016, Summer). A learning journey with Latino immigrant children: An American low-income preschool project. Childhood Explorer, 3.

Lee, L., & Misco, T. (2014). All for one or one for all: An analysis of the concepts of patriotism and others in multicultural Korea through elementary moral education textbooks. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher. 23(1), 2-10.

Misco, T., & Lee, L. (2013). “There is no such thing as being Guamanian”: Controversial Issues in the context of Guam. Theory and Research in Social Education, 42(3), 414-439.

Misco, T.,& Lee, L. (2012).1Multiple and overlapping identities: The case study of Guam. Multicultural Education, 20(1), 23-32.

Lee, L. (2011). Language and identity in the moral domains: Minority children in education. Focus on Elementary, 23(3). 3-6.

Lee. L. (2011). Cultural awareness in beliefs and practice: An elementary teacher’s perspective on Korean children and their culture. Focus on Teacher Education, 11(2), 4-10.

ECE Professional Attrition

Chiang, C.J., Jonson-Reid, M., Kim. H., Drake. B., Pons. L., Kohl. P., Constantino. J., & Auslander. W., (2018) Service engagement and retention: Lessons from the Early Childhood Connections Program. Children and Youth Services Review, 88, 114-127. DOI: 10.1016/j.childyouth.2018.02.028

Carson, R. L., Baumgartner, J. J., Ota, C.L., Pulling Kuhn, A. C., & Durr, A. (2016). An ecological momentary assessment of burnout, rejuvenation strategies, job satisfaction, and quitting intentions in childcare teachers. Early Childhood Education Journal, 1-8.

Educational Leadership

Nelson-Smith, K. (2009). Building Opportunities through Leadership Development (BOLD). A curriculum.

Jonson-Reid, M., & Chiang, C. J.(2019). Problems in Understanding Program Efficacy in Child Welfare. In Re-Visioning Public Health Approaches for Protecting Children (pp. 349-377). Springer, Cham.

Environment (Classroom)

Deris, A., DiCarlo, C., Wagner, D. & Krick-Oborn, K. (in press). Using environmental modification and teacher mediation to increase literacy behaviors in inclusive preschool settings. Infants & Young Children

Reames, H. & DiCarlo, C.F. (2016). Creating a learner-centered classroom. Focus on PK/K, Early Years Bulletin, 3(3), 1-3, 7.

Guan, X. & DiCarlo, C.F. (2009). Minimizing stressors in the early childhood classroom. Collaborations, 2, 22-23.

Wayne, A., DiCarlo, C., Burts, D., & Benedict, J. (2007). Increasing the literacy behaviors of preschool children through environmental modifications. The Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 22(1), 5-16.

DiCarlo, C.F., Stricklin, S., & Reid, D.H. (2006). Increasing toy play among toddlers with and without disabilities by modifying structural quality of the classroom environment. National Head Start Association Dialog, 9(1)49-62.

Behavior Guidance

Reames, H. & DiCarlo, C. (2018). Using positive reinforcement to increase attentive behavior and correct task performance for preschoolers during extra curricular activities. Journal of Teacher Action Research, 4(2), 1-9.

DiCarlo, C.F., Baumgartner, J., & Ourso, J. & Powers, C. (2016). Using least-to-most assistive prompt hierarchy to increase child compliance with teacher directives in preschool classroom. Early Childhood Education Journal, 44(6) 1-10.doi:10.1007/s10643- 016-0825-7.

DiCarlo, C. & Baumgartner, J. (2011). Promoting Positive Behavior in the Preschool Classroom. Focus on Pre-K and K, 24(1), 4-7.

Torres, A., & DiCarlo, C.F. (2008). Positive Guidance. Collaborations. 3, 14-15.

Literacy and Language

Terrusi, M. (2020).  Illustrated books without words for inclusion: Method reflections on  reading, between form and metaphor. In E.A. Emili & V. Macchia (Eds.), Reading the inclusion: Picture books and books for one and all (pp. 77-88). ETS Editions. 

Terrusi, M. (2018). Silent Books. Wonder, Silence and Other Metamorphosis in Wordless Picture Books. Proceedings, 1(9), 1 – 12. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/proceedings1090879

Terrusi, M. (2017). Child portraits. Representations of the child body in children's illustration and literature: Some interpretative categories. Magazine of history of education, 4(1),  183 – 210. http://dx.doi.org/10.4454/rse.v4i1.28

Terrusi, M. (2017). Constellation of early childhood, Gugu's firmament. A portrait of Augusta Rasponi del Sale (Ravenna 1864-1942), author of picture book. Research of education  and education, 12(2), 71 – 88. http://dx.doi.org/10.6092/issn.1970-2221/7082

Terrusi, M. (2017). Eternals, children, winged: Neoteny, lightness and literature for children. Training Studies, 20(2), 387 – 408. http://dx.doi.org/10.13128/Studi_Formaz-22195

Terrusi, M. (2017). Mute wonders: Silent book and children's literature. Carocci.  

Beach, D., & DiCarlo, C.F. (2016). Can I play, again? Using a literacy ipad app to increase letter recognition & phonemic awareness. Journal of Teacher Action Research,2(2), 70-76.

Terrusi, M. (2016). Children read great. In C.I. Salviati (Ed.), In vitro: An experimental project    to promote reading (pp. 18-21). Center for Literature and Reading. MIBAC Ministry of Artistic and Cultural Heritage.

Terrusi, M. (2016). The possible, the visible, the questionable: Unexpected (or wordless) books   at school. In E. A. Emili (Ed.), Languages ​​for an inclusive school (pp. 51-66). Free Books.

Grilli, G. & Terrusi, M. (2014). A (Visual) Journey to Italy. In E. Arizpe, T. Colomer, & C. Martinez-Roldan (Eds.), Visual Journeys Through Wordless Narratives (pp. 217-238). Bloomsbury Academic.

Grilli, G. & Terrusi, M. (2014).  Migrant readers and wordless books: Visual narratives' inclusive experience. Encyclopaideia, 18(38), 67 – 90. http://dx.doi.org/10.6092/issn.1825-8670/4508

Ota, C. L. & Austin, A.M. (2013). Training and mentoring: Family child care providers’ use of linguistic inputs in conversations with children. Early Childhood Research Quarterly 28(4), 972-983

Terrusi, M. (2013). The room of children's literature: Educators, teachers and storytellers. In C.  Panciroli & F. D. Pizzigoni (Eds.), The museum as a workshop of experiences with heritage: The example of the Mode (pp. 1-199). Quiedit.

Terrusi, M. (2013). The life of children in the figures: Gugú, a forgotten author. Childhood, 6(1), 335-339. 

Terrusi, M. (2012). Illustrated books: Read, look, name the world in children's books. Carocci

Brintazzoli, G. & Terrusi, M. (2011). At the edge of the page. Li.Ber books for children and boys, 92(1), 50 – 52.

Terrusi, M. (2011). Read the visible. The world pictured in the pages. Form and poetics of early childhood books. In E. Beseghi & G. Grilli (Eds.), The invisible literature: Childhood and children's books (pp. 143-164). Carocci.

Chung, M. & Lee, L. (2009). Critical literacy theories for media literacy education. Academic Exchange Quarterly, 13(4), 121-127.

Lee, L. (2009). Media literacy. Academic Exchange Quarterly, 13(4), 10.

Terrusi, M. (2009). Classic fairy tales with contemporary design, interview with Steven Guarnaccia. Li.Ber books for children and boys, 82(1), 60 – 61. 

Terrusi, M. (2009). The art of the three little pigs. Li.Ber books for children and boys, 82(1), 59 – 63.

Terrusi, M. (2007). Philosophers animals: whether they are feathered canids or felines, we can consider them Masters. Li.Ber books for children and boys, 74(1), 30 – 31.

Terrusi, M. (2007). Families and new conformisms: The challenge of the bourgeois mentality seen through the complex father-son dialectic: Holidays with the father by Marcello Argilli. Li.Ber books for children and boys, 73(1), 44-45. 

Terrusi, M. (2007).  Books on the road. Li.Ber books for children and boys, 76(1), 54 – 55. 

