Kindergarten to 1st grade: classroom characteristics and the stability and change of children's classroom experiences.

Abstract. This study examines the classroom experiences of 192 children followed longitudinally from kindergarten to 1st grade. Time-sampled observations of children were conducted to compare learning formats, teaching activities, and children's engagement in activities between kindergarten and 1st grade. Classroom observations also were conducted to examine differences in classroom quality; specifically, teacher sensitivity and instructional and emotional support for learning. Results from paired t-tests show that instructional activities become more teacher-directed and structured in 1st grade, children in 1st grade are exposed to less academic instruction than children in kindergarten, but children in 1st grade are more actively engaged in activities than children in kindergarten. With respect to classroom quality, kindergarten and 1st-grade classrooms were similar in terms of teacher sensitivity and emotional support for learning. Instructional support for learning, including instructional conversations, evaluative feedback, and child responsibility, decreased from kindergarten to 1st grade. These findings point to both stability and change in children's classroom experiences across kindergarten and 1st grade and are discussed in terms of the ways in which instructional activities in the classroom and children's achievement can be enhanced in early childhood classrooms.

**********

Much attention has been given to the ways in which the transition to kindergarten marks children's entrance into formal schooling and constitutes a change in educational experiences and philosophies for young children (Bohan-Baker & Little, 2002; Haines, Fowler, Schwartz, Kottwitz, & Rosenkoetter, 1989; Love, Logue, Trudeau, & Thayer, 1992; Pianta & Cox, 1999). Most existing work on school transition emphasizes the kindergarten year; in fact, kindergarten experiences are reported "to set the trajectory" for school success (Early, Pianta, & Cox, 1999; Entwisle & Alexander, 1993). However, it is worth noting that some have argued that 1st grade is a "critical period" for children's social and academic development, calling for an improved understanding of children's social experiences in 1st grade as well as during the transition between kindergarten and the 1st-grade year (Entwisle & Alexander, 1998). The transition to 1st grade marks a period of increased academic demands, a shift toward more structure, and a heightened focus on autonomy (Dauber, Alexander, & Entwisle, 1993; Entwisle & Alexander, 1993), but the way in which these new demands represent a shift in children's classroom experiences is unclear and, surprisingly, there has been very little attention given to the stability and change of children's experiences in early elementary classrooms.

The present study uses classroom observations collected longitudinally from the National Institute for Child Health and Human Development (NICHD) Study of Early Child Care to examine stability and change in classroom experiences for children from kindergarten through 1st grade. Specifically, this study examines the stability and change in children's classroom experiences, using frequency data focused on learning formats, teaching activities, and child engagement, as well as global quality ratings of teacher sensitivity, instructional support, and emotional support.

Stability and Change of Experiences From Kindergarten to 1st Grade

Contemporary national policy issues set the stage for our interest in children's classroom experience during their early years of school. No Child Left Behind, as well as previous federal initiatives, has heightened attention toward children's readiness for school, raised the bar for children's academic performance in the early years of school, and has placed pressure upon schools to better meet the needs of all children, even those with substantial social and academic needs. As such, teachers of young children have been challenged to meet two, occasionally contradictory, goals: providing the optimal level of structure and choice to match children's developmental level and providing an academic and social environment that becomes progressively more challenging and presses for increased academic competency. In the early years of school, teachers are challenged to create a classroom experience for children that balances these two goals.

The variability of kindergarten standards and policies across states contributes to the challenges of creating developmentally appropriate classrooms while simultaneously preparing children for the academic rigor of future grades. For example, kindergarten lasts merely two and one-half hours in some states, and a full day (6-7 hours) in others; kindergarten attendance is mandatory in some states and optional in others (Kauerz, 2005; Vecchiotti, 2003). In addition, the policies and standards for kindergarten are generally not aligned with those of 1st grade (Kauerz, 2005). In fact, from a policy perspective, kindergarten often resembles child care or preschool (Kauerz, 2005), but the curriculum and accountability goals may resemble K-6 standards. Although 1st grade is more closely aligned with the public school statutes and is standardized with regard to being full day and required for virtually all children, instructional practices are more variable than standardized (NICHD-ECCRN, 2002).

Observations in kindergarten and 1st-grade classrooms indicate that classrooms are remarkably diverse in their teaching methods and adequacy in meeting children's needs across classrooms (NICHD-ECCRN, 2002; Pianta, La Paro, Payne, Cox, & Bradley, 2002; Vecchiotti, 2003). Observations in over 200 kindergarten classrooms from three sites of the NICHD Study of Early Child Care showed wide variation in children's classroom experiences, with similar findings from a sample of more than 800 first-grade classrooms involved in the same study. For example, teacher-led instruction, centers, and free time varied among kindergarten classrooms from 0-100 percent of the observation period (Pianta et al., 2002). Some children had no exposure to centers during the observation period, while other children were observed in centers 100 percent of the time. Similarly, with teacher-led instruction, some children never experienced teacher-led instruction, while other children experienced teacher-led instruction almost 100 percent of the time (Pianta et al., 2002). With regard to teaching practices in 1st grade, classroom observations revealed a range of classroom experiences for children ranging from no reading aloud or teaching of academics, to classrooms in which at least half of the observations included these activities (NICHD-ECCRN, 2002). These findings suggest that, in all likelihood, children may experience vast differences in their early education experiences across grade levels.

