DEP 3130 FIU Influence of Preschool Attendance on Self Regulation Development Summary

Preschool Attendance as a Predictor
of Self-Regulation in Kindergarteners
Jedd P. Alejandro, Andrew M. Leslie, Brooke C. Manley, Amy F. Rivas,
Dominic M. Wiltermood, and Charlene K. Bainum*
Pacific Union College
ABSTRACT. Research has found that early childhood education positively
impacts the academic success and educational achievement of children all
the way through early adulthood (Barnett & Frede, 2010; Campbell &
Ramey, 1994; Lamy, 2013). Tough (2012) suggested that preschools help
children develop self-regulation skills that are necessary for educational
success. It was hypothesized that preschool attendance would predict higher
self-regulation than nonattendance, and that girls would have higher
self-regulation than boys, as measured by behavioral scores and teacher
ratings of self-regulation. Participants included 37 kindergartners. Preschool
attendees and nonattendees were tested by condition-blind researchers on
2 subtests of the Preschool Self-Regulation Assessment. Additionally,
teachers used items from the Children’s Self-Control Scale to rate
participants. A 2 x 2 (Condition x Sex) Analysis of Variance was performed
on the Balance Beam, the Gift Wrap Scores, and the teacher ratings of
behavioral and cognitive self-control. The Balance Beam Scores were higher
in the preschool condition than in the nonpreschool condition, F(1, 33)
= 6.18, p = .02, ?2 = .15. Also, the Gift Wrap Scores were higher in the
preschool condition than in the nonpreschool condition, F(1, 33) = 10.69,
p = .003, ?2 = .24. Teacher’s ratings of behavioral self-control for girls was
higher than for boys, F(1, 33) = 6.94, p = .01, ?2 = .17. Also teacher’s ratings
of cognitive self-control for girls was higher than for boys, F(1, 33) = 7.73,
p < .001, ?2 = .19. The benefit of preschool education for the acquisition of
self-regulation is addressed.
A
WINTER 2016
PSI CHI
JOURNAL OF
PSYCHOLOGICAL
RESEARCH
cademic performance is about more than
good test scores and a high grade point
average. The educational system seems
designed to teach students how to get along with
their peers, follow instructions, and solve problems,
among other things. All of these skills depend
on self-discipline as demonstrated by numerous
studies, which have shown that the most successful
students (behaviorally and academically) are those
who have high levels of self-discipline (Bear, 2010;
Denham et al., 2012; Duckworth & Seligman, 2005;
Kuhnle, Hofer, & Kilian, 2012; Rimm-Kaufman,
Curby, Grimm, Nathanson, & Brock, 2009).
Additionally, children who have higher levels of
self-regulation were found to have higher levels
of success in the future (Barnett & Frede, 2010;
Campbell & Ramey, 1994; Lamy, 2013).
Although self-discipline and self-regulation are
often closely tied in operational definitions, Rui
and Yi-Lung (2015) described self-discipline as the
ability to execute a task while suppressing the urge
to become engaged in distractors when pursuing
a goal. Although slightly different, self-regulation
was defined as the extent to which individuals
are able to demonstrate control over their own
behavior (Baumeister, Bratslavsky, Muraven, &
Tice, 1998; Shoda, Mischel, & Peake, 1990). Kopp
(1982) traced the development of self-regulation
222 COPYRIGHT 2016 BY PSI CHI, THE INTERNATIONAL HONOR SOCIETY IN PSYCHOLOGY (VOL. 21, NO. 4/ISSN 2164-8204)
*Faculty mentor
Alejandro, Leslie, Manley, Rivas, Wiltermood, and Bainum | Preschool as a Predictor of Self-Regulation
and noted that young children who manifested
only some degree of self-control, a precursor to
self-regulation, continued to have problems in
delaying gratification and were not able to make
use of diversionary strategies, behaviors necessary
in self-regulation. Because the terms self-regulation
and self-discipline are similar, the main distinction
between these definitions is the presence of an
alternative goal to be accomplished. This is found
in self-discipline, though is not necessarily required
for the operational definition of self-regulation.
