U.S. Department of Education

Office of Planning, Evaluation and Policy Development

Policy and Program Studies Service 

Results in Brief:

Preschool Through Third Grade Alignment and Differentiated 

Instruction: A Literature Review

August 2016

Research shows that participation in a high-quality preschool can improve young children’s readiness skills for elementary school, 

positively influencing behavioral, social-emotional, and cognitive outcomes. Specifically, for children who may be at risk for 

academic challenges in early elementary school, attending a high-quality preschool can improve test scores and attendance, and it 

can reduce placement in special education and grade-level retention. However, some preschool program evaluations document 

that initial benefits may not persist into early elementary school.

Some early childhood experts assert that the effects of preschool may diminish if curricula and instructional strategies from preschool 

through grade 3 are not well aligned. A second explanation for why initial benefits of preschool may not persist is that children who 

make early gains in preschool may not have the opportunity to maintain their growth rate or learning trajectory because early 

elementary instruction may focus on students who are less prepared and have low-level skills. This literature review aimed to 

better understand the research behind these two theories and focused on preschool and K–3 alignment and differentiated 

instruction in kindergarten and first grade. The review of differentiated instruction excluded studies that focused exclusively on 

low-achieving students because of the priority on differentiated instruction as a way to help sustain the gains children make in 

preschool.

STUDY QUESTIONS

1. What approaches does the research and theoretical

literature suggest for aligning preschool through third 

grade (P–3) education, and what is the quality of the

research studies? 

2. What are the findings from studies of differentiated 

instruction on children in kindergarten and first grade, 

and what is the quality of these studies?

DESIGN

To gather literature, the review team conducted keyword 

searches related to P–3 alignment and differentiated 

instruction in nine widely used education and psychology 

electronic databases. Searches focused on articles 

published between January 2003 and July 2014. All studies 

that used quantitative designs—including randomized 

controlled trials (RCTs), quasi-experimental designs (QEDs),

and pretest/post-test and correlational designs—were 

included if they focused on child-level developmental 

outcomes, such as academic outcomes, cognitive outcomes, 

and/or social and behavioral outcomes for students. 

Qualitative studies that focused on implementation were 

also included in the review. The review for the P–3 

alignment topic also included theory and policy articles. 

Because the review for the differentiated instruction topic 

included studies that employed a rigorous design (i.e., RCTs 

and QEDs), the research team appraised the research 

methods using systematic research standards designed by 

the What Works Clearinghouse; however, this review is not 

a product of the What Works Clearinghouse.

HIGHLIGHTS

 Nearly all qualitative studies and policy and theory 

articles on P–3 alignment suggest aligning standards, 

curriculum, instruction, assessments, and environments 

across preschool and grades K–3.

 P–3 alignment could be supported by establishing similar 

teacher education and training requirements and 

developing longitudinal data systems that integrate 

preschool and K–12 data.

 None of the three quantitative studies of P–3 alignment 

used experimental or quasi-experimental designs to 

examine impacts of preschool and K–3 alignment 

interventions.

 Common challenges to P–3 alignment include policies 

that inhibit the blending of funds and the instability of 

preschool funding.

 Of the 17 quantitative studies of differentiated instruction,

one RCT of the Individualized Student Instruction With 

Assessment to Instruction intervention demonstrated 

positive results on reading outcomes and had the potential 

to meet the criteria for strong causal evidence.

 Less rigorous quantitative studies of differentiated 

instruction demonstrated mixed results on reading and 

writing outcomes.

 Qualitative studies of differentiated instruction indicate 

that opportunities for peer collaboration and guidance by 

mentors may be helpful to improve teacher practice 

related to differentiation.
PRESCHOOL AND K–3 ALIGNMENT

The P–3 alignment topic includes 49 policy or theory 

resources, nine qualitative studies, three quantitative 

studies, and one mixed-methods study.