Research that studies the school readiness and the quality of children's classroom experience points to the importance of classroom practices in relation to children's school performance. Work by Huffman and Speer (2000) describes the relationship between developmentally appropriate practice (DAP) and achievement outcomes for kindergarten and 1st-grade children. In their study, teachers were trained to provide developmentally appropriate classroom experiences for 1st-grade students identified as "at risk," based on socio-demographic indicators. The intervention group (moderate use of DAP, as determined by scores on the Assessment Profile) was compared to a comparison group (low use of DAP, as assessed by the Assessment Profile) (Abbott-Shim & Sibley, 1992), revealing that children scored higher on the Woodcock-Johnson Psycho-Educational Battery (Woodcock & Johnson, 1990) assessment in more developmentally appropriate classrooms. Likewise for social emotional outcomes, Donahue, Perry, and Weinstein (2003) describe the relationship between learner-centered practices and children's peer rejection. Specifically, children were observed in 14 first-grade classrooms with varying degrees of learner-centered teaching practices (e.g., degree to which the teacher attends to individual differences, focuses on positive social relationships, and offers choice and autonomy while also providing active guidance of children toward academic goals). They report an association between learner-centered practices and fewer behavior problems, lower rates of peer rejection within the classroom, and less child-reported anger and more empathy toward a hypothetical peer. Taken together, these findings show the relation between children's classroom experience and social and academic outcomes for children in the earliest years of school.

The central goal of this study was to use observationally based measures to examine the stability and change of classroom experiences from kindergarten to 1st grade. Using data from the NICHD Study of Early Child Care, this study examined (longitudinally) children's classroom experiences between kindergarten and 1st grade by asking two questions. First, how are classroom learning formats, teaching activities with children, and children's engagement similar or different between kindergarten and 1st grade? Second, how is classroom quality (teacher sensitivity; emotional and instructional support for learning) similar or different from kindergarten to 1st grade?

Method

Participants

One hundred ninety-four children and their teachers (N=194) were observed in kindergarten and 1st grade. These children were a subset of the larger sample of children involved in the NICHD Study of Early Child Care, a comprehensive, observational study of key developmental contexts from birth to age 5 (see NICHD-ECCRN, 1996, for details on the larger sample).

Kindergarten and 1st-grade classrooms were dispersed across numerous school districts, some in small urban areas but the majority in suburban or rural locations. Fewer than 10 percent of the kindergarten classrooms were half-day programs. Two classrooms, one kindergarten and one 1st grade, had fewer than 5 children enrolled in the class and both kindergarten and 1st-grade data for these two children were dropped from analyses to ensure that the sample reflected fairly typical kindergarten and 1st-grade classrooms. In the final sample of teachers and classrooms (N = 192), kindergarten class size ranged from 5 to 31 children, with a mean of 20 children, and in 1st grade, class size ranged from 7 to 39 children, with a mean of 20 children. Both kindergarten and 1st-grade classrooms had an average of one paid aide per classroom. We did not obtain information on features of the schools or school divisions in which these classrooms were located and are therefore unable to examine relations between observations of the classrooms and aspects of schools or school districts. In addition, there were not enough schools in which multiple classrooms with study children were located to support analyses of classrooms nested within schools.

Teachers in the kindergarten classrooms ranged in years of experience from .50 to 35 years (mean = 14 years). Teachers in 1st-grade classrooms ranged in years of experience from 1 to 36 years (mean = 13 years). Both kindergarten and 1st-grade teachers averaged about 8 years of teaching experience at their current school. The majority of kindergarten and 1st-grade teachers were female, 98 percent and 97 percent, respectively. Ninety-five percent of kindergarten and 1st-grade teachers were white. There were no significant differences on these demographic characteristics between the kindergarten and 1st-grade teachers.

One child per classroom had been enrolled at birth in the NICHD Study of Early Child Care at one of three sites (Virginia, North Carolina, Arkansas) and had been followed longitudinally since that time. The sample comprised 95 males and 97 females. Their ethnicity groups were as follows: 164 white, 24 African American, and 4 other ethnic groups. The mean income-to-needs ratio was 2.94 (SD=2.13), with a range from .13 to 14.69.

Measures

Data for the present study were obtained using: 1) observations in the kindergarten and 1st-grade classrooms attended by children from the Arkansas, North Carolina, and Virginia sites of the NICHD Study of Early Child Care; 2) teacher, school, and classroom descriptive information provided by kindergarten teachers (National Center for Early Development and Learning [NCEDL], 1997) and 1st-grade teachers (NICHD-ECCRN, 1998); and 3) family demographic information provided by mothers during the kindergarten and 1st-grade school year (NICHD-ECCRN, 1998).

Classrooms Observations. Kindergarten observations took place from January through May, using the Classroom Observation System for Kindergarten (COS-K) (NCEDL, 1997). The COS-K is an adaptation of the Observational Record of the Care-giving Environment (ORCE) used in the NICHD Study of Early Child Care (NICHD-ECCRN, 1996). First-grade observations took place between January and late April using the Classroom Observation System for First Grade (COS-l) (NICHD-ECCRN, 1998). These measures use identical codes that focus on the classroom as well as a study child and his or her experiences in the classroom. It is important to note that observations were intended to describe experience in the classrooms only for the children enrolled in the NICHD Study of Early Child Care at these three sites. However, because there was no special selection of children into classrooms on the basis of their enrollment in the NICHD sample, these children can be considered unselected and their experience "typical." Because one child in each classroom was of interest in this study, information was available on multiple levels. That is, time-sampled observations were recorded for activities in which the study child was involved, for teacher-child interactions, and for child engagement. Global ratings, using a 7-point scale, were made for teacher sensitivity in regard to the study child. Global ratings also were made at the classroom level for emotional support for learning and instructional support for learning.