Terrusi, M. (2006). Andersen Press turns 30: from the voice of its founder, Klaus Flugge, the story of the famous English publishing house. Andersen, 224(1), 31 – 35.

Mathematics

Hendershot, S., Austin, A. M. B., Blevins-Knabe, B., & Ota, C.L. (2015). Young children’s mathematics references during free play in family child care settings. Early Child Development and Care.  186(7), 1126-1141.

Misco, T., Lee, L., & Malone, K. Goley, S., & Seabolt, P. (2012).*Using the idea of insurance to develop mathematical skills and democratic dispositions. Interdisciplinary Journal of Teaching and Learning, 2(2), 78-89.

Austin, A.M., Blevins-Knabe, B., Ota, C., Rowe, T., & Knudsen Lindauer, S. (2011). Mediators of preschoolers’ early mathematics concepts. Early Child Development and Care, 181(9), 1181-1198.

Motor Skills

Molinini, R. M., Koziol, Marcinowski, E. C., Tripathi, T., Hsu, L.-Y., Harbourne, R. T., Lobo, M. A., McCoy, S. W., Bovaird, J., & Dusing, S. C. (2021). Early motor skills predict the developmental trajectory of problem solving skills in young children with motor impairments. Developmental Psychobiology. [Early View] 

Barnett, L.M., Stodden, D.F., Hulteen, R.M. and Sacko, R. (2020). Motor Proficiency Assessment. In T. Brusseau, S. Fairclough & D. Lubans (Eds.), The Routledge Handbook of Youth Physical Activity.

Gonzalez, S. L., Campbell, J. M., Marcinowski, E. C., Michel, G. F., Coxe, S., & Nelson, E. L. (2020). Preschool language ability is predicted by toddler hand preference trajectories. Developmental Psychology, 56(4), 699-709. 

Hulteen, R.M., Barnett, L.M. True, L., Lander, N., Cruz, B.P. and Lonsdale, C. (2020). Validity and Reliability Evidence for Motor Competence Assessments in Children and Adolescents: A Systematic Review. Journal of Sports Sciences, 38(15), 1717-1798, doi: 10.1080/02640414.2020.1756674  

Hulteen, R.M., True, L., and Pfeiffer, K. (2020). Differences in Associations of Product- and Process-Oriented Motor Competence Assessments with Physical Activity in Children. Journal of Sports Sciences, 38(4), 375-382. doi:10.1080/02640414.2019.17 02279

Webster, E.K., Kracht, C.L., Newton, R.L., Beyl, R.A., & Staiano, A.E. (2020). Intervention to improve preschoolers’ fundamental motor skills: Protocol of a parent-focused, mobile app-based comparative effectiveness trial. Research Protocols, 9(10):e19943.

Fearnbach, S.N., Martin, C.K., Heymsfield, S.B., Staiano, A.E., Newton, R.L., Garn, A.C., Johannsen, N.M., Hsia, D.S., Carmichael, O.T., Murray, K.B., Ramakrisnapillai, S., Murray, K.B., Blundell, J.E., & Finlayson, G.S. (2020) Validation of the Activity Preference Assessment: A tool for quantifying children’s implicit preferences for sedentary and physical activities. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity

Kracht, C.L., Webster, E.K., & Staiano, A.E. (2020) Relationship between the 24-hour movement guidelines and fundamental motor skills in preschoolers. Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport.

Marcinowski, E. C., Tripathi, T., Hsu, L.-Y., McCoy, S. W., & Dusing, S. C. (2019). Sitting skill and the emergence of arms‐free sitting affects the frequency of object looking and exploration. Developmental Psychobiology, 61 (7), 1035-47. 

Marcinowski, E. C., Nelson, E. L., Campbell, J. M., & Michel, G. F. (2019). The development of object construction from infancy through toddlerhood. Infancy, 24(3), 368-391. 

Campbell, J. M., Marcinowski, E. C., & Michel, G. F. (2018). The Development of Neuromotor Skills and Hand Preference During Infancy. Developmental Psychobiology, 60(2), 165-175. 

lteen, R.M., Morgan, P.J., Barnett, L.M., Robinson, L.E. Barton, C., Wrotniak, B., and Lubans, D.R. (2018). Initial Predictive Validity of the Lifelong Physical Activity Skills Battery. Journal of Motor Learning and Development, 6(2), 301-314. doi: 10.1123/jmld.2017-0036

Michel, G. F., Babik, I., Nelson, E. L., Campbell, J. M., & Marcinowski, E. C. (2018). Evolution and Development of Handedness: An Evo-Devo Approach. In G. Forrester, W. D. Hopkins, K. Hudry, & A. K. Lindell (Eds.), Cerebral Lateralization and Cognition: Evolutionary and Developmental Investigations of Motor Biases. Elsevier Inc.: Academic Press. 347-374. 

Hulteen, R.M., Morgan, P.J., Barnett, L.M., Stodden, D.F. and Lubans, D.R. Development of Foundational Motor Skills: A Conceptual Model for Physical Activity Across the Lifespan. (2018). Sports Medicine, 48(7), 1533-1540. doi: 10.1007/s4029-018-0892-6

Marcinowski, E. C., & Campbell, J. M. (2017). Building on what you have learned: Constructing skill during infancy influences the development of spatial relation words. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 41(3), 341-349. doi:10.1177/0165025416635283 

Nelson, E. L., Gonzalez, S., Coxe, S., Campbell, J. M., Marcinowski, E. C., & Michel, G. F. (2017). Toddler hand preference trajectories predict 3-year language outcome. Developmental Psychobiology, 59(7), 876-887. 

Nathan, N., Cohen, K., Beauchamp, M. W.L., Hulteen, R.M., Babic, M. and Lubans, D.R. Feasibility and Efficacy of the Greater Leaders Active StudentS (GLASS) Program on Improving Children’s Fundamental Movement Skills: A Pilot Study. (2017). Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport, 20(12), 1081-1086. doi: 10.1016/j.jsams.2017.04.016

Johnson, T.M., Ridgers, N.D. Hulteen, R.M., Mellecker, R.R. and Barnett, L.M. (2016). Does Playing a Sports Active Video Game Improve Young Children’s Ball Skill Competence? Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport, 19(5), 432-436. doi: 10.1016/j.jsams.2015.05.002

Marcinowski, E. C., Campbell, J. M., Faldowski, R. A., & Michel, G. F. (2016). Do hand preferences predict stacking skill during infancy? Developmental Psychobiology, 58(8), 958-967. 

Michel, G. F., Campbell, J. M., Marcinowski, E. C., Nelson, E. L., & Babik, I. (2016). Infant Hand Preference and the Development of Cognitive Abilities. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, 410. http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00410 

Campbell, J. M., Marcinowski, E. C., Babik, I., & Michel, G. F. (2015). The influence of a hand preference for acquiring objects on the development of a hand preference for unimanual manipulation from 6 to 14 months. Infant Behavior and Development, 39, 107-117. 

Campbell, J. M., Marcinowski, E. C., Latta, J. A., & Michel, G. F. (2015). Different assessment tasks produce different estimates of handedness stability during the 8 to 14 month age period. Infant Behavior and Development, 39, 67-80. 

Hulteen, R.M., Johnson, T.M., Ridgers, N.D., Mellecker, R.R. and Barnett, L.M. (2015). Children’s Movement Skills When Playing Active Video Games. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 121(3), 1-24. doi: 10.2466/25.10.PMS.121c24x5

Michel, G. F., Nelson, E. L., Babik, I., Campbell, J. M., & Marcinowski, E. C. (2013). Multiple trajectories in the developmental psychobiology of human handedness. In R. M. Lerner, & J. B. Benson (Eds.), Embodiment and epigenesis: Theoretical and methodological issues in understanding the role of biology within the relational developmental system Part B: Ontogenetic Dimensions. Elsevier Inc.: Academic Press, 227-260. 

Music Education

Isbell, D. (2018). Music educators consider musical futures. Contributions in Music Education. 43(1). 39-58.

Isbell, D. S., & Stanley, A. M. (2018). Code-switching musicians: an exploratory study. Music Education Research,20(2), 145-162.