Because Duckworth, Grant, Loew, Oettingen, and
Gollwitzer (2011) found that one probable mechanism by which students acquired self-discipline was
through self-regulation strategies, the current study
examined both self-discipline and self-regulation,
and specifically measured self-regulation as a means
of achieving self-discipline.
Researchers Duckworth and Seligman (2005)
substantiated the vital connection between selfdiscipline and academic performance. Their
study measured students’ academic performance
and self-discipline through standardized tests,
student surveys, and teacher questionnaires.
Self-disciplined students had better attendance
and performed better in academics compared
with students who were not self-disciplined. More
importantly, self-disciplined students were more
successful than students with a higher IQ. This
finding had implications for what increases academic performance and challenged the generally
accepted idea that a smarter student is a more
successful student. Similarly, Kuhnle et al. (2012)
suggested that self-control was important to success
both inside and outside of the classroom. In the
classroom, self-control helps students curb their
social impulses that distracted them from learning, and outside of the classroom, it helped them
schedule their free time for studies. The study used
eighth graders and took measurements of selfcontrol, life balance, and flow at the beginning and
end of the school year. Similar to Duckworth and
Seligman, they found that self-control predicted
school grades and was also related to life balance
and satisfaction of life.
Not only does the presence of self-discipline
have positive effects on academic performance,
but the lack of it may have negative effects as well.
Cleary, Platten, and Nelson (2008) found that
students who were referred for academic problems
were more likely to have a deficit in self-regulation
and motivation skills. Similarly, Lee, Cheng, and
Lin (2013) collected academic information from
adolescents, as well as surveys of self-control, an
indicator of self-regulation. According to the
results, self-control was necessary to sustain a
satisfactory quality of life. This further underlined
the importance of self-regulation in academic performance and to a general positive quality of life.
Research has pointed out the importance of
both self-discipline and self-regulation in academic
success. However, of more relevance is how and
whether self-regulation can be taught. Based on
his work in humanistic-experiential psychology,
Combs (1985) provided self-regulatory principles
as a means of achieving self-discipline that teachers
can use in the classroom. These included setting
the context for experiences of success and feelings
of belonging. Bear (2010) surveyed the current
research and presented strategies to encourage
self-discipline in the classroom. His comprehensive guide promoting self-discipline emphasizes
student-centered strategies and techniques in
which students learn to guide and regulate themselves. Duckworth et al. (2011) tested a method of
teaching self-regulation called mental contrasting.
This exercise includes thinking about dreams, leaving goals that are wasteful, and planning for the
future. As a result, the mental contrasting group
completed significantly more practice questions
than the control group, suggesting that behaviors
that encourage planning can have an impact on
an individual’s self-regulation.
Further research has suggested that the earlier
years in life are crucial in learning self-regulation.
For example, Rimm-Kaufman et al. (2009) found
that the quality of the classroom, more specifically
the teacher’s effectiveness in classroom management, was linked to children’s behavioral and
cognitive self-control, indicating that the nature
and quality of the classroom environment may
encourage students to be more self-regulated. In
addition, Lee et al. (2013) found that self-control
may be strengthened by increasing self-esteem
in earlier years. Fuhs, Farran, and Nesbitt (2013)
examined preschool teacher’s interactions and
behavior in the classroom, and found that more
approving behavior and positive emotional tone
were related to children’s subsequent gains in
cognitive self-regulation skills. Denham et al.
(2012) tested a large sample of 3- and 4-year-olds
on measures of emotion knowledge and preschool
self-regulation assessments in late fall and again in
early spring. Developmental changes in emotion
knowledge as well as self-regulation were seen, with
higher levels associated with later academic success.
