Examining the impact of pre-k and kindergarten classroom alignment on school readiness outcomes

162 Pages·2012·1.66 MB·English

UUnniivveerrssiittyy ooff DDeennvveerr
DDiiggiittaall CCoommmmoonnss @@ DDUU
Electronic Theses and Dissertations Graduate Studies
1-1-2015
EExxaammiinniinngg tthhee IImmppaacctt ooff PPrree--KK aanndd KKiinnddeerrggaarrtteenn CCllaassssrroooomm
AAlliiggnnmmeenntt oonn SScchhooooll RReeaaddiinneessss OOuuttccoommeess
Margaret Deane Franko
University of Denver
Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.du.edu/etd
Part of the Early Childhood Education Commons, and the Educational Assessment, Evaluation, and
Research Commons
RReeccoommmmeennddeedd CCiittaattiioonn
Franko, Margaret Deane, "Examining the Impact of Pre-K and Kindergarten Classroom Alignment on
School Readiness Outcomes" (2015). Electronic Theses and Dissertations. 1024.
https://digitalcommons.du.edu/etd/1024
This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate Studies at Digital Commons @ DU. It
has been accepted for inclusion in Electronic Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Digital
Commons @ DU. For more information, please contact [email protected],[email protected].
EXAMINING THE IMPACT OF PRE-K AND KINDERGARTEN CLASSROOM
ALIGNMENT ON SCHOOL READINESS OUTCOMES
__________

A Dissertation
Presented to
The Faculty of the Morgridge College of Education
University of Denver

__________

In Partial Fulfillment
of the Requirements for the Degree
Doctor of Philosophy

__________

by
Meg Deane Franko
August 2015
Advisor: Dr. Kristina Hesbol
©Copyright by Meg Deane Franko
All Rights Reserved
Author: Meg Deane Franko
Title: EXAMINING THE IMPACT OF PRE-K AND KINDERGARTEN CLASSROOM
ALIGNMENT ON SCHOOL READINESS OUTCOMES
Advisor: Kristina Hesbol
Degree Date: August 2015
Abstract
This study explored children’s experiences of instructional alignment from
prekindergarten to kindergarten and analyzed the impact of those alignment experiences
on children’s school readiness outcomes. The study answered the following overarching
research question: Does the alignment of children’s learning experiences between
prekindergarten and kindergarten impact school readiness outcomes? Three sub-
questions drove the research design: (1) How do children’s prekindergarten and
kindergarten learning experiences align; (2) To what extent does the alignment of early
learning experiences predict children’s school readiness outcomes; and (3) Does the
quality of prekindergarten classroom teacher interactions moderate the impact of any PK-
K alignment effects? Using cluster analysis and hierarchical linear modeling (HLM) to
analyze data from over 1,300 children in the 2009 Head Start Family and Child
Experiences Survey (FACES), the study found that children have distinct and definable
experiences of PK-K alignment. Results also indicated a disparity in children’s PK-K
alignment experiences, with Hispanic/Latino children more likely to attend Head Start
programs with poor systems transition practices followed by kindergartens with poor
classroom structures.
The study found that growth in the use of instructional activity centers from
prekindergarten to kindergarten is predictive of better literacy and math outcomes.
ii
Findings further suggested that boys, minority students, and children from lower income
households are predicted to score lower than girls, white classmates, and higher-income
peers across school readiness measures. Findings support the need for equitable transition
and alignment practices for children from all racial and ethnic groups. They also argue
for an increase in child-directed activity centers in kindergarten. With one exception, the
current findings did not support the hypothesis that prekindergarten teacher quality is a
moderator of alignment effects on children’s school readiness outcomes. The study
presents suggestions for further research.