Isbell, D. (2015). My Music and School Music: Formal and Informal Music Experiences. In Burton, S. and Snell, A. (Eds.), Engaging Musical Practices: A Sourcebook for Instrumental Music. Rowman and Littlefield Education Publishers, Inc.

Isbell, D. and Stanley, A. (2015) Are you a musical code-switcher?Polyphonic.org: The Orchestra Music Forum. http://www.polyphonic.org/2015/06/22/are-you-a-musical-code-switcher/.

Isbell, D. (2015)Apprehensive and excited: Music education students ’ encounter vernacular musicianship. Journal of Music Teacher Education. doi:10.1177/1057083714568020.

Isbell, D. (2014). The socialization and identity of undergraduate music teachers: A review of literature. Update: Applications for Research in Music Education.doi: 10.1177/8755123314547912.

Isbell, D. (2012). Learning theories: Insights for music educators. General Music Today 25(2). 9-23.

Isbell, D. (2009). Understanding Socialization and Occupational Identity among Preservice Music Teachers. In M. Schmidt (Ed.), Collaborative action for change:Selected proceedings from the 2007 symposium on music teacher education. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield Publishers, Inc.

Isbell, D. (2007). Popular music and the public school music classroom. Update: Applications for Research in Music Education.26(1).

Bowers, J., Cassellberry, J., Isbell, D., Kyakuwa, J., Li, Y., Mercado, E., and Wallace, E.(2019) A Descriptive Study of the Use of Music During Naptime in Louisiana Child Care Centers. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 33(2). doi: 10.1080/02568543.2019.1577770.

National Disasters

DiCarlo, C.F., Burts, D., Buchanan, T., Aghayan, C., & Benedict, J. (2007). Making Lemonade from Lemons: Early Childhood Teacher Educators’ Programmatic Responses to Hurricanes Katrina and Rita. Journal of Early Childhood Teacher Education, 28 (1), 61-68.

Outdoor Education

Terrusi, M. (2020). Children's books and outdoor education imagery: Stories and figures to tell each other. In S. Meo & M. Ognissanti (Eds.), From risk to opportunity: Outdoor education experiences in childcare and primary school services (pp. 115-118). Junior-   Children Editions.

Farné, R., Bortolotti, A., Terrusi, M. (2018) Introduction: Natural educational needs. In R. Farné, A. Bortolotti, & M. Terrusi (Eds.), Outdoor education: Theoretical perspectives and  good practices (pp. 13-24). Carocci.

Terrusi, M. (2018). Children's literature and natural imaginary. In R. Farné, A. Bortolotti, & M. Terrusi (Eds.), Outdoor education: Theoretical perspectives and good practices (pp. 183- 200). Carocci.

Terrusi, M. (2015). The green ship: natural education and reading for children. Li.Ber books for children and boys, 106(2), 40 – 42.

Terrusi, M. (2015). The teacher's shelf. Childhood, 1(4), 334 – 336.

Terrusi, M. (2014). Children's literature and natural narratives. In R. Farné & F. Agostini (Eds.) Outdoor education: Education takes care of outdoors (pp. 69-74). Junior-Spaggiari.

Grantham-Caston, M., & Perry, M. & DiCarlo, C.F. (2019). Playful Reggio Emilia. International Play Association, Spring-Fall, 20-25.

Dicarlo, C.F., Baumgartner, J.J., Ota, C.L. & Jensen, C. (2015). Preschool teachers’ perceptions of rough and tumble play vs. aggression in preschool-aged boys. Early Child Development and Care, 185(5), 779-790.

Carson, R., Lima, M. & DiCarlo, C.F. (2015). Play On! Playground learning activities for youth fitness (2nd edition). Reston, VA: American Association for Physical Activity and Recreation.

Casey, E. M. & DiCarlo, C.F. (2015). Play traditions in the Garifuna culture of Belize. International Play Association eJournal, www.Ipausa.org.

DiCarlo, C.F. & Vagianos, L.A. (2009). Preferences and play. Young Exceptional Children, 12(4), 31-39.

Popular Culture

Lee, L. (2012). Conceptualizing childhood in Korean Educational Broadcasting System (EBS): Critical analysis of Popular Picture Book, Pororo. In V. Cvetkovic & D. Olsen (Eds.), Fleeting Images: A Childhood Studies Examination of Children in Popular Culture (pp. 85-100). Lexington Press. 

Lee, L. (2012). "That's a great idea but I will think about it later": Early childhood pre-service Teachers' perceptions about popular culture in Teaching. Teacher Education and Practice, 25(1), 87-99.

Lee, L. (2010). Disney in Korea: A socio-cultural context of children’s popular culture. Red Feather Journal: An International Journal of Children’s Visual Culture, 1(2), 41-45.

Lee, L.,& Goodman, J. (2010). Romantic love and sexuality in Disney: A study of young, Korean immigrant girls’ perspectives. Education and Society, 28(1), 25-47.

Lee, L. & Goodman, J. (2009). Traversing the challenges of conducting research with young immigrant children: The case of Korean children. Interchange, 40(2), 225–244.

Lee, L. (2009). American immigrant girls’ perceptions about female body image in Disney: A critical analysis of young Korean girls. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 17(3), 363-375.

Lee, L. (2009). Marry the prince or stay with family—That is the question: A perspective of young Korean immigrant girls on Disney’s marriages in the United States. Australian Journal of Early Childhood, 34(2), 39-46.

Lee, L. (2009). Young American immigrant children’s interpretations of royalty in popular culture: A case study of Korean girls’ perspectives. Journal of Early Childhood Research, 7(2), 200-215.

Lee, L. (2008). Issues of popular culture and young children in American society: A Critical perspective. Academic Exchange Quarterly, 12(4),49-53.

Lee, L. (2008). Understanding gender through Disney’s marriages: A study of young Korean immigrant girls. Early Childhood Education Journal, 36(1), 11-18.

Parents in Education

Kepper MM, Staiano AE,Katzmarzyk PT, Reis R, Eyler A, Griffith DM, Kendall M, ElBanna B, Denstel KD, & Broyles ST (2019). Neighborhood influences on women’s parenting practices for adolescents’ outdoor play: A qualitative study. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health.

Baumgartner, J., McBride, B., Ota, C.L., & DiCarlo, C., (2016). How much do they need to be the same? What parents believe about continuity between home and childcare environments. Early Child Development and Care, 187(7), 1184-1193.

Professional Development

Bowers, J., Isbell, D., Stanley, A., and West, J. (in press). Attrition, (De)motivation, and “Effective” Music Teacher Professional Development: An Instrumental Case Study. Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education.

Grantham-Caston, M. & DiCarlo, C. (2019). Lights! Camera! Action! Improving your teaching through video self-reflection. Young Children, 74(4)

Grantham-Caston, M. & DiCarlo, C. (2019). The impact of video self-reflection on teacher practice. National Head Start Association Dialog, 22(2), 61-75.

Grantham-Caston, M. & DiCarlo, C. (2019). Video self-reflection. Dialog, 22(2), 99-102.

Isbell, D. and Russell, J. (2009). Perceptions of Music Educators Regarding the Practice, Impact, and Outcomes of Professional Development.  Southern Music Education Journal.