COPYRIGHT 2016 BY PSI CHI, THE INTERNATIONAL HONOR SOCIETY IN PSYCHOLOGY (VOL. 21, NO. 4/ISSN 2164-8204)
WINTER 2016
PSI CHI
JOURNAL OF
PSYCHOLOGICAL
RESEARCH
223
Preschool as a Predictor of Self-Regulation | Alejandro, Leslie, Manley, Rivas, Wiltermood, and Bainum
WINTER 2016
PSI CHI
JOURNAL OF
PSYCHOLOGICAL
RESEARCH
Preschool, which is intended as a foundational
introduction to the workings of school life, is an
ideal launching pad from which self-regulation can
develop. The early acquisition of self-regulation
sets students on a positive trajectory, potentially
enabling them to reach greater achievements than
otherwise possible.
Further, Bassett, Denham, Wyatt, and WarrenKhot (2012) found a positive relationship between
teachers’ reports of children’s school readiness
and executive control, measured by an assessment
battery of preschooler’s self-regulation. More
recently, it was found that, although girls seem
to consistently earn better grades than boys in
early primary school, the mechanism to explain
this appears to be involved in teachers’ reports
of self-discipline (Duckworth et al., 2015). Using
teachers’ reports of kindergarten girls’ more positive learning approaches such as task persistence
and self-discipline, Ready, LoGerfo, Burkam, and
Lee (2005) also noted a strong connection between
high academic performance and self-discipline.
This combined research has suggested that,
from the start, girls seem to have the upper hand
with self-discipline and academic performance.
However, this pattern does not necessarily take
into account whether children were exposed to a
prekindergarten environment.
Raver (2012) determined that self-regulation is
modifiable (e.g., increasing executive functioning
skills) by earlier educational intervention, which
points to the necessity for accessible preschool
education for every child. Although Love, ChazanCohen, Raikes, and Brooks-Gunn (2013) did not
find differences in the early academic achievement
between Early Head Start (EHS) and non-EHS
students, they did find that EHS students had
better attention spans, more effective approaches
to learning, and fewer behavioral problems than
non-EHS students.
Currently, 30 states are attempting to draft
legislation that would make prekindergarten
education accessible to all. In the 2014 State of
the Union address, President Obama called on
Congress to invest in high-quality early education
for all (Kristof, 2014). The rationale behind this
movement is the research that has shown that early
childhood education will positively impact the
academic success and educational achievements
of children all the way up through early adulthood (Barnett & Frede, 2010; Campbell & Ramey,
1994; Lamy, 2013). Tough (2012) suggested that
preschools help children develop critical skills such
as self-regulation that are necessary for life success
rather than simply providing academic enrichment.
But before a national preschool education referendum should be set into law, more studies need
to be conducted to determine whether preschools
are in fact teaching critical skills like self-regulation.
To that end, the current study sought to
examine whether preschool attendance affected
self-regulation, and would thereby increase the
likelihood of acquiring self-discipline at an earlier
age. Based on previous research, we hypothesized
that preschool attendance would predict higher
self-regulation scores, measured by behavioral tests
and teacher ratings of kindergarten children. We
also hypothesized that self-regulation would be
higher for girls than for boys.
Method
Participants
Participants consisted of 37 children (17 girls,
20 boys) ranging in age from 4 to 6 years old
(M = 5.08, SD = 0.43) attending a small public
elementary school in northern California. The ethnic breakdown of the sample included 26 Hispanic
(70%) and 11 European American participants
(30%). Several of the Hispanic kindergarteners
were not proficient in English comprehension and
were tested by the Spanish speaking researcher.
With respect to preschool attendance, 28 children
(13 girls, 15 boys) had attended preschool and
nine (4 girls, 5 boys) had not. The 28 children
who had attended preschool consisted of seven
(25%) European American and 21 (75%) Hispanic participants. The nine children who had
not attended preschool consisted of four (44%)
European American and five (56%) Hispanic participants. Although participants were selected on
the basis of signed parental consent forms, children
signaled their assent when they agreed to leave the
classroom with the experimenter and be tested in
a nearby area.