iii
Acknowledgements
I am grateful to my committee, Professors Kristina Hesbol, Duan Zhang, Ellen
Miller-Brown, and Nicole Nicotera, for the guidance and support they have provided over
the past year. Special thanks to Kristina, who helped me to shape my research questions
early on and provided continuing encouragement throughout the process, and to Duan,
who guided me through the technical jungle that is HLM.
I am also thankful for my colleagues at the Butler Institute for Families who
cheered me on and inspired me along this journey. Thank you for providing such a
supportive work environment where I could learn and grow. Thanks also go to all the
wonderful people in my cohort these past four years. What a wonderful, fun group to
learn beside.
I am most thankful for my family, who encouraged me to pursue this dream, even
when it stole time from them. Mom and Dad, thank you for being such terrific role
models and for instilling a love of learning in me. Frederick, you have kept this family on
track when I have been buried in my computer. Aidan and Cole, you are my inspiration
and reason for all of this; I love you.
iv
Table of Contents
Abstract ............................................................................................................................... ii
Acknowledgements ............................................................................................................ iv
List of Tables .................................................................................................................... vii
Chapter One: Introduction .................................................................................................. 1
Overview ................................................................................................................. 1
Early Childhood Education Context ....................................................................... 4
School Readiness .................................................................................................... 5
Transition and P-3 Alignment ................................................................................. 9
Classroom Quality ................................................................................................ 12
Purpose of the Study ............................................................................................. 14
Research Questions ............................................................................................... 16
Limitations ............................................................................................................ 18
Operational Definitions ......................................................................................... 19
Chapter Two: Literature Review ...................................................................................... 23
Context .................................................................................................................. 23
Classroom Quality: System Components ............................................................. 24
Transition: System Interconnections..................................................................... 37
School Readiness and Later Achievement: System Purpose ................................ 42
Conceptual Framework ......................................................................................... 50
Chapter Three: Methods ................................................................................................... 52
Purpose of the Study ............................................................................................. 52
Research Questions ............................................................................................... 53
FACES 2009 ......................................................................................................... 55
Research Design.................................................................................................... 59
Procedure .............................................................................................................. 62
Data Analysis ........................................................................................................ 68
Limitations and Delimitations ............................................................................... 76
Chapter Four: Results ....................................................................................................... 78
Organization of Data Analysis .............................................................................. 78
Data Preparation and Missing Data ...................................................................... 80
Study 1: Cluster Analysis...................................................................................... 83
Study 2: Hierarchical Linear Modeling ................................................................ 92
Summary ............................................................................................................. 110
Chapter Five: Discussion ................................................................................................ 112
Summary of the Study ........................................................................................ 112
Findings............................................................................................................... 116
v
Conclusions ......................................................................................................... 120
Implications......................................................................................................... 129
Future Research .................................................................................................. 132
Summary ............................................................................................................. 134
References ....................................................................................................................... 136
Appendix A: Instrument Descriptions ............................................................................ 148

vi
List of Tables

Table 1. Assessment selections ......................................................................................... 62
Table 2. Items for alignment variables ............................................................................. 64
Table 3.Structural scales ................................................................................................... 66
Table 4. Transition items .................................................................................................. 67
Table 5. Generalized models for questions 1B and 1C ..................................................... 73
Table 6. Repeated measure collections ............................................................................. 74
Table 7. Summary of FACES 2009 data files................................................................... 80
Table 8. Child demographics for full cluster sample ........................................................ 84
Table 9. Alignment experiences for full cluster sample ................................................... 86
Table 10. Cluster means (z-scores) ................................................................................... 87
Table 11. Mean PK and K alignment scores by cluster .................................................... 89
Table 12. Demographics by cluster .................................................................................. 90
Table 13. Demographics for HLM3 sample ..................................................................... 93
Table 14. Descriptive statistics for HLM3 sample ........................................................... 95
Table 15. Predicting literacy from cluster membership .................................................... 98
Table 16. Predicting literacy from alignment factors ..................................................... 100
Table 17. Predicting math outcomes from cluster membership ..................................... 102
Table 18. Predicting math outcomes from alignment factors ......................................... 104
Table 19. Predicting social-emotional/approaches toward learning outcomes from cluster
membership ..................................................................................................................... 106
Table 20. Predicting social-emotional/approaches toward learning outcomes from
alignment factors ............................................................................................................. 108

vii
Chapter One: Introduction
Overview
Interest in early childhood education has expanded considerably since the
beginning of this decade, as evidenced by federal funding initiatives such as the Race to
the Top – Early Learning Challenge Fund and presidential advocacy for early childhood
education in the last two State of the Union addresses (The White House, 2013, 2014;
U.S. Department of Education & U.S. Department of Human Services, 2011; White
House Press Office, 2013). To varying degrees, individual states have also increased their
emphasis on and investment in early childhood education. Since the first Race to the Top
– Early Learning Challenge announcement in 2011, twenty states have won grants to
improve early care and education through improved quality rating systems, workforce
development initiatives, data strategies, and development of early learning standards
(U.S. Department of Education & U.S. Department of Human Services, 2014). Many
states have also acted independently to emphasize early childhood education and link it
with K-12 education expectations (Education Commission of the States, 2014a; Rose,
2012).
1