U.S. Department of Education

Toward the Identification of 

Features of Effective 

Professional Development for 

Early Childhood Educators

Literature Review
Toward the Identification of 

Features of Effective 

Professional Development for 

Early Childhood Educators

Literature Review

Prepared for

U.S. Department of Education

Office of Planning, Evaluation and Policy Development

Policy and Program Studies Service

By

Martha Zaslow

Kathryn Tout

Tamara Halle

Jessica Vick Whittaker

Bridget Lavelle

Child Trends

Washington, D.C.

2010
This report was prepared for the U.S. Department of Education under Contract No. ED04-CO-0038/0002 by Child Trends. James Maxwell served as the contracting officer's 

representative. The views expressed herein do not necessarily represent the positions or 

policies of the Department of Education. No official endorsement by the U.S. Department 

of Education of any product, commodity, service or enterprise mentioned in this 

publication is intended or should be inferred. 

U.S. Department of Education

Arne Duncan

Secretary

Office of Planning, Evaluation and Policy Development

Carmel Martin

Assistant Secretary

Policy and Program Studies Service

Alan L. Ginsburg

Director

August 2010

This report is in the public domain. Authorization to reproduce it in whole or in part is 

granted. While permission to reprint this publication is not necessary, the citation should 

be: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Planning, Evaluation and Policy 

Development, Policy and Program Studies Service, Toward the Identification of Features 

of Effective Professional Development for Early Childhood Educators, Literature 

Review. Washington, D.C., 2010. 

This report is available on the Department’s Web site at 

http://www.ed.gov/about/offices/list/opepd/ppss/reports.html.

On request, this publication is available in alternative formats, such as Braille, large print 

or computer diskette. For more information, please contact the Department’s Alternate 

Format Center at 202-260-0852 or 202-260-0818.
iii

Contents

List of Figures and Tables................................................................................................... v

Acknowledgments............................................................................................................. vii

Executive Summary........................................................................................................... ix

I: Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 1

A. The Literature on Professional Development of Early Childhood Educators ......... 2

B. Strategy of Review................................................................................................... 4

C. Orientation to the Tables.......................................................................................... 6

C. 1. Methodology Table ............................................................................ 7

C. 2. Table on Content of Professional Development ................................ 7

C. 3. Table on Outcomes............................................................................. 8

II: Toward the Identification of Features of Effective Professional Development 

for Early Childhood Educators ............................................................................... 9

A. Enhancing the Human and Social Capital of Early Childhood Educators 

as Targets of Early Childhood Professional Development............................... 9

A.1. Education of Early Educators ............................................................. 9

A.1a. Earlier and More Recent Evidence Linking the Education 

 of Early Educators with Educator Knowledge, Educator 

 Practice and Child Outcomes................................................. 10

A.1b. Possible Interpretations of the Recent Findings............... 11

A. 2. Training of Early Educators............................................................. 13

A. 2a. Studies of Association..................................................... 13

A. 2b. Evaluation Studies. ......................................................... 14

A. 2c. Needed Next Steps in Research on Training................... 15

A. 3. Literacy Levels of Early Educators.................................................. 15

A. 3a. Low Literacy as an Issue Among Early Educators......... 15

A. 3b. Possible Approaches to Strengthening Literacy Among

Early Educators.......................................................16

A. 4. Early Educators’ Psychological Well-being .................................... 17

A. 4a. Descriptive Studies of Depressive Symptoms and 

 Stress and Their Correlates.................................................... 17

A.4b. Initial Findings from Intervention Studies....................... 18

III: Strengthening the Institutions and Organizations Providing Professional 

Development......................................................................................................... 19

B. 1. Quality of Higher Education Programs............................................ 19

B. 1a. Accreditation of Higher Education Programs for Early

 Educators .............................................................................. 19

B. 1b. Perspectives of Directors of Higher Education 

 Programs. .............................................................................. 20

B. 2. Content of Course Work .................................................................. 21

B. 2a. Exploratory Findings on Course Content and 

 External Standards. ............................................................... 21

B. 2b. Exploratory Findings on Balance of Course Focus 

 On Knowledge, Assessment, Planning and Teaching. .......... 21

B. 3. Strategies to Engage Adult Learners................................................ 22
iv

B. 3a. Characteristics of “Nontraditional” Students.................. 22

B. 3b. Early Perceptions of Participants in Cohort 

 Approaches to Supporting Nontraditional Students.............. 23

B. 4. Need for Focus on Strengthening the Institutions That Provide 

Training as Well as Higher Education.......................................... 23

IV: Professional Development Targeting Improvement in Specific Developmental 

Domains for Children ........................................................................................... 25

C. 1. Early Language and Literacy ........................................................... 25

C. 1a. Overview of Studies Reviewed ....................................... 25

C. 1b. Study Designs and Methodologies.................................. 33

C. 1c. Patterns of Findings......................................................... 34

C. 1d. Implementation of Professional Development................ 38

C. 1e. Sustainability of Effects. ................................................. 43

C. 1f. Overall Summary of Findings for the Early 

Language and Literacy Studies Reviewed................................. 46

C. 2. Early Mathematics............................................................................ 50

C. 2a. Overview of Studies Reviewed. ...................................... 50

C. 2b. Study Designs.................................................................. 55

C. 2c. Patterns of Findings......................................................... 57

C. 2d. Implementation of Professional Development................ 59

C. 2e. Sustainability of Effects. ................................................ 60

C. 3 Child Social Behavior ....................................................................... 61

C. 3a. Overview of Studies Reviewed. ...................................... 61

C. 3b. Study Designs and Methodology. ................................... 64

C. 3c. Patterns of Findings......................................................... 66

C. 3d. Implementation of Professional Development................ 67

C. 3e. Sustainability of Effects. ................................................. 68

V: Approaches to Strengthening the Overall Quality of Early Care and Education 

Settings.................................................................................................................. 69

D. 1. Comprehensive Curricula ................................................................ 69

D. 1a. Overview of Studies Reviewed....................................... 69

D. 1b. Study Designs and Methodology.................................... 70

D. 1c. Patterns of Findings......................................................... 71

D. 1d. Implementation of Professional Development................ 72

D. 1e. Sustainability of Effects.................................................. 72

D. 2 General Approaches in Professional Development