Materials
Two subtests from the Preschool Self-Regulation
Assessment (Smith-Donald, Raver, Hayes, & Richardson, 2007) were used to assess self-regulation
in the kindergarten children: Balance Beam and
Gift Wrap. These subtests were selected because
Smith-Donald et al. (2007) found high reliabilities
(intraclass correlation); the Balance Beam task
had a reliability of .98 and the Gift Wrap had a
reliability of .90 (peek) and .81 (touch). They were
also selected for their ease of administration and
224 COPYRIGHT 2016 BY PSI CHI, THE INTERNATIONAL HONOR SOCIETY IN PSYCHOLOGY (VOL. 21, NO. 4/ISSN 2164-8204)
Alejandro, Leslie, Manley, Rivas, Wiltermood, and Bainum | Preschool as a Predictor of Self-Regulation
because extensive experimenter training was not
required, thus minimizing potential error.
For the Balance Beam task, a simulated
balance beam was made from a 6-foot piece of
masking tape. The piece of tape was placed on the
floor for subjects to walk on like a balance beam.
Participants were asked to walk across the beam
as slowly as they could (measured in seconds) on
three different trials. In Trial 1, they were simply
instructed to walk the balance beam. In Trial 2,
they were asked to walk as slowly as possible. For
Trial 3, participants were asked to walk even more
slowly. Larger differences between Trial 3 and Trial
1 related to higher levels of behavioral self-control.
The Gift Wrap portion of the experiment used
scissors, wrapping paper, and 37 prewrapped pencil
gifts. The scissors and wrapping paper were used
to simulate the wrapping of a gift; the gifts were
already wrapped to save time during data collection. Self-regulation was measured by timing how
long (up to 60 s) participants would wait without
peeking at the gift while the researcher was wrapping the gift and how long participants would wait
without touching the gift (up to 60 s). The time
without peeking and the time without touching
the gift were summed, and higher scores related to
higher levels of cognitive self-regulation. The cognitive self-regulation score from the Gift Wrap and
behavioral self-regulation score from the Balance
Beam were summed to obtain a combined behavioral score of self-regulation. Higher scores related
to higher levels of self-regulation. Children’s times
from the Balance Beam and the Gift Wrap sections
were scored on a data sheet (see Appendix A).
Teachers were given a rating sheet comprised
of a modified Teacher’s Self-Control Rating Scale
(Humphrey, 1982). The original scale rated
participants’ cognitive and behavioral levels of
self-regulation with test-retest reliabilities of .93
and .88, respectively. This scale rates the frequency
of several behaviors on a 7-point Likert-type scale
from 1 (hardly ever) to 7 (frequently). Although
Humphrey used a 5-point scale, to allow for higher
order analyses the scale was expanded to a 7-point
scale. Only three items from each subsection were
used in order to help make the rating scale shorter,
quicker, and less onerous for the teachers to fill
out. The three items of cognitive self-control were
“sticks to what he or she is doing, even during a
lengthy, unpleasant task,” “anticipates the consequences of his/her actions,” and “works toward
goals,” which had test-retest reliabilities of .95, .57,
and .93, respectively. The three items of behavioral
self-control were “talks out of turn,” “gets into fights
with other children,” and “disrupts others when
they are doing things,” with reliabilities of .79, .78,
and .76, respectively. These behavioral self-control
items were reverse-scored so that higher ratings
related to higher levels of self-control
Procedure
Prior to conducting the study, the researchers
received institutional review board approval from
Pacific Union College in a letter dated October 22,
2013. Researchers were blind to which students had
attended preschool and which had not during data
collection. Five researchers (3 men and 2 women)
individually introduced themselves to participants.
There were no sex difference detected for the
researchers on the children’s self-regulation scores.
Each participant was taken outside the classroom
where masking tape simulating a balance beam
was on the ground. The researcher instructed
participants to walk the balance beam from one
end to the other. Trial 1 was timed and recorded.
Next, participants were told to rewalk the balance
beam as slowly as they could for Trial 2. Finally,
participants were told to walk the balance beam for
Trial 3 even more slowly if possible. The third trial
was also timed and recorded, and the difference
between Trial 3 and Trial 1 was used to determine
the child’s level of self-regulation.