All observations occurred during the morning and began with the official start of the school day. The entire observation took approximately three hours. Detailed manuals describe these codes, numerous examples of variation, and the coding procedures (NCEDL, 1997; NICHD-ECCRN, 1996). For the purposes of the present study, we describe 1) the time-sampled codes for learning formats, teacher activities, and child's engagement; and 2) the global qualitative codes for teacher sensitivity and classroom quality (e.g., emotional and instructional support for learning). See Table 1 for a brief description of these time-sampled codes.

Time Sampling. For the formal COS-K observation, two 44-minute observational cycles took place. In each cycle, observers made time-sampled recordings of discrete codes for three 10-minute periods of 30-second "observe" and 30-second "record" intervals. Thus, there were 30 one-minute periods in which discrete behaviors were sampled across each of the two observation cycles, for a total of 60 minutes.

Time-sampled codes included measures of the learning formats (e.g., structured teacher-directed activity, seat work, centers, free time, and transition), teaching activity (e.g., reads aloud, interacts with whole class, interacts with small group, interacts with study child, teaches social rule, teaches academic skill), and child engagement (passive engagement, productive engagement, off-task behavior).

Global Ratings. In addition to the time-sampled coding, observers had several minutes between time-sampling periods, as well as 10 minutes at the conclusion of the three time-sampled periods in each cycle, to observe and take notes about the classroom level processes. Coders took notes during these periods of observation, and they used their observations from 60 one-minute intervals to make global ratings of classroom quality, using a set of seven-point rating scales.

Global ratings of classroom quality included ratings of teacher sensitivity, emotional support, and instructional support. Teacher sensitivity included ratings of teacher responsivity, intrusiveness, and detachment. Emotional support included ratings of both positive and negative classroom climate and over-control. Instructional support ratings included ratings of literacy instruction, evaluative feedback, instructional conversation, and child responsibility. These classroom-level ratings could range from 1 to 7. A rating of 1 was assigned when that code was "uncharacteristic," a 3 was assigned when the description was "minimally characteristic," a 5 was assigned when the description of the code was "very characteristic" of the classroom, and a 7 was assigned under circumstances in which the code was "extremely characteristic" of the observed classroom.

Training and Reliability. Observers from all three sites carefully reviewed observation manuals with detailed examples and descriptions, and viewed videotapes of classrooms, prior to attending a centralized training workshop. After the training workshop, coders returned to their sites and conducted pilot observations and trained on one to two more videotaped cases. All observers had to pass a gold-standard videotaped reliability test involving six 44-minute cycles for behavioral coding and six cases for qualitative ratings. Criteria for passing were at least a 60 percent match on time-sampled codes and an 80 percent match (within one scale point) on the global rating scales for kindergarten. All coders passed at these levels on a reliability test or a make-up test (if they failed the first) before being certified to conduct observations in the field. For the kindergarten observations, average inter-rater agreement was .76 for the time-sampled codes and .81 for the global ratings. For 1st grade, the average exact agreement with the gold-standard videotape test for the time-sampled codes was .70. For the global ratings, average reliability on the videotaped test was estimated at .63 (correlation method) for within one scale point on the seven-point rating scales.

Results

Paired t-tests were computed comparing kindergarten and 1st-grade learning formats, teaching activities, children's engagement, and classroom quality. These comparisons showed differences in learning formats between kindergarten and 1st grade. Specifically, children in kindergarten spent more time in learning formats such as centers, free time and transitions than did 1st-grade children. First-grade children spent more time in teacher-directed (lecture format) and structured individual (seatwork) activities. In addition, kindergarten children were exposed to more academic and social skills teaching than were 1st-grade children, and kindergarten children spent more time passively engaged and 1st-grade children spent more time actively engaged in classroom activities. More stability across kindergarten and 1st grade was found with regard to classroom quality; specifically, emotional support for learning and teacher sensitivity. However, kindergarten classrooms appear to offer more instructional support for learning (instructional conversation, opportunities for child responsibility, and evaluative feedback) than did 1st-grade classrooms.

Effect size d values were computed for paired t-tests, following the recommendations of Dunlop, Corina, Vaslow, and Burke (1996). Cohen's (1992) recommendation was used to interpret effect sizes, where .20 equals a small effect, .50 equals a medium effect, and .80 equals a large effect. With regard to interpretation of these findings, it is important to note that since there was no special selection of children into classrooms on the basis of their enrollment in the NICHD sample, these children can be considered unselected. Thus, these results provide insight into the learning formats, teaching activities, engagement, and classroom quality for a "typical" child in a teacher's classroom during a "normal" morning.

Time-sampled Behaviors

Nine of the 13 time-sampled behaviors showed differences between kindergarten and 1st grade, as described below.