Preschool and grades K–3 (P–3) alignment entails 

alignment of standards, curriculum, instruction, 

assessments, and environments across grade. Classroom 

environments should be similar across P–3: All classes 

should be small; preschool and kindergarten, in particular, 

should have similar classroom structures and environments.

Kindergarten readiness standards and kindergarten entry 

assessments can serve as mechanisms to facilitate 

alignment from preschool to kindergarten.

According to the theory and policy literature, the ultimate 

goal of alignment is to ease children’s transitions into 

school and across grade levels. Examples of specific 

transition practices include (1) the transfer of records from 

prekindergarten to kindergarten, (2) kindergarten 

classroom visits for children prior to entering kindergarten, 

or (3) parent orientations prior to the beginning of 

kindergarten.

Establishing similar teacher education and training 

requirements, and equivalent compensation across 

preschool and elementary education job positions, would 

support P–3 alignment. The creation of P–3 teacher 

certification programs provides an opportunity to build a 

shared educational philosophy among early childhood 

educators and elementary school teachers of the K–3 

grades, thus increasing alignment.

Longitudinal student data systems that integrate 

preschool with K–12 data, P–3 teacher professional 

development on data use, and cross-grade planning time 

would support the use of student assessment data in P–3 

instruction planning. The theory and policy literature 

recommends development of longitudinal P–12 or P–20 

data systems that link data from public and private early 

care and education programs to public school data.

District administrators and principals support the 

implementation of P−3 initiatives by involving teachers in 

the planning process, ensuring fidelity of implementation, 

measuring student achievement benchmarks, and holding 

administrators and teaching staff accountable.

Common challenges to P–3 alignment include policies that 

inhibit the blending of funds, instability of preschool 

funding, resistance among practitioners to integration of 

preschool and K–3 grades, and the organization of 

elementary education classrooms, buildings, and 

enrollment. K–3 administrators, teachers, and early 

childhood providers may resist the idea of combining or 

aligning preschool with grades K–3 because there is a 

perception of significant philosophical differences between 

early childhood and elementary grade teachers.

DIFFERENTIATED INSTRUCTION

The differentiated instruction topic includes 21 studies, 

including 17 quantitative studies and 4 qualitative studies 

focused on students in kindergarten or grade 1. Of the 17 

quantitative studies, 7 were RCTs, 6 were QEDs, and 4 were 

other non-rigorous designs (i.e., descriptive and singlegroup pretest/post-test designs) to examine the effects of 

differentiated instruction on achievement.

Of the 17 quantitative studies of differentiated instruction, 

one RCT of the Individualized Student Instruction With 

Assessment to Instruction intervention demonstrated 

positive results on reading outcomes and had the 

potential to meet the criteria for strong causal evidence.

Five RCTs of this specific intervention that did not meet the 

criteria for strong causal evidence also showed positive 

outcomes. 

Less rigorous quantitative studies of differentiated 

instruction demonstrated mixed results on reading and 

writing outcomes. One RCT that did not meet the criteria 

for strong causal evidence did not find any effects when 

comparing the strategies of (1) grouping students by 

learning style preferences (i.e., visual, auditory, tactile, or 

kinesthetic), with (2) grouping students by pre-intervention 

reading achievement. 

Seven quantitative studies (five QEDS, one pretest/post-test

design, and one descriptive design) examined small-group 

differentiated instruction approaches for reading and 

showed mixed results. 

Three quantitative studies (one QED and two single-group 

pretest/post-test designs) suggest that some students may 

benefit from collaborative, interactive writing sessions or 

from specific writing tools or prompts.

Qualitative studies of differentiated instruction indicate 

that opportunities for peer collaboration and guidance by 

mentors may be helpful to improve teacher practice 

related to differentiation. Four qualitative studies provided 

information about processes and strategies for 

implementing differentiated instruction for mathematics

but do not provide evidence of effects. These small studies, 

which focused on perceptions of facilitators or barriers to 

implementation, suggest that differentiated instruction 

requires careful planning and reflection on the part of 

teachers.