For the Gift Wrap test, participants were told
that they would receive a gift for their participation
but that it first needed to be wrapped. Participants
were instructed to turn around in their seat and
told that they should not peek while the gift was
being wrapped. The researcher pretended to wrap
the present by creating noise with wrapping paper
and a scissors. When the participant peeked or at
60 s, the participant was allowed to turn around and
the time was recorded. Next, the gift was placed in
front of the participant, who was instructed not to
touch the present, while the experimenter finished
cleaning up the wrapping paper. During these
60 s, or until the participant touched the present,
the researcher would clean up the surrounding
area, and the time was recorded. The sum of the
two intervals determined a second measure of selfregulation. The Gift Wrap and the Balance Beam
measures were added to make a behavioral score
of self-regulation. At the end, participants were
thanked and praised for their participation. They
were also told to put their gift in their backpack
so that their classmates would not be able to see
the gift.
COPYRIGHT 2016 BY PSI CHI, THE INTERNATIONAL HONOR SOCIETY IN PSYCHOLOGY (VOL. 21, NO. 4/ISSN 2164-8204)
WINTER 2016
PSI CHI
JOURNAL OF
PSYCHOLOGICAL
RESEARCH
225
Preschool as a Predictor of Self-Regulation | Alejandro, Leslie, Manley, Rivas, Wiltermood, and Bainum
In addition to these two subtests, the kindergarten teachers filled out selected items from
the Children’s Self-Control Scale, which rated
participants’ cognitive and behavioral levels of
self-regulation (Humphrey, 1982).
Descriptive Statistics
Measured in seconds, the Balance Beam Scores
(M = 4.41, SD = 9.73) and Gift Wrap Scores
(M = 95.01, SD = 33.90) were used as two behavioral
measures of self-regulation. The Children’s SelfControl Scale, which measured each kindergartener’s cognitive (M = 14.68, SD = 6.85) and behavioral
(M = 13.89, SD = 5.31) levels of self-regulation,
provided a teacher rating of self-regulation for each
kindergartener (M = 28.57, SD = 10.82). Tables 1
through 4 summarize the means, standard error
of the means, and confidence intervals for the Balance Beam and Gift Wrap Scores and the teacher
TABLE 1
TABLE 2
Estimated Marginal Means of Sex, Condition, and
the Interaction for the Balance Beam Scores
Estimated Marginal Means of Sex, Condition,
and the Interaction for the Gift Wrap Scores
Results
95% CI
95% CI
Variable
Variable
M
SE
LL
UL
M
SE
LL
UL
1.50
2.32
-3.22
6.22
Men
87.92
7.92
71.80
104.03
8.09
Women
81.80
8.77
63.95
99.64
Preschool
104.18
5.81
92.35
116.01
No preschool
65.53
10.29
44.59
86.47
106.43
7.92
90.32
122.55
Sex
Sex
Men
Women
2.86
2.57
-2.36
Condition
Condition
Preschool
6.49
1.70
3.02
9.95
No preschool
-2.12
3.02
-8.26
4.01
Sex*Condition
Sex*Condition
Male-Preschool
8.29
2.32
3.57
13.01
Male-Preschool
Male-No preschool
-5.28
4.02
-13.46
2.89
Male-No preschool
69.40
13.72
41.48
97.32
Female-Preschool
4.69
2.49
-0.38
9.76
Female-Preschool
101.93
8.51
84.62
119.24
Female-No preschool
1.04
4.49
-8.10
10.18
Female-No preschool
61.66
15.34
30.45
92.87
Note. CI = confidence interval; LL = lower limit; UL = upper limit.
Note. CI = confidence interval; LL = lower limit; UL = upper limit.