Learning Formats. Children in both kindergarten and 1st grade spent the largest part of their day (almost half of their classroom time) in structured teacher-directed activities (40-48 percent of the observed intervals). Centers (in kindergarten) and seatwork (in 1st grade) were the second most prevalent learning formats. With respect to differences between kindergarten and 1st-grade classrooms, 1st-grade children are exposed to more teacher-directed activities and seatwork activities. Children in kindergarten spend more time in centers, free time, and transitions. There were no differences between kindergarten and 1st-grade classrooms with respect to the amount of time children spent in different groupings (i.e., whole group, small group, and one-on-one). See Table 2 for percentage of observed intervals that kindergarten and 1st-grade children spent in different learning formats.

Teaching Activities. Table 2 also displays the percentage of intervals during the morning-long observation that children were exposed to various types of teaching activities. Overall, kindergarten and 1st-grade children spent less than 25 percent of their time exposed to the teaching of academic or social skills. Children in kindergarten experienced twice as much teaching of academic skills as did children in 1st grade; 21 percent versus 9 percent of the observed intervals. Also, there was a significant decrease between kindergarten and 1st grade in the percentage of observed intervals children were exposed to the teaching of social skills. Overall, however, children spent very little time being taught social skills (1 percent and .006 percent, respectively). There were no significant differences between kindergarten and 1st grade for observed intervals the teacher spent reading aloud. On average, teachers spent about 7 percent of the observation time involved in reading aloud to children. The variability is notable for this activity; some children were exposed to no reading aloud during the course of the observation, while others were exposed to the teacher reading aloud for at least half of the observed intervals.

Child Engagement. Overall, children in both kindergarten and 1st grade were observed spending a greater percentage of intervals actively engaged than receptively engaged. However, children in kindergarten classrooms spent more time receptively engaged in activities than did 1st-grade children, and 1st-grade children spent more time actively engaged in activities than did kindergarten children. (See Table 2.)

Global Classroom Quality

Teacher Sensitivity. There were no differences for global ratings of teacher responsivity, intrusiveness, or detachment between kindergarten and 1st-grade teachers. Typically, kindergarten and 1st-grade teachers were moderately high in sensitivity and low in intrusiveness and detachment. (See Table 3.)

Emotional Support for Learning. Kindergarten and 1st-grade classrooms were similar with regard to the amount of over-control and the positive and negative climate qualities of the classroom. Both kindergarten and 1st-grade classrooms received low ratings for over-control and negative emotional climate and positive ratings for positive emotional climate. (See Table 3.)

Instructional Support for Learning. Table 3 shows the differences in kindergarten and 1st-grade classrooms with respect to the amount of instructional support provided in the classroom. Kindergarten teachers were rated higher than 1st-grade teachers on evaluative feedback, instructional conversation, and promoting child responsibility in their classrooms. Overall, ratings for both classrooms were in the mid-range, suggesting moderate instructional support for learning in the typical classroom.

Discussion

The present findings show differences in nine of the 13 teacher behaviors observed in kindergarten and 1st grade, suggesting that children experience shifts between kindergarten and 1st grade in the ways in which their classrooms are structured and in terms of the demands placed upon them. Specifically, in 1st grade, structured learning formats are more common; in kindergarten, centers, free time, and transitions are more common. It is interesting to note that kindergarten children spent almost twice the amount of time in free time than 1st-grade children did. The focus of teaching changes from kindergarten to 1st grade; kindergarten children experience more teaching of academic and social skills than children in 1st grade. Children's engagement in activities also changes from kindergarten to 1st grade--children showed an increase in active engagement and a decrease in passive engagement between the two grades.

The global measures of classroom quality create a different picture. Specifically, the emotional support and teacher sensitivity that children receive appears to be consistent (and moderately high) in both kindergarten and 1st grade. In contrast, children appear to experience a decrease in instructional support for learning, receiving less evaluative feedback and instructional conversation, and fewer opportunities to take on responsibility in the 1st grade, compared to the kindergarten year. These findings can be interpreted in terms of the stability and changes of emotional and instructional experiences and expectations for children in kindergarten and 1st grade.

Change in Format, Activities, and Engagement

The present results show that children experience more change and less stability in learning formats between kindergarten and 1st grade. Although children in both kindergarten and 1st grade experience primarily structured activities in the classroom, teachers use significantly more structured activities in 1st grade compared to kindergarten, supporting findings showing that 1st-grade teachers report lower levels of developmentally appropriate beliefs and practices than kindergarten teachers (Vartuli, 1999). Intensive use of teacher-directed activities is the focus of much discussion in the early childhood literature. Guidelines from the National Association for the Education of Young Children favor giving children learning opportunities through direct physical and social experience, as opposed to teacher-directed learning (Bredekamp & Copple, 1997). Maxwell, McWilliam, Hemmeter, Ault, and Schuster (2001) reported that about one quarter of the variance in observed classroom practices could be accounted for just by knowing the grade level of the classroom, citing an inverse relation between the developmental appropriateness of a classroom and grade level.

In a recent study conducted by Stipek and Byler (2004), teachers who used more didactic methods also rated social skills and higher order thinking as less important. Many researchers posit that "teacher-controlled" instruction undermines children's intrinsic interest in learning and fosters dependency on adult authority for defining tasks and evaluating outcomes (Elkind, 1986; Katz, 1988). In fact, Stipek and Byler report that highly didactic teachers rated children as "less capable of self-directed learning" (p. 391).