Physical Education

Ferkel, R.C.. Allen, H.R., True, L. and Hulteen, R.M. (2018). Split-Week Programming for Secondary Physical Education: Inducing Behavioral Change for Lifetime Fitness. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation and Dance, 89(8), 11-22. doi: 10.1080/07303084.2018.1503118

Hulteen, R.M., Morgan, P.J., Barnett, L.M., Barton, C., Wrotniak, B., Robinson, L.E. and Lubans, D.R. (2018). Development, Content Validity and Test-Retest Reliability of the Lifelong Physical Activity Skills Battery in Adolescents. Journal of Sports Sciences, 36(20), 2358-2367. doi: 10.1080/02640414.2018.1458392

Hulteen, R. M., Smith, J.J., Morgan, P.J., Barnett, L.M, Hallal, P.C., Colyvas, K. and Lubans, D.R. (2017). Global Sport and Leisure-Time Physical Activities Participation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Preventive Medicine, 95, 14-25. doi: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2016.11.027

Hulteen, R.M., Lander, N.J., Morgan, P.J., Barnett, L.M., Robertson, S.J. and Lubans, D.R. (2015). Validity and Reliability of Field-Based Measures for Assessing Movement Skill Competency in Lifelong Physical Activities: A Systematic Review. Sports Medicine, 45(10), 1443-54. doi: 10.1007/s40279-015-0357-0

Physical Therapy

Harbourne, R. T., Dusing, S. C., Lobo, M. A., McCoy, S. W., Koziol, N. A., Hsu, L.-Y., Willett, S., Marcinowski, E. C., Babik, I., Cunha, A. B., An, M., Chang, H.-J., Bovaird, J. A., Sheridan S. M. (2020). START-Play physical therapy intervention impacts motor and cognitive outcomes in infants with neuromotor disorders: A multisite randomized clinical trial. Physical Therapy, 101(2), 1-11. 

Dusing, S. C., Harbourne, R. T., Lobo, M. A., Westcott-McCoy, S., Bovaird, J., Kane, A. E., Syed, G., Marcinowski, E. C., Koziol, N., Brown, S. E. (2019). A physical therapy intervention to advance cognitive skills a young child with cerebral palsy: A single subject with severe motor impairments. Pediatric Physical Therapy, 31(4), 347-352. 

Dusing, S. C., Marcinowski, E. C., Tripathi, T., Rocha, A., & Brown, S. (2018). A perspective on the importance of assessing parent-child interaction in rehabilitation using high or low tech methods. Physical Therapy Journal, 99(6), 658-665. 

Harbourne, R. T., Dusing, S. C., Lobo, M. A., McCoy, S. W., Bovaird, J., Sheridan, S., Galloway, J. C., Chang, H.-J., Hsu, L.-Y., Koziol, N., Marcinowski, E. C., & Babik, I. (2018). Sitting Together and Reaching to Play (START-Play): Protocol for a multisite randomized controlled efficacy trial on intervention for infants with neuromotor disorders. Physical Therapy, 76(1), 1-31. 

Dusing, S. C., Tripathi, T., Marcinowski, E. C., Thacker, L., Brown, L., & Hendricks-Munoz, K. (2018). Supporting Play Exploration and Early Developmental Intervention versus usual care to enhance developmental outcomes during the transition from the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit to home: A pilot randomized controlled trial. BMC Pediatrics, 18(46), 1-12. 

Social-Emotional

DiCarlo, C. F., Ota, C., & Deris, A. (under revision). Social behavior in kindergarten. Journal of Early Childhood Research.

DiCarlo, C., Hebert, E. & Meaux, A. (in review). Finding the “om” in your ABCs: Mindfulness in the classroom. Child Care Exchange.

Chiang, C.J., Chen, Y. C., Wei, H. S., & Jonson-Reid, M. (2020). Social bonds and profiles of delinquency among adolescents: Differential effects by gender and age. Children and Youth Services Review, 104751

Benton, A., & DiCarlo, C. F. The impact of social stories on compliance and aggression in a kindergarten aged child. The Journal of Teacher Action Research, 4(3), 55 – 67.

DiCarlo, C.F, Ota, C.L., & Deris, A. (2020). An ecobehavioral analysis of social behavior across learning contexts in kindergarten.  Early Childhood Education Journal, DOI 10.1007/s10643-020-01103-y

DiCarlo, C.F., & Melikyan, S. (2016). Increasing the communicative behaviors of children with low levels of communicative initiations in an inclusive preschool classroom. Literacy Experiences Special Interest Group (LESIG), 46(1) 14-35.

Beckert, T., Lee, C., & Ota, C.L.  (2015). Correlates of psychosocial development for Taiwanese youth. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 46(6), 837-855.

DiCarlo, C.F., Onwujuba, C., & Baumgartner, J.J. (2014). Infant Communicative Behaviors and Maternal Responsiveness. Child and Youth Care Forum, 43(2), 195-209.

Deris, A. R., DiCarlo, C., Flynn, L. L., Ota, C.L., & O’Hanlon, A. (2012). Importance of social supports of parents of children with autism.  International Journal of Early Childhood Special Education, 4(1), 17-31.

Baumgartner, J., Burnett, L., DiCarlo, C. & Buchanan, T. (2012). An inquiry of children’s social support networks using eco-maps. Child and Youth Care Forum, doi: 10.1007/s10566-011-9166-2

Deris, A. R., DiCarlo, C. F., & Deris, T. P. (2012). Evidence-based practices: Using story-based interventions to improve social behavior in the general education setting. Focus on Inclusive Education, 10(1), 5-8.

Social Studies

Casey, E., DiCarlo, C., & *Sheldon, K. (2019). Growing democratic citizenship competencies: Fostering social studies understandings through inquiry learning in the preschool garden. The Journal of Social Studies Research. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jssr.2018.12.001

Casey, E. & DiCarlo, C.F. (2016). Social studies surprises found in the garden. Focus on PK/K, Early Years Bulletin, 4(2), 7-10. http://www.acei.org/sites/default/files/eybwinter2016.pdf

Lee, L., & Misco, T. (2016). Seeking moral autonomy in a Chinese context: A study of elementary moral education standards. Journal of International Social Studies, 6(2), 84 95.

Special Education

Deris, A., & DiCarlo, C.F. (2015). Effects of using a weighted or pressure vest for a child with autism. Autonomy, the critical journal of interdisciplinary Autism studies, 1(4).

Deris, A. R., & DiCarlo, C. F. (2013). Working with young children with autism in inclusive classrooms. Support for Learning, 28(2), 52-56.

Deris, A. R., DiCarlo, C., Flynn, L. L., Ota, C., & O’Hanlon, A. (2012). Investigation of social supports for parents of children with autism. International Journal of Early Childhood Special Education, 4(1), 17-32.

Sola, S. & Terrusi, M. (2010). Just like us. Li.Ber books for children and boys, 87(1), 50 – 51.

DiCarlo, C.F., Schepis, M., & Flynn, L. (2009). Embedding sensory preferences in toys to enhance toy play in toddlers with disabilities. Infants and Young Children, 22(3), 187-199.

Flynn-Wilson, L, & DiCarlo, C.F. (2009). Transdisciplinary intervention: What does it look like in community-based child care? Collaborations, 1, 30-32.

Sola, S. & Terrusi, M. (2009). The difference is not a subtraction: Books for children and disabilities. Lapis.

DiCarlo, C.F., Benedict, J., & Aghayan, C. (2008). Social proximity of preschoolers with disabilities in an inclusive classroom. The Journal of Early Childhood Education and Family Review

Terrusi, M. (2008). All uses of the book at all. Childhood, 4(1), 46-49.  

DiCarlo, C.F., & Reid, D.H. (2004). Increasing pretend toy play among 2-year-old children with disabilities in an inclusive setting. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis. 37, 197-207.

Reid, D.H., DiCarlo, C.F., Schepis, M.M., Hawkins, J., & Stricklin, S.B. (2003). Observational assessment of toy preferences among young children with disabilities in inclusive settings: Efficiency analysis and comparison with staff opinion. Behavior Modification, 27(2), 233-250.

Banajee, M., DiCarlo, C., & Stricklin, S. (2003). Core vocabulary determination for toddlers. Augmentative/Alternative Communication, 19, 67-73.

DiCarlo, C.F., Reid, D.H., & Stricklin, S. (2003). Increasing toy play among toddlers with multiple disabilities in an inclusive classroom: A more-to-less, child-directed intervention continuum. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 24, 195-209.

DiCarlo, C.F., Stricklin, S., Banajee, M., & Reid, D. (2001). Effects of manual signing on communicative vocalizations by toddlers with and without disabilities in inclusive classrooms. The Journal of the Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 26(2), 1-7.

