A common challenge in developmental research is the amount of incomplete and missing data that occurs from respondents failing to complete tasks or questionnaires, as well as from disengaging from the study (i.e., attrition). This missingness can lead to biases in parameter estimates and, hence, in the interpretation of findings. These biases can be addressed through statistical techniques that adjust for missing data, such as multiple imputation. Although this technique is highly effective, it has not been widely adopted by developmental scientists given barriers such as lack of training or misconceptions about imputation methods and instead utilizing default methods within software like listwise deletion. This manuscript is intended to provide practical guidelines for developmental researchers to follow when examining their data for missingness, making decisions about how to handle that missingness, and reporting the extent of missing data biases and specific multiple imputation procedures in publications.
Intervention dosage is foundational to realizing intended impacts but is often variable, particularly when interventions are implemented under real-world conditions. In this study, we examined dosage of small-group emergent literacy intervention experienced by preschool children ( n = 154) identified as at risk for later reading difficulties in authentic classroom settings. We documented considerable variability in dosage that was largely due to when instructors stopped offering lessons. Drawing from extant literature and an ecological orientation, we found that instructor factors (i.e., instructor self-efficacy for teaching language and literacy, instructor perception of lesson acceptability, average small-group size) and classroom factors (i.e., classroom teachers’ self-efficacy for decision-making), but not child factors, significantly predicted children’s intervention dosage. Moreover, most variance could be attributed to differences between small groups/instructors rather than individual differences among children. We discuss implications for preschool teachers, administrators, researchers, and intervention developers seeking to better support successful small-group intervention implementation.
In response to Fuson et al.’s commentary on Litkowski et al. (2020), we clarify and expand on three areas: (1) the need for prekindergarten standards, (2) the value in developmental survey work, and (3) the importance of understanding curriculum translation and uptake. Specifically, we note that standards need to be appropriate for grade-level and it is time for more aligned prekindergarten standards. Developmental survey work is critical for ensuring that standards and expectations are accurate and adjusted to meet current needs and can be used address equity issues in instruction. Furthermore, we agree that intervention and curriculum work are needed, but there should be explicit emphasis on enhancing uptake and use of high-quality instruction. Ultimately, we need a system of assessment and instruction that is continually updated and improved, that integrates and modifies new evidence over time to ensure that we are striving for—and attaining—the best results for young children.
Many preschool language-focused interventions attempt to boost language and literacy skills in young children at risk in these areas of development, though the long-term effects of such interventions are not well-established. This study investigated kindergarten language and reading skills, specifically the subcomponents of vocabulary, decoding, and reading comprehension, for children exposed to the language-focused intervention Learning Language and Loving It (LLLI; Weitzman & Greenberg, 2002) during preschool. End of kindergarten skills were examined, comparing children whose teachers implemented LLLI (n = 25) or business-as-usual (BAU) instruction (n = 24). Hierarchical linear modeling results showed the LLLI intervention to have significant effects on children's decoding and reading comprehension in kindergarten for children who had high levels of language skill at preschool, as compared to their counterparts in the BAU condition. Study findings therefore indicate that preschool language-focused inter...
The authors examined whether math fluency was independent from untimed math and from reading using 314 pairs of school-aged twins drawn from the Western Reserve Reading and Math Projects. Twins were assessed through a 90-min home visit at approximately age 10 and were reassessed in their homes approximately 1 year later. Results suggested that the shared environment and genetics influenced the covariance among math fluency, untimed math measures, and reading measures. However, roughly two thirds of the variance in math fluency was independent from untimed math measures and reading, including reading fluency. The majority of this independent variance was the result of genetic factors that were longitudinally stable across two measurement occasions. These results suggest that math fluency, although related to other math measures, may also be a genetically distinct dimension of mathematics performance.
Many research agencies are now requiring that data collected as part of funded projects be shared. However, the practice of data sharing in education sciences has lagged these funder requirements. We assert that this is likely because researchers' generally have not been made aware of these requirements and the benefits of data sharing. Furthermore, data sharing is usually not a part of formal training, so many researchers may be unaware how to properly share their data. Finally, the research culture in education science is often filled with concerns regarding the sharing of data. In this article, we address each of these areas, discussing the wide range of benefits of data sharing, the many ways data can be shared, provide a step by step guide to start sharing data, and responses to common concerns.
As early childhood education programming expands across the globe, there is an increased need to understand how features of these programs influence children's development. The composition of children's age within a classroom is one such feature, although it is much less studied than other features. Theoretical and empirical evidence suggests that children's development may be influenced by the age range of their classmates. This study examines the relations between classroom age variability on children's vocabulary development for 2,743 children between the ages of two years, nine months, and six years, 11 months enrolled in early childhood education settings in Denmark. Findings indicate a significant nonlinear relationship between the range of child age within a classroom and children's vocabulary development, such that classrooms with a maximum age range of 24 months were associated with the greatest gains in vocabulary growth. Results give direction to policy efforts focused on expansion of early childhood education programming.