Findings such as these raise the question of whether this shift toward more structure such as seatwork is useful and effective for 1st-grade children and if children are prepared for this transition in 1st grade. Anderson, Brubaker, Alleman-Brooks, and Duffy (1985) conducted a qualitative study of seatwork in the 1st grade and describe that the seatwork format worked better for high achievers because their success rate was sufficient to enhance learning. In contrast, lower achievers, who typically found the seatwork very difficult, developed strategies for completing the work that did not promote learning consistent with the goals of the assignment. More thorough monitoring and more frequent and process-oriented feedback from the teacher were viewed as mechanisms to make this learning format work for students with a broader range of ability levels. Additional research is needed to see the effects of structure across the curriculum on such student outcomes as academic competence.

The present findings show an overall low intensity of academic instruction in kindergarten and 1st grade, and also a decrease in academic instruction between the two years. Both kindergarten and 1st-grade children spent less than a quarter of the observed intervals exposed to the teaching of academic or social skills. Children may be spending their time listening and watching, or in routines and management of materials. It is important to know in understanding this finding that a fairly conservative definition of academic instruction was used, in that a teacher had to be actively leading a discussion about an academic concept; providing children practice or instructions about how to do something was not included in the definition of academic teaching. Examination of more general learning opportunities may show a different pattern of results and raises questions for future work in this area. Instructional discussions that include brainstorming, prediction, or expansion of learning opportunities are generally low-occurrence events or completely absent. This finding questions the degree to which schools and teachers are prepared to help children achieve academic competence, given that one of the explicit goals of U.S. schools is to teach children how to analyze information and make inferences (National Research Council, 2005).

Finally, the present findings show that children in both kindergarten and 1st grade spend the majority of their time actively engaged in activities. Children spend almost twice as much time actively engaged compared to passively engaged in both kindergarten and 1st grade, with an increase in active engagement between the two years. Thus, although students spend most of their time (and increasing amounts of their time) in teacher-directed instruction in kindergarten and 1st grade, this appears to have no adverse effects on children's engagement. These are positive findings for both grade levels, as it is generally found that levels of engagement are related to children's learning; the more time children are engaged in learning, the more opportunities they have for practice and mastery of skills and knowledge. Children who spend more time engaged in academic activities show greater achievement (Greenwood, 1991), and children who are more likely to participate in class (e.g., cooperate with classroom demands, display reliant behavior) show higher achievement (Ladd, Birch, & Buhs, 1999).

Stability and Change in Quality

With regard to global quality and instruction, our results show a decrease in instructional support for learning between kindergarten and 1st grade. Both empirical studies (e.g., Meyer, Wardrop, Hastings, & Linn, 1993) and meta-analytic work (Wang, Haertel, & Walberg, 1993) indicate that instructional support is viewed as a key component of successful instruction and has been linked to student achievement. For example, research syntheses describe that spending more time teaching and using more positive motivational techniques are key elements of effective instruction (Pressley et al., 2003). Further, work by Meyer and colleagues (1993) describes observations conducted in kindergarten classrooms in relation to students' reading ability at the end of kindergarten, pointing to the importance of teachers' engagement and feedback, especially "confirming feedback," to children as a mechanism for promoting reading ability at the end of kindergarten. In light of such work, the present findings suggest that critical elements of instructional support are lacking in the typical 1st-grade classroom.

It is interesting to note that there were no notable changes in emotional support between kindergarten and 1st grade. This finding points to the consistency in warmth and nurturance that children are likely to experience between the kindergarten and 1st-grade years.

Closing Comments

Taken together, two observations about classroom processes appear to be most important in understanding children's experiences in kindergarten and 1st grade. First, there is a high degree of variability in kindergarten and 1st-grade classrooms. Despite this variability, the differences between these two grades are quite robust (with small to medium effect sizes). The variability in these environments reflect the wide variety of goals for the early years of school (ranging from intensely academic to focused on social and emotional development only), the remarkable range of policies (Vecchiotti, 2003), and the lack of uniformity and stability, even into the 1st grade. Despite this variability, the typical child will experience a shift in his/her teachers' instructional practices and support between kindergarten and 1st grade.

Second, this research shows a shift in classroom activities between kindergarten and 1st grade (more seatwork, less center-time, less explicit academic teaching) without the increase in quality of instruction (e.g., opportunity to take on responsibility, evaluative feedback) necessary to support this change. This finding leads us to question the amount of academic instruction as well as support for learning in these early grades. Although both kindergarten and 1st-grade classrooms are generally positive places to be, children in both grades receive low levels of academic instruction. In particular, in 1st grade, teachers are not providing the high-quality instruction, feedback, and careful monitoring that research suggests is critical for these activities to produce academic learning (Anderson et al., 1985; Meyer et al., 1993).

Thus, teachers differ in the types of experiences that they offer children in kindergarten and 1st grade, and the quality of instructional support decreases between the two grades. These notable discontinuities need to be understood in the context of policy and practice. Nationwide policies for kindergarten are highly variable (Vecchiotti, 2003), a situation that has become more visible in a movement toward standardization and accountability. Practices are equally variable, and thus, the implications of the current work for practice are clear. Specifically, it is critical that learning environments are well-suited to the learning needs of young children and, most important, that high-quality instructional support is retained as a central goal for future kindergarten and 1st-grade classrooms. As such, offering instruction requiring children to analyze information and make inferences, using language in the classroom that extends children's thinking, and offering feedback that is specific and fosters inquiry are practices providing children with the consistent instructional support likely to improve academic performance through the kindergarten and 1st-grade years.