TABLE 3
TABLE 4
Estimated Marginal Means of Sex, Condition,
and the Interaction for the Teacher Ratings
of Cognitive Self-Control
Estimated Marginal Means of Sex, Condition,
and the Interaction for the Teacher Ratings
of Behavioral Self-Control
95% CI
Variable
M
SE
LL
95% CI
UL
Sex
SE
LL
UL
Men
11.47
1.27
8.88
14.05
Men
12.03
1.63
8.73
15.34
16.74
1.40
13.88
19.60
Women
18.42
1.80
14.76
22.09
Condition
Preschool
14.08
0.933
12.18
15.98
Preschool
14.66
1.19
12.23
17.08
No preschool
14.13
1.65
10.77
17.49
No preschool
15.80
2.11
11.50
20.10
Sex*Condition
PSI CHI
JOURNAL OF
PSYCHOLOGICAL
RESEARCH
M
Women
Condition
WINTER 2016
Variable
Sex
Sex*Condition
Male-Preschool
11.93
1.27
9.35
14.52
Male-Preschool
11.47
1.63
8.16
14.78
Male-No preschool
11.00
2.20
6.52
15.48
Male-No preschool
12.60
2.82
6.87
18.33
Female-Preschool
16.23
1.37
13.45
19.01
Female-Preschool
17.85
1.75
14.29
21.40
Female-No preschool
17.25
2.46
12.24
22.26
Female-No preschool
19.00
3.15
12.59
25.41
Note. CI = confidence interval; LL = lower limit; UL = upper limit.
Note. CI = confidence interval; LL = lower limit; UL = upper limit.
226 COPYRIGHT 2016 BY PSI CHI, THE INTERNATIONAL HONOR SOCIETY IN PSYCHOLOGY (VOL. 21, NO. 4/ISSN 2164-8204)
Alejandro, Leslie, Manley, Rivas, Wiltermood, and Bainum | Preschool as a Predictor of Self-Regulation
ratings on cognitive and behavioral items of the
Children’s Self-Control Scale.
Primary Analysis
To test the hypotheses that preschool attendance
and child sex would predict higher self-regulation
in kindergarteners, a 2 x 2 (Condition [preschool,
no preschool] x Sex) between-subjects Analysis of
Variance was performed on the Balance Beam and
the Gift Wrap Scores. The Balance Beam Scores
were significantly higher in the preschool attendance condition (M = 6.62, SD = 8.68) than in the
no preschool attendance condition (M = -2.47, SD
= 10.06), F(1, 33) = 6.18, p = .02, ?2 = .15. Also, the
Gift Wrap Scores were significantly higher for those
in the preschool attendance condition (M = 104.34,
SD = 22.99) than in the no preschool attendance
condition (M = 65.96, SD = 46.18), F(1, 33) = 10.69,
p = .003, ?2 = .24. There were no significant main
effects for sex or condition by sex interactions for
the Balance Beam and Gift Wrap Scores. To further
test the hypothesis that preschool attendance and
child sex would predict higher self-regulation in
kindergarten children, a 2 x 2 (Condition [preschool, no preschool] x Sex) between-subjects
Analysis of Variance was performed on the teacher
ratings of behavioral self-control and the teacher
ratings of cognitive self-control. The main effect
for sex was significant with teacher’s ratings of
behavioral self-control for girls (M = 18.12, SD =
5.22) higher than for boys (M = 11.75, SD = 6.81),
F(1, 33) = 6.94, p = .01, ?2 = .17. In addition, the
main effect for sex was significant with teacher’s
ratings of cognitive self-control for girls (M = 16.47,
SD = 3.67) higher than for boys (M = 11.70, SD =
5.58), F(1, 33) = 7.73, p < .001, ?2 = .19. There were
no significant main effects for condition or condition by sex interactions for the teacher ratings of
behavioral or cognitive self-control.
Discussion
The results of the current study were mixed in support of the hypothesis that preschool attendance
would be an important predictor of self-regulation
in kindergarten children. Preschool attendees
were better able to regulate their speed during
the Balance Beam test and manage their urge to
touch or peak at the present during the Gift Wrap
test. However, the teacher ratings of self-regulation
did not corroborate the behavioral measures and
failed to differentiate between those who had been
to preschool and those who had not. Additionally, the correlations between teacher ratings and
behavioral measures of self-regulation were not
significant. This was contrary to the findings of
Rimm-Kaufman et al. (2009) who found teacher
ratings and behavioral measures of self-regulation
to be highly correlated. One explanation may lie
in the difference between teacher ratings for boys
and girls.