DiCarlo, C.F., & Banajee, M. (2000). Using voice output devices to initiations among children with disabilities. Journal of Early Intervention, 23(3), 191-199. http://jei.sagepub.com/content/23/3/191.full.pdf+html

DiCarlo, C.F., Banajee, M., Stricklin, S. (2000). Circle time: Embedding augmentative communication into routine activities. Young Exceptional Children, 3, 18-26.

Teacher Education

Baumgartner, J., DiCarlo, C.F., & Casbergue, R. (in press). Service-learning in early childhood education: The Intersection of modeling developmentally appropriate teacher education & the P.A.R.E. model. Journal of Early Childhood Teacher Education.

Isbell, D. S. (2020). Early Socialization and Opinions of Musicianship Among Preservice Music Teachers. Journal of Music Teacher Education,29(3), 62-76. https://doi.org/10.1177/1057083720928496

Lee, L. (2016). Infant-toddler field experience design: A developmentally and culturally relevant approach in restrictive reality. Early Years Bulletin, 4(1), 7-11.

Isbell, D. (2009) Understanding Music Teacher Preparation. Saarbrucken, Germany: VDM, Verlag Publishing, Inc

Isbell, D. (2009). Role Models and Career Commitment Among Music Education Undergraduate Students. Music Education Research International, 3.13-27

Lee, L. & McMullen, M. B. (2006). Social ideology and early childhood education: A comparative analysis of Korean early childhood teacher education textbooks written in 1993 and 2003. Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood, 7(2), 119-129.

Ota, C.,DiCarlo, C.F.,Burts,D., Laird, R., & Gioe, C. (2006).  Training and the needs of adult learners. Journal of Extension, 44(6), Article 6TOT5.

Ota, C.,DiCarlo, C.F.,Burts,D., Laird, R., & Gioe, C. (2006).  The impact of training on caregiver responsiveness. The Journal of Early Childhood Teacher Education, 27(2), 149-160

Teaching Practices

Hulin, C., DiCarlo, C., & Grantham-Caston, M. (in review). The Impact of responsive partnership strategies on the satisfaction of co-teaching relationships in early childhood classrooms. NHSA Dialog: The Research-to-Practice Journal for the Early Childhood Field.

Watson, K.J. & DiCarlo, C.F. (2015). Increasing completion of classroom routines through the use of picture activity schedules. Early Childhood Education Journal. DOI 10.1007/s10643-015-0697-2

DiCarlo, C.F. & Haney, L. (2014). Action research/evidence-based practice in early childhood. Focus on Infants & Toddlers, 1(4), 11-14.

Flynn, L., & DiCarlo, C., (2009). Using a transdisciplinary teaming service delivery approach in preschools. Focus on Inclusive Education, 6(4), 2-3.

VanDerHeyden, A., Snyder, P., DiCarlo, C.F., Stricklin, S.B., & Vagianos, L.A. (2002). Comparison of within-stimulus and extra-stimulus prompts to increase targeted play behaviors in an inclusive early intervention program. The Behavior Analyst Today, 3 (2), 189.

Teaching Adults

Ota, C., DiCarlo, C.F., Burts, D., Laird, R., & Gioe, C. (2006). Training and the needs of adult learners. Journal of Extension, 44(6) [Article No. 6TOT5].

Lee, L. (2020). Technology-augmented play materials. In D. Bergen (Ed.), Handbook of Developmentally Appropriate Toys. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.

Lee, L. (2019). When technology met real-life experiences; Science curriculum project with technology for low-income Latino preschoolers. In N. Kucirkova & J. Rowsell (Eds.), International Handbook of Learning with Technology in Early Childhood Theory and   Method (pp. 338-348). New York: Routledge. 

Tu, X., & Lee, L. (2019). Integrating digital media in early childhood education: A case study of using iPad in American Mid-Western preschools. Journal of Studies in Chinese Early Childhood Education. [Chinese], 54-59.

Clark, S., & Lee, L. (2018). Technology Enhanced Classroom for Low-Income Children’s Mathematical Content Learning: A Case Study. International Journal of Information and Education Technology, 9(1), 66-69.

Lee, L. & Tu, X. (2016). Digital media for low-income preschoolers’ effective science learning: A case study of iPads with a social development approach. Computer in the Schools, 33(4), 1-14.

Lee, L., & Tu, X. (2016). Mathematical learning with digital media for low income preschool children: A case study of ELL and Non-ELL. International Journal of Early Childhood Learning, 23(3), 1-10.

Lee, L. (2015). Digital media for supporting young children’s learning: A case study of American preschool children and their uses of iPads. International Journal of Information and Education Technology, 5(12), 947-950.

Lee, L. (2015). Young children, play, and technology: Meaningful ways of using technology and digital media. In D. P. Fromberg & D. Bergen (Eds.) (3rd), Play from Birth to Twelve: Contexts, Perspectives, and Meanings (pp. 217-224). New York: Routledge

Lee, L. (2012). “It is a learning Journey for all”: A lesson from American elementary teachers who used a classroom Wiki. Journal of Interactive Online Learning, 11(3).

Types of Schools (Charter, urban, rural, laboratory)

Nelson-Smith, K. & Gunn, B. (2019). Determining the Perception and Necessity for a Child Development Laboratory in Local Communities. Journal of Education and Human Development, 8(4), pgs. 1-7.

Nelson-Smith, K. (2014). Charter Schools and the Corporate Makeover of Public Education: What’s at Stake? Journal of Negro Education. Book Review. Volume 83(3).

Andrews, N., Houston, W. R., Tobe, P. F., Zhang, A., & Powers, K. (2013). United Way Bright Beginnings Program Evaluation 2012. A program of the United Way of Greater Houston and ExxonMobil. Institute for Urban Education, University of Houston.

Houston, W. R.; Tobe, P. F., Zhang, A., Francis, T. P., & Stallings, T. (2012). United Way Bright Beginnings Program Evaluation, January 2011-January 2012. A program of the United Way of Greater Houston and ExxonMobil. Institute for Urban Education, University of Houston.

Houston, W. R., Tobe, P. F., Dixon, J., & Zhang, A. (2011). United Way Bright Beginnings Program Evaluation, January 2010-January 2011. A program of the United Way of the Texas Gulf Coast and ExxonMobil. Institute for Urban Education, University of Houston.

Nelson-Smith, K. (2011). Extension Role in Urban Education: Why Aren’t We Involved? Journal of Extension,49(4). Can be found at: http://www.joe.org/joe/2011august/comm1.php

Isbell, D. (2005). Music education in rural areas: A few keys to success.  Music Educators Journal, 92(2), 30-34.

79 Kindergarten Essay Topic Ideas & Examples

🏆 best kindergarten topic ideas & essay examples, 🎓 simple & easy kindergarten essay titles, 📝 good essay topics on kindergarten.