References

Abbott-Shim, M., & Sibley, A. (1992). Assessment profile for early childhood programs: Research version. Atlanta, GA: Quality Assist.

Anderson, L. M., Brubaker, N. L., Alleman-Brooks, J., & Duffy, G. G. (1985). A qualitative study of seatwork in first-grade classrooms. The Elementary School Journal, 86(2), 123-140.

Bohan-Baker, M., & Little, P. (2002). The transition to kindergarten: A review of current research and promising practices to involve families. Retrieved October 6, 2006, from Harvard University, Harvard Family Research Project Web site: www.gse.harvard.edu/hfrp/ content/projects/fine/resources/research/bohan.pdf

Bredekamp, S., & Copple, C. (Eds.). (1997). Developmentally appropriate practice in early childhood programs (Rev. ed.). Washington, DC: National Association for the Education of Young Children.

Cohen, J. (1992). A power primer. Psychological Bulletin, 112, 155-159.

Dauber, S., Alexander, K., & Entwisle, D. (1993). Characteristics of retainees and early precursors of retention in grade: Who is held back? Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 39(3), 326-343.

Donahue, K. M., Perry, K. E., & Weinstein, R. S. (2003). Teachers' classroom practices and children's rejection by their peers. Applied Developmental Psychology, 24, 91-118.

Dunlop, W. P., Corina, J. M., Vaslow, J. B., & Burke, M. J. (1996). Meta-analysis of experiments with matched groups or repeated measures designs. Psychological Methods, 1, 170-177.

Early, D. M., Pianta, R. C., & Cox, M. J. (1999). Kindergarten teachers and classrooms: A transition context. Early Education & Development, 10(1), 25-46.

Elkind, D. (1986). Formal education and early childhood education: An essential difference. Phi Delta Kappan, 67(9), 631-636.

Entwisle, D. R., & Alexander, K. L. (1993). Entry into schools: The beginning school transition and educational stratification in the United States. In Annual review of sociology (Vol. 19, pp. 401-423). Palo Alto, CA: Annual Reviews, Inc.

Entwisle, D. R., & Alexander, K. L. (1998). Facilitating the transition to first grade: The nature of transition and research on factors affecting it. The Elementary School Journal, 98(4), 351-364.

Greenwood, C. (1991). Classwide peer tutoring: Longitudinal effects on the reading, language, and mathematics achievement of at-risk students. Journal of Reading, Writing, and Learning Disabilities International, 7(2), 105-123.

Haines, A. H., Fowler, S. A., Schwartz, I. S., Kottwitz, E., & Rosenkoetter, S. (1989). A comparison of preschool and kindergarten teacher expectations for school readiness. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 4(1), 75-88.

Huffman, L. R., & Speer, P. W. (2000). Academic performance among at-risk children: The role of developmentally appropriate practices. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 15(2), 167-184.

Katz, L. (1988). Engaging children's minds. The implications of research for early childhood education. In C. Warger (Ed.), A resource guide to public school early childhood programs (pp. 32-52). Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Kauerz, K. (2005, March). State kindergarten policies: Straddling early learning and early elementary school. Young Children: Beyond the Journal, 60(2). Retrieved October 6, 2006, from www.journal.naeyc.org/btj/200503/ 01Kauerz.asp

Ladd, G. W., Birch, S. H., & Buhs, E. S. (1999). Children's social and scholastic lives in kindergarten: Related spheres of influence? Child Development, 70(6), 1313-1400.

Love, J. M., Logue, M. E., Trudeau, J. V., & Thayer, K. (1992). Transitions to kindergarten in American schools (Contract No. LC 88089001). Portsmouth, NH: U.S. Department of Education.

Maxwell, K. L., McWilliam, R. A., Hemmeter, M. L., Ault, M. J., & Schuster, J. W. (2001). Predictors of developmentally appropriate classroom practices in kindergarten through third grade. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 16(4), 431-452.

Meyer, L. A., Wardrop, J. L., Hastings, C. N., & Linn, R. (1993). Effects of ability and settings on kindergartners' reading performance. Journal of Educational Research, 86(3), 142-160.

National Center for Early Development and Learning. (1997). Classroom Observation System-Kindergarten. Charlottesville, VA: University of Virginia.

National Institute of Child Health and Human Development-Early Child Care Research Network. (1996). Characteristics of infant child care: Factors contributing to positive care-giving. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 11(3), 269-306.

National Institute of Child Health and Human Development-Early Child Care Research Network. (1998). Operations Manual First Grade Classroom Observation System. Retrieved October 6, 2006, from http://secc.rti.org/manuals.cfm?P=2.

National Institute of Child Health and Human Development-Early Child Care Research Network. (2002). The relation of global first-grade classroom environment to structural classroom features and teacher and student behaviors. The Elementary School Journal, 102(5), 367-387.

National Research Council. (2005). Mathematics and scientific development in early childhood: A workshop summary. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

Pianta, R. C., & Cox, M. J. (1999). The transition to kindergarten. Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.

Pianta, R. C., La Paro, K. M., Payne, C., Cox, M. J., & Bradley, R. (2002). The relation of kindergarten classroom environment to teacher, family, and school characteristics and child outcomes. The Elementary School Journal, 102(3), 225-238.