It is possible that the sex differences found
in teacher ratings of self-regulation were due to
the subjective nature of self-report surveys. The
hypothesis that girls would have higher levels of
self-regulation than boys, though not supported in
the behavioral scores of self-regulation, was found
in the teacher ratings of self-regulation. This sex
bias in teacher ratings found in the current study
supported the research of Miller, Koplewicz, and
Klein (1997) who found evidence that preschool
boys were rated much higher than girls in hyperactivity, inattention, and conduct problems in the
classroom. Given that this sex difference in the current study was only present in the subjective views
of the teachers, it is possible that this difference
is due to a sex bias in primary school instructors.
Pollack (1998) believed that many teachers suffer
from the myth of boys’ toxicity, which states that
part of being a boy is misbehaving and getting into
trouble. This might explain why teacher ratings
of self-regulation for boys were lower despite the
fact that boys were no different from girls on their
ability to self-regulate on the Balance Beam and
Gift Wrap tasks.
A unique aspect of the current study was having both dual language learners (DLL) and English-only (EO) children in the sample. Although
research (Yazejian, Bryant, Freel, & Burchinal,
2015) has shown that age of entry and duration in
preschool yielded higher language outcomes for
both populations, there was a bigger difference for
those who were DLL. This suggests that the DLL
who attended preschool may not have had any
discernible difficulty understanding the simple task
directions, and having a Spanish translator available may have eliminated most instances of misunderstanding due to language comprehension.
One limitation of the study might have been
that some participants realized that they were
being timed during the Balance Beam trials, and
this might have affected their performance. The
possibility of demand characteristics could have
influenced the data in the opposite direction of
the hypothesis. Future studies should find a way
for researchers to record the time in a less conspicuous way.
COPYRIGHT 2016 BY PSI CHI, THE INTERNATIONAL HONOR SOCIETY IN PSYCHOLOGY (VOL. 21, NO. 4/ISSN 2164-8204)
WINTER 2016
PSI CHI
JOURNAL OF
PSYCHOLOGICAL
RESEARCH
227
Preschool as a Predictor of Self-Regulation | Alejandro, Leslie, Manley, Rivas, Wiltermood, and Bainum
WINTER 2016
PSI CHI
JOURNAL OF
PSYCHOLOGICAL
RESEARCH
Similarly, the gift items used in the Gift Wrap
test were pencils, which were easily identifiable as
pencils when wrapped. This could have dissuaded
the children from wanting to peek or touch the
gift, which would confound the essential detail of
the subtest. Future research could control for this
by wrapping the item in a more concealed manner.
The current study also did not provide the specific
practices that were implemented or quality of
the preschools that the participants attended. In
addition, there was no access to socioeconomic
information or parenting styles of either preschool
or nonpreschool attendees. Further, there was no
way to evaluate whether these factors influenced
the self-regulation of students going through these
preschool programs.
Despite these limitations, there are some
significant outcomes, which could offer additional
perspectives into the effectiveness of preschool.
Because the students who attended preschool had
the ability to better control themselves in each task,
their high self-regulation level predicted that they
will be more ready to enter a kindergarten learning environment. Children with higher levels of
self-regulation were found to have higher levels
of future academic success (Barnett & Frede,
2010; Campbell & Ramey, 1994; Lamy, 2013). The
current study offered additional evidence that selfregulation is present in primary school children
who have attended preschool. Preschool is a valid
avenue of learning self-regulation. Therefore,
because of this connection between early childhood
self-regulation and later academic success, it is
important that states work to improve and provide
access to preschool programs.
However, these findings and practical significance do not stop here. The current study may also
serve as an agent to inspire future research into
how self-regulation is formed. Although we found
that primary school children who had gone to
preschool were significantly more self-regulated
than those who had not, the current study did not
find a correlation between behavioral measures
and teacher rat

Needs help with similar assignment?

We are available 24x7 to deliver the best services and assignment ready within 6-12 hours? Order a custom-written, plagiarism-free paper

Order Over WhatsApp Place an Order Online