• Lev Vygotsky: Educational Implications of Sociocultural Theory The sociocultural theory is more responsive to the learning process of children with special needs since it argues that ideas and concepts are socially mediated and exist in collectives rather than in individuals.
• Comparing Kindergarten Programs in the US to the UK Another aspect of kindergarten curriculum that is identical in the US and in the UK is the fact that it encompasses a lot of play and experienced learning. We will write a custom essay specifically for you by our professional experts 808 writers online Learn More
• A Day’s Outing for Kindergarten Children The client, who is a school, wants the kindergarten children and their children to have a days picnic and outing. The event would help to break the tediousness of regular schoolwork and provide some entertainment […]
• Kindergarten English Language Proficiency Standard 1 It is important to develop an appropriate set of ELP standards for English learners at the kindergarten level in order to create a solid background for basic learning and the linguistic demands that will be […]
• Full-Day Kindergarten Program: Advantages and Disadvantages The educational stakeholders seek to determine the effect of this program to the parents, teachers, and the pupils undertaking it. In this regard, the full-day kindergarten program provides time for the students to practice the […]
• Reading Aloud in Kindergarten: Lesson Plan The approximate age of learners should be four to five years. The group should consist of approximately 15-20 students.
• Kindergarten Classroom Environment Design The design of the classroom environment should reflect the demographic characteristics of learners. The desks of children will be placed right in the center of the room, and at least, four students will sit at […]
• American Federal Holidays: Essential Knowledge for Kindergarten Their bravery gave a start to the history of our country, as the first European settlers followed Columbus quite soon and established their colonies on American soil. The Fourth of July has become a symbol […]
• Kindergarten Transition: The Key Difficulties Sheridan et al.offer a good source to explore KT as their study systematically assesses and summarizes almost 250 parents’ practices in the pre-KT and KT periods and such activities’ implications for children’s success.
• Social-Emotional Learning for Kindergarten Education To set adequate goals for social-emotional learning, researchers must quantify and contextualize the behaviors and attitudes of large samples of subjects.
• Impact of Social Media on Instructional Practices for Kindergarten Teachers General Context of the Problem Despite the increase in the use of social media in teaching, there is still a significant lack of research done on the impact of social media integration in teaching techniques […]
• Using Technologies in Kindergarten Classrooms Integrating modern technologies into the educational process in kindergartens helps educators transmit knowledge to the children and influence their emotions and perception of the materials.
• The Conflicts in Organizations: Experiences in the Kindergartens The conflicts indicate the latent negative processes, the real existence of disagreements, and the tendency to change them. The nature of the conflict was destructive and contributed to the inability to operate in the workplace.
• Monitoring Success of Kindergarten Students Thompson and Thompson emphasize the development of creativity as a criterion for engaging instruction. Therefore, to ensure that the curriculum is fun and meets the developmental requirements of children, it is essential to pay attention […]
• Pre-Schooling Before Kindergarten Admission The strategy needs the involvement of the student, and the teacher as the pre-schooling students are young and thus delicate to handle.
• Services for Students Who Are Transitioning Into Kindergarten The importance of a transfer program aimed at reducing students’ exposure to challenges associated with communication and learning.
• Weather and Climate for Kindergarten This lesson sequence is the introductory step towards learning the basic concept of weather and climatic changes in the Earth Science curriculum.
• Lead Exposure in Pre-Kindergarten Children Lead poisoning is as a result of accumulation of lead metal in the blood caused by inhalation or ingestion of lead over a period of time.
• Phonemic Awareness and Word Recognition in Kindergarten Blachman and Ball define phonemic awareness as the awareness that spoken words are made up of individual sounds; the ability to identify the individual phonemes of a word.
• Effects of Full-day Kindergarten on Achievement These changes in the American culture and in schooling over the past 2 decades have had their impact on the reputation of full-day, all-day-a-week kindergarten education in a number of communities.
• Grouping at the Kindergarten and Secondary Levels Researchers have established that group or cooperative learning improves the academic grades of students and helps in building high self-esteem, good social skills, and enhanced the comprehensive ability of their content and skills of the […]
• Kindergarten Inclusion Classroom A kindergarten inclusion classroom needs to meet a number of requirements to be classified as such: it should be aesthetically pleasing, challenging, age-appropriate, and safe for differently-abled children.
• Emergent Writing in Abu Dhabi Kindergartens This major variable will be achieved through a sequential implementation of various interactive writing strategies with an emphasis on play-based learning and an active learning approach.
• Learning for Kindergarten: Five Senses Objective: By the end of the lesson, the students will be able to define the key five sense and explain, which body organ is responsible for sensing a corresponding signal, as well as define the […]
• Learning Second Language in Kindergarten Online Storyland is a section of the Reading Eggs program that allows it to be used with a small group. The program allows teachers to choose from 44 available lesson plans that include student worksheets for […]
• Reading Unit Plan for Kindergarten Students The aim of the lesson plan is to teach the students to read and write by the end of the course.
• A Pre-Kindergarten Teacher Analysis When speaking about the prestige and relevance of the profession of a pre-kindergarten teacher, it is possible to say that at the national level, this occupation is encouraged, and jobs can be found almost always.
• The Superkids Reading Program in the Kindergarten The purpose of this paper is to overview the program components, evaluate it in terms of advantages and disadvantages, and discuss the details of the program implementation in the classroom setting with the focus on […]
• Pre-Kindergarten Education: Program and Resources The challenge that is proposed to be reviewed within the framework of the current letter is the universalization of pre-K education.
• Kindergarten Business Venture: La Trobe University The staff members and students with kids in the university’s kindergarten will be in a position to put more effort into their studies or roles within the institution.
• Teacher Career: Staff Development in Kindergartens The level of professional development of the teachers at the kindergarten stage plays a key role in the general development of pupils and the quality of education they receive at the end of the day.
• Education: Bilingual Kindergarten A major problem with bilingualism in kindergartens is that it leads to a lack of mastery in either of the languages.
• The Comparison of Montessori Education and a Regular Mathematics Program in Kindergarten Classroom Furthermore, it will compare the strengths and the weaknesses of the Montessori system with a regular mathematics program in order to determine the extent to which it benefits students.
• Student Engagement and Student Motivation in a Reading Classroom for the Kindergarten Level The tasks have to be short and able to stimulate the curiosity and creativity of the children This strategy requires that the tasks offered are short enough to allow the children to complete them.
• Benefits of Bilingualism Among Kindergarten Children The purpose of this report is to show the benefits of learning more than one language among kindergarten children. The purpose of this report is to analyse the benefits of learning two languages among kindergarten […]
• Separate Schooling for the Sexes from Kindergarten to University Level in Saudi Arabia A notable attribute of Saudi Arabia’s education system is that it is highly centralized in nature and the overall supervision is done by the Ministry of Education This ministry is also charged with the training […]
• Learning To Read With Rubrics. Assisting Kindergarten Learners To Improve Reading Skills The teacher arranges these levels according to the complexity of the content to be taught and evaluated. At the end of this level, the learners should be able to read simple words from a wall […]
• Vygotsky’s Social-Historical Theory: Towards Facilitating Learning in Kindergarten-Age children It is the object of this paper to demonstrates how Vygotsky’s theory can be used to assist kindergarten students and others with special needs to cope with the learning process It was the perception of […]
• Counting and Number Line Trainings in Kindergarten: Effects on Arithmetic Performance and Number Sense
• Designing for Human Behavior: The Elementary Kindergarten
• Factors Affecting the School Readiness of Public Kindergarten Pupils
• Elementary vs. Kindergarten Teacher
• Elementary School Ranges From Kindergarten
• Ecological Instability and Children’s Classroom Behavior in Kindergarten
• Pedagogics of the Kindergarten by Friedrich Frobel (1782-1852)
• Computer Science Classes for Students as Early as Kindergarten
• Psychodynamically-Oriented Early Prevention for “Children-at-Risk” in Urban Areas
• Elena Developed Chicken Pox When She Was in Kindergarten
• China Pre-school Education (Kindergarten) Industry Overview 2014
• Children and Home Reading Prior to Kindergarten
• Autobiography: High School and Kindergarten Aged Children
• Early Childhood Education and Kindergarten
• Early Kindergarten, Maternal Labor Supply and Children’s Outcomes: Evidence From Italy
• Does Full-Day Kindergarten Matter? Evidence from the First Two Years of Schooling
• Can Universal Pre-kindergarten Programs Improve Population Health and Longevity? Mechanisms, Evidence, and Policy Implications
• Book: Kindergarten and Bibliographic Citation
• Foreign Language Instruction Should Begin in Kindergarten
• Better Beginnings: The State of Early Learning and Kindergarten Readiness in White Center
• Kindergarten Classroom Observation
• Mathematics Education vs. Kindergarten Education
• Kindergarten Teachers Should Have at Least Basic Degree
• How and Why Does Age at Kindergarten Entry Matter
• Math Kindergarten Standard K-4: 2D and 3D Geometric Shapes and Relative Positions in Space
• Lesson Plan For Kindergarten English Learners
• How Does Your Kindergarten Classroom Affect Your Earnings? Evidence From Project Star
• How Non-Native Speaking Children Learn the Chinese Language in Kindergarten
• Observing the Kindergarten Classroom at Pine Meadow Elementary
• Kindergarten Readiness Skills Promotes Academic Achievement
• Full-Day vs. Half-Day Kindergarten
• Investigation into Developed SABIS Curriculum in Kindergarten
• Preschool and Kindergarten Best Practice Curriculum
• Lesson Plans Kindergarten First Grade
• “A Kindergarten Teacher Like Me”: Social-Emotional Development in Early Childhood Education “A kindergarten teacher like me” focuses on the relationship between racial and ethnic backgrounds of students and teachers in the social-emotional development of children.
• Pre-Kindergarten Impacts Over Time: An Analysis of KIPP Charter Schools
• Kindergarten Duties and Work Place
• Full Day Kindergarten Programs
• Reading Activity For Kindergarten
• Kindergarten Children and Reading Aloud
• High Quality Pre Kindergarten Classroom Look Like
• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2024, February 28). 79 Kindergarten Essay Topic Ideas & Examples. https://ivypanda.com/essays/topic/kindergarten-essay-topics/

"79 Kindergarten Essay Topic Ideas & Examples." IvyPanda , 28 Feb. 2024, ivypanda.com/essays/topic/kindergarten-essay-topics/.