Pressley, M., Roehrig, A. D., Raphael, L., Dolezal, S., Bohn, C., Mohan, L., et al. (2003). Teaching processes in elementary and secondary education. In W. M. Reynolds & G. Miller (Eds.), Handbook of psychology: Volume 7: Educational psychology (pp. 153-175). New York: John Wiley & Sons.

Stipek, D., & Byler, P. (2004). The early childhood classroom observation measure. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 19(3), 375-397.

Vartuli, S. (1999). How early childhood teacher beliefs vary across grade level: Do they practice what they preach? Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 14(4), 489-514.

Vecchiotti, S. (2003). Kindergarten: An overlooked educational policy priority. Social Policy Report, 17(2), 3-19.

Wang, M. C., Haertel, G. D., & Walberg, H. J. (1993). Toward a knowledge base for school learning. Review of Educational Research, 63(3), 249-294.

Woodcock, R. W., & Johnson, M. B. (1990). Woodcock-Johnson Psycho-Educational Battery Revised. Allen, TX: DLM Teaching Resources.

Karen M. La Paro

University of North Carolina, Greensboro 

Sara E. Rimm-Kaufman

Robert C. Pianta

University of Virginia

Table 1
Brief Description of Observational Coding System (from NICHD-ECCRN,
1998).

Learning     Structured Teacher-Directed: The teacher actively leads
Format         a planned activity with the whole class or a small
               group of students, including the study child (SC).
             Seat Work: The SC independently carries out an activity
               that was directed or planned by the teacher. The
               teacher may be visually monitoring the children and/or
               checking the child's work.
             Centers: The SC participates in learning activities
               without direct teacher involvement. The teacher may
               have planned activities, but the SC, to some degree,
               decides on his/her level of participation.
             Free Time: The SC participates in activities that have
               not been planned or are not directed by the teacher.
             Transition: The SC is standing in line, or the activity
               in which the SC was involved is changing. The teacher
               is directing the transition.

Teaching     Reads Aloud: The teacher reads from a book, magazine, or
Activities     other written material to the SC or the group that
               includes the SC.
             Whole Group: The teacher is providing instruction to or
               facilitating activities with a large group (more than
               six children), including the SC. Visual monitoring is
               not coded under this category.
             Small Group: The teacher is providing instruction to a
               small group of children (6 or fewer), including the SC.
             Individual: Teacher interacts individually with the SC
               for a minimum of 5 seconds. This may include question-
               and-answer discussions, discussion of classroom rules,
               or listening to individual reading if it lasts at
               least five seconds.
             Teaches Academic Skills: The teacher provides instruction
               to the SC or a group that includes the SC. This does
               not include the teacher giving instructions about an
               activity or setting up an activity for children to do.
               Mentioning numbers or words is not included, unless
               the teacher offers further explanation or instruction
               describing a concept.
             Teaches Social Skills: The teacher teaches the SC (or a
               group of children that includes the SC) a moral or
               social rule. The content may include information about
               sharing, turn-taking, hitting, taking materials, saying
               "please" or "thank you," or expressing feelings.

Child        Active Engagement: The SC shows active involvement with
Engagement     the teacher-sanctioned activity for more than half of
               the 30-sec. coding interval. Reading aloud, writing in
               a journal, participation in a game, raising his/her
               hand, or talking to the teacher or peer about the
               current activity are included.
             Passive Engagement: The SC shows passive involvement with
               the teacher-sanctioned activity for more than half of
               the 30-sec. coding interval. Day-dreaming, looking at
               the ceiling or floor without focus on the current task,
               and wandering around are included.
             Off-Task Behavior: The SC shows involvement in an
               activity not sanctioned by the teacher for more than
               half of the interval. Disruptive behavior (e.g.,
               rolling around, taking other children's materials,
               roughhousing) or behavior that the teacher indicates to
               be inappropriate (with either class reminders or direct
              reminders to the SC) are included.

Classroom    Emotional   Sensitivity: Teacher shows evidence of child-
Quality      Support:      centered behavior toward SC. There appears
                           to be awareness of the child's needs,
                           moods, interests, and capabilities. This
                           quality may be shown though the teacher's
                           structuring of the physical and social
                           environment effectively, permitting
                           opportunity for child choice. A mix of
                           support and independence so  that the child
                           can experience mastery, success, pride, and
                           the development of self-regulatory skills
                           is typical.
                         Intrusiveness: Teacher imposes his/her agenda
                           on the SC; his/her interactions with the
                           child are adult-driven rather than child-
                           centered. Teacher appears unable to
                           relinquish control of interactions in order
                           to facilitate the child's exploration or
                           regulation of activities.
                         Detachment: Teacher shows a lack of emotional
                           involvement and lack of awareness of the
                           SC's needs for appropriate interactions
                           with activities, materials, and/or peers.

             Classroom   Over-control: The classroom is rigidly
             Climate:      structured. There is little choice of
                           activity, activities are heavily
                           regimented, and there is little time for
                           freedom to physically move around, interact
                           with peers, or be actively involved (rather
                           than listening to the teacher).
                         Positive Climate: The classroom has evidence
                           of pleasant conversation, spontaneous
                           laughter, exclamations of excitement. The
                           teacher appears to show positive regard
                           toward children.
                         Negative Climate: The classroom has evidence
                           of hostility and punitive control. The
                           teacher shows annoyance, disapproval,
                           criticism, and negative regard toward
                           children.