IvyPanda . (2024) '79 Kindergarten Essay Topic Ideas & Examples'. 28 February.

IvyPanda . 2024. "79 Kindergarten Essay Topic Ideas & Examples." February 28, 2024. https://ivypanda.com/essays/topic/kindergarten-essay-topics/.

1. IvyPanda . "79 Kindergarten Essay Topic Ideas & Examples." February 28, 2024. https://ivypanda.com/essays/topic/kindergarten-essay-topics/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "79 Kindergarten Essay Topic Ideas & Examples." February 28, 2024. https://ivypanda.com/essays/topic/kindergarten-essay-topics/.

• Bilingual Education Essay Ideas
• Invention Topics
• Spanking Ideas
• Literacy Development Titles
• Child Development Research Ideas
• Developmental Psychology Essay Ideas
• Child Welfare Essay Ideas
• Personality Psychology Research Topics
• Childcare Research Topics
• Social Development Essay Topics
• Tolerance Essay Ideas
• Children’s Rights Research Ideas
• Pedagogy Topics
• Brain-Based Learning Essay Titles
• Private School Research Ideas

Every child deserves high-quality early education

We improve the learning and development of young children through research that transforms policy and practice.

State of Pre-K Data Explorer

View and Compare State of Preschool Yearbook Data Across States and Years

The State of Preschool 2022

Uneven Access & Quality Span Two Decades, but New Universal Preschool Efforts Offer Hope

NIEER Research

What does it take to provide professional development focused on DLLs?

State(s) of Early Intervention and Early Childhood Special Education

State(s) of Head Start and Early Head Start

More research.

Evaluation of Early Childhood Programs and Child Development in Indiana, from 2021-2022

Including Family Child Care (FCC) Programs in Publicly-Funded Pre-K

State Preschool in a Mixed Delivery System

Preschool matters blog, envisioning, planning, and implementing better systems for dual language learners, potential inclusion of outdoor preschool in state funded programs, reaching every child: a call for inclusive early education policies, international journal of child care and education policy, states should and can do much more to support assistant teachers according to a new peer-reviewed article by gg weisenfeld and kate hodges and abby copeman petig of the center for the study of child care employment (cscce) at berkeley..

Qualifications and supports for teaching teams in state-funded preschool in the United States

Join the Conversation

Learn more about our work, research & program evaluations.

We evaluate nationwide early childhood programs, rigorously assessing impact. Data-driven evaluations span years, revealing strengths and weaknesses for targeted improvements.

Policy Landscapes

NIEER's policy landscapes offer insights into early childhood education policies, enrollment, and nationwide funding. Advocates, policy-makers, and researchers rely on them to improve the quality and accessibility of early childhood education.

NIEER Developed Tools

NIEER has created numerous proprietary research tools that include assessments, surveys, cost calculators, and evaluations, used by researchers and educators to gather data, analyze information, and evaluate the effectiveness of early childhood education programs.

International Journal of Childcare & Education Policy

The International Journal of Childcare and Education Policy (IJCEP) is a scholarly, peer-reviewed journal focusing on childcare and education policy research for young children.

Technical Assistance

NIEER provides technical assistance to state advocates on improving the quality of early care and education programs and understanding the costs associated with high-quality programs. NIEER is producing a series of Guides to PreK Expansion and other resources to support state and national advocates in their efforts to ensure all children have access to high-quality early care and education.

Partnership with New Jersey

New Jersey has a rich history of supporting early learning, evidenced by the state's Supreme Court decisions, legal regulations, financial investments, and committed state leadership. However, a pivotal turning point came with a landmark legal decision that sparked significant changes and laid the groundwork for progress over the last two decades.

Subscribe to Our Newsletter

Stay Informed on Early Childhood Education Each Week

Collaborative for Student Growth

Research brief

Preparing early learners: Considerations for supporting the kindergarten class of 2021

By: Beth Tarasawa , Angela Johnson , Christine Yankel

Description

Among the many ways in which schools are being transformed by the COVID-19 pandemic, the change in public school kindergarten enrollment is one likely to have important consequences in classrooms across the nation. Because the academic and nonacademic skills students develop in their preschool and early elementary school years are foundational to important longer-term outcomes, understanding these changes and finding ways to effectively support our youngest students’ learning is critical for educators and leaders. Drawing on recent research, we offer four timely considerations for district, school, and classroom leaders.

Topics: Equity , COVID-19 & schools , Early learning

Related Topics

High dosage tutoring for academically at-risk students

This brief provides a review of the research on high dosage tutoring as an intervention strategy for supporting at-risk students. It highlights the benefits and the non-negotiable factors for effective implementation and usage.

By: Ayesha K. Hashim , Miles Davison , Sofia Postell , Jazmin Isaacs

Topics: COVID-19 & schools , Equity , Growth , Informing instruction

Typical learning for whom? Guidelines for selecting benchmarks to calculate months of learning

To describe the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on students, researchers have translated test scores into months of learning to claim how many months/years students are behind in school. Despite its perceived accessibility, there are major downsides to this translation. To inform future uses by researchers and media, we discuss in this brief how to calculate this metric as well as its trade-offs.

By: Megan Kuhfeld , Melissa Diliberti , Andrew McEachin , Jon Schweig , Louis T. Mariano

Topics: COVID-19 & schools , Equity , Growth , Growth modeling , Seasonal learning patterns & summer loss

Exploring the educational impacts of COVID-19

This visualization was developed to provide state-level insights into how students performed on MAP Growth in the 2020–2021 school year. Assessments are one indicator, among many, of the student impact from COVID-19. Our goal with this tool is to create visible data that informs academic recovery efforts that will be necessary in the 2022 school year and beyond.

By: Greg King

Topics: COVID-19 & schools , Innovations in reporting & assessment

Education’s long COVID: 2022–23 achievement data reveal stalled progress toward pandemic recovery

New research shows progress toward academic recovery stalled in 2022-23. This research brief covers data from 6.7 million US students examining academic gains relative to pre-pandemic years as well as tracking the gap in achievement between COVID year student groups compared to their pre-pandemic peers.

By: Karyn Lewis , Megan Kuhfeld

Products: MAP Growth

Topics: COVID-19 & schools , Equity

Technical appendix: 2022-23 achievement data reveal stalled progress toward pandemic recovery

The purpose of this technical appendix is to share more detailed results and describe the sample and methods used in the research in Education’s long COVID: 2022-23 achievement data reveal stalled progress toward pandemic recovery report.

By: Jazmin Isaacs , Megan Kuhfeld , Karyn Lewis

Technical appendix for progress towards pandemic recovery continued signs of rebounding achievement at the start of the 2022-2023 school year

The purpose of this technical appendix is to share more detailed results and describe the sample and methods used in the research in Progress towards pandemic recovery: Continued signs of rebounding achievement at the start of the 2022-23 school year.

By: Megan Kuhfeld , Karyn Lewis

Progress towards pandemic recovery: Continued signs of rebounding achievement at the start of the 2022-23 school year

New research provides evidence that student reading and math achievement at the start of the 2022–23 school year is continuing to rebound from the impacts of the pandemic, though full recovery is likely still several years away.