             Instruc-    Instructional Conversation: Focuses on the
             tional        quality of cognitive skills or concepts
             Support:      elicited during teacher-led discussions.
                           The content of these conversations includes
                           the teacher and children discussing ideas
                           and potential solutions to tasks and
                           activities. These include exchanges, not
                           recitation of facts or details.
                         Child Responsibility: Captures the extent to
                           which the classroom allows children to take
                           on responsibility. Assignment of "jobs,"
                           such as attendance monitor, table washer,
                           and plant monitor, would be included. For
                           example, during group time, a child may be
                           selected to call on other children in the
                           group.
                         Evaluative Feedback: Refers to the quality of
                           verbal evaluation of the children's work,
                           comments, and ideas. Feedback that is
                           constructive, provides information about
                           solving problems, focuses on the process
                           rather than the product, and does not
                           over-emphasize "correctness" typifies this
                           characteristic.
                         Literacy Instruction: Captures the amount of
                           literacy instruction. The teacher reads
                           and elaborates on reading by providing
                           description of phonics and comprehension.
                           Children are encouraged to elaborate upon
                           the story by relating the story to their
                           own experience or making predictions about
                           the story.

Table 2
Percentage of Observed Intervals, Number of Intervals (Across 60
one-minute Intervals), and Differences Spent in Learning Formats,
Teaching Activities, and Engagement Categories in Kindergarten and
1st Grade.

Variable                                 Kindergarten

                               Mean      Mean      Range    SD
                                 %     Number of
                                       Intervals

Learning Formats
Structured, Teacher-directed   42      25.43       0-56    13.28
Seatwork                       17      10.19       0-48    10.30
Centers                        18      11.28       0-60    14.50
Free-time                      12      5.10        0-24    7.01
Transition                     8       6.82        0-30    4.90

Teaching Activities
Reads Aloud                    7       4.23        0-31    5.24
Whole Group                    44      26.24       0-60    13.20
Small Group                    10      6.21        0-32    6.96
Individual                     7       4.42        0-34    4.15
Academic Skill                 21      12.43       0-43    8.44
Social Skill                   1       0.71        0-12    1.40

Children's Engagement
Passive                        38      23.18       0-49    11.28
Active                         57      33.76       8-60    11.44

Variable                                   1st Grade

                               Mean      Mean      Range    SD
                                 %     Number of
                                       Intervals

Learning Formats
Structured, Teacher-directed   48      28.90       0-58    13.25
Seatwork                       27      15.80       0-48    12.07
Centers                        5       2.90        0-46    6.20
Free-time                      6       0.89        0-16    3.24
Transition                     1       5.38        0-20    3.60

Teaching Activities
Reads Aloud                    7       3.92        0-29    5.14
Whole Group                    47      28.17       0-59    14.86
Small Group                    10      5.99        0-43    8.79
Individual                     8       4.91        0-50    5.15
Academic Skill                 9       9.43        0-30    8.35
Social Skill                   -1      0.44        0-7     1.00

Children's Engagement
Passive                        32      18.58       0-51    10.69
Active                         63      37.83       8-59    11.02

Variable                       Difference

                                 t     Sig.   Effect
                               value           Size
                                                r

Learning Formats
Structured, Teacher-directed   -2.59   .01     -.19
Seatwork                       -4.88   .00     -.35
Centers                        7.73    .00     .55
Free-time                      7.32    .00     .52
Transition                     3.08    .00     .22

Teaching Activities
Reads Aloud                    0.57    .57     .04
Whole Group                    -1.36   .18     -.10
Small Group                    0.291   .77     .02
Individual                     -1.4    .16     -.10
Academic Skill                 3.50    .00     -.25
Social Skill                   2.32    .02     .17

Children's Engagement
Passive                        3.63    .00     .26
Active                         4.17    .00     .30

Note. Mean percentage was computed as number of intervals observed
with the specific behavior over total intervals observed (60).

Table 3
Means, Standard Deviations, and Differences in Observed Classroom
Quality, Rated on a 7-Point Likert-Type Scale, in Kindergarten and
1st-Grade Classrooms

Classroom Quality          Kindergarten    1st Grade    t value
                             Mean SD        Mean SD

Teacher Sensitivity
  Responsivity             5.20 (1.32)    5.17 (1.11)     0.25
  Intrusiveness            1.90 (1.34)    1.86 (0.98)     0.38
  Detachment               1.67 (0.97)    1.56 (0.76)     1.19
Emotional Support
  Overcontrol              2.27 (l.51)    2.30 (l.27)    -0.25
  Negative Climate         1.83 (l.16)    1.69 (1.05)     1.34
  Positive Climate         5.29 (l.36)    5.26 (1.20)     0.28
Instructional Support
  Evaluative Feedback      4.22 (l.58)    3.28 (l.62)     5.64
  Instruct. Conversation   4.01 (1.80)    3.14 (l.58)     5.08
  Child Responsibility     4.63 (l.41)    4.31 (l.36)     2.30

Classroom Quality          Sig.    Effect
                                   Size r

Teacher Sensitivity
  Responsivity             n.s.      .02
  Intrusiveness            n.s.      .03
  Detachment               n.s.      .09
Emotional Support
  Overcontrol              n.s.     -.02
  Negative Climate         n.s.      .10
  Positive Climate         n.s.      .02
Instructional Support
  Evaluative Feedback      0.000     .41
  Instruct. Conversation   0.000     .37
  Child Responsibility     0.022     .17