Topics: Equity , COVID-19 & schools

Popular Topics

Data Visualizations

View interactive tools that bring complex education issues to life. Explore patterns in growth, achievement, poverty, college readiness, and more.

Research Partnerships

Our collaborations with university researchers, school systems, address diverse education research topics.

Upcoming Research Presentations

Connect with us and learn about our newest research at these conferences and events.

Media Contact

Simona Beattie Sr. Manager, Public Relations

971.361.9526

Stay current by subscribing to our newsletter

STAY CURRENT

You are now signed up to receive our newsletter containing the latest news, blogs, and resources from nwea., thank you for registering to be a partner in research.

Close Overlay

Download the guide

Click below to view now..

Continue exploring >>

A New Vision for High-Quality Preschool Curriculum

A high-quality preschool education can foster critical development and learning that promotes joyful, affirming, and enriching learning opportunities that prepare children for success in school and life. While preschool programs generally provide emotionally supportive environments, their curricula often fall short in advancing learning in math, early literacy, and science, and lack the necessary support for multilingual learners emerging bilingualism. Additionally, access to high-quality, effective early learning experiences may be limited and inadequate based on factors such as a childs race, location, gender, language, identified disability, and socioeconomic status.

A New Vision for High-Quality Preschool Curriculum examines preschool curriculum quality for children from ages three to five, with special attention to the needs of Black and Latine children, multilingual learners, children with disabilities and children experiencing poverty in the United States. The report articulates a vision for high-quality preschool curricula for all children, grounded in an equity and justice-oriented principles from inception to implementation and evaluation.

Read Full Description

• Issue Brief: Early Childhood Organizations and Educators
• Issue Brief: Funders
• Issue Brief: Policymakers
• Issue Brief: Curriculum Developers and Publishers

Recent News

Review Examines COVID-19 Vaccination and Adverse Events

Science Academies Issue Statements to Inform G7 Talks

Supporting Family Caregivers in STEMM

Pregnant and Lactating Women in Clinical Research

• Load More...

• Our Mission

PBL for Pre-K Through Second Grade

Very young students can benefit from project-based learning, as these detailed steps for a project conducted by preschool students demonstrate.

Observation, exploration, and discovery are three main skills that young children (kindergarten to second grade) generally develop when they interact with their surroundings. Some children prefer to take time to observe the environment before moving around to explore, while others choose to immediately start actively discovering the wonders within the environment. Nurturing an environment that ignites curiosity and facilitates exploration, therefore, is paramount.

Early-years educators who work with children 2 to 7 years old play a pivotal role in laying the foundation for lifelong learning by creating spaces where children can freely explore their diverse interests and learn how to expand explorations and inquiries into meaningful in-depth projects. 

In this post, I share a project I developed for a pre-K class with 3-year-olds that offers clear examples of each step and process feature. The project began when a boy became fascinated by the sound that came out of a bottle when he blew into it. He shared his findings with his peers, and the Sounds Exploration project began.  

Creating an Environment for Exploration

The environments where young children interact become learning spaces and serve as educators, generating dialogue between children and/or between each child and the environment, developing processes of inquiry, reflection, observation, and active listening. What should these spaces be like? 

Versatility: Design flexible learning environments that allow spontaneous exploration and discovery in different areas and disciplines. Incorporate adaptable learning materials to accommodate diverse interests and activities. Equip your classroom with a rich variety of resources, including books, art supplies, natural materials, and sensory experiences. Allow children to access natural open spaces that offer enough room for free exploration.  

In the example of the Sounds Exploration project, the teacher offered different materials and contexts for the learners to make and identify sounds, both outside and indoors. In the open air, the teacher helped learners focus on sounds by inviting them to close their eyes and name the sounds they could hear. This takes some time and guidance to help learners to listen beyond the sounds in the foreground and pay attention to those in the background. The learners were then made aware of the sounds they made by walking on different surfaces—like pebbles, grass, and mud—and the sounds they made with sticks or by hitting the water. Outdoors contexts are full of discovery possibilities. 

Indoors, the children used materials such as plastic tops, foil, plastic, cellophane, construction paper, and cardboard to make sounds. Wood blocks, musical instruments, and toys (cars, trucks, dolls, balls, construction blocks) are also an option, as are the different surfaces (floor, carpets, tables) in the classroom. 

In both environments, the children had guidance to help them discover more about the sounds they produced. This connects with the next point.

Curiosity: Encourage a culture of inquiry by posing open-ended questions, stimulating wonder, and inviting children to explore topics of interest. Offer provocations and invitations to learning that spark curiosity and prompt further investigation. 

Collaboration: Facilitate opportunities for children to explore together, interact, learn from one another, and question their findings. 

Interacting with children during exploration periods

The most successful interactions a teacher can carry out in the period of inquiry are those that don’t have a single answer but allow for different responses. The children’s answers will likely be the result of the connections they make with themselves, their previous knowledge, their interaction with their peers, and the context in which they’re interacting.

As a consequence, the teacher has an opportunity to develop and model an attitude of listening and of inquiry into the children’s responses and the construction of their learning. 

For example, related to the Sounds project, the teacher might ask the following questions: 

• “How do you do it? Can you teach me?”
• “This sound... what does it remind you of?” 
• ”What other sounds can we make?”
•  ”What causes sound to be produced?”
•  ”What can we use this sound for?”

Engage in active observation: Observe children closely as they play: as they interact with each other, the decisions they make, and how they choose to communicate their feelings, emotions, thoughts. Pay attention to their interests, preferences, and inquiries.

Listen actively: Listen to the children’s conversations when you ask open-ended questions to stimulate their thinking and foster reflection and critical thinking. Encourage them to communicate their ideas and their thoughts, share observations, and voice their desire to know. 

Let the children express freely: Let them show you their willingness to deepen their knowledge. Follow their interests and curiosity, allowing them to guide the direction of their exploration. Facilitate support and resources based on their inquiries, empowering them to build knowledge and take ownership of their learning journey.

Provide research tools: Offer the children access to age-appropriate tools and materials, including books, digital resources, and hands-on experiences. Support them in navigating these resources independently, fostering self-directed learning skills.

Facilitate tools to document their findings: Provide materials and resources for learners to document their discoveries in various ways: different art forms, notes, oral dialogues, audio/video recordings. 

Transferring exploration into research projects

Children’s active exploration, properly documented, will generate a lot of information and, in turn, will create the possibility of continuing work on a specific project.

In the example of the Sounds Exploration project, the learners were invited to use the sounds they had collected, identified, and documented to make a Sound Story from a well-known story they usually read in class and enjoyed. The guiding question was this: How can the learners in this class turn [the name of the story] into a sound story?

Assist project planning: Guide children in planning and organizing their research project, and deconstruct the process into manageable steps. Help them create research questions, collect information, and develop a short-term plan of action. 

Analyze the data collected: Facilitate understanding of the findings and guide the children to become aware of which subject area they’re willing to learn more about. 

Ignite Intrinsic motivation: Provide steps for the learners to become aware of  what they already know about the specific topic in that subject area and what more they want to know, and guide them in finding where they can collect the information they’re looking for. 

Foster reflection: Promote reflection throughout the research process. Provide opportunities for children to share their findings with peers and reflect on their learning experiences and strategies.

Research projects enable teachers to empower children to make choices and decisions about their learning journey when they have a range of options and opportunities to explore their interests authentically. In addition, research projects foster collaboration and peer learning by encouraging children to work together and share what they’ve learned. 

It’s important to recognize and celebrate children’s achievements and contributions throughout the research process. Create opportunities for them to showcase their work, share their findings with others, and receive feedback and praise .

In essence, by creating an environment that nurtures exploration, supporting children during their inquiries, and empowering them to take on leadership roles in their learning, early years educators can lay the groundwork for a lifetime of curiosity, discovery, and success.

• NAEYC Login
• Member Profile
• Hello Community
• Accreditation Portal
• Online Learning
• Online Store

Popular Searches:   DAP ;  Coping with COVID-19 ;  E-books ;  Anti-Bias Education ;  Online Store

How to Do Action Research in Your Classroom

You are here

This article is available as a pdf. please see the link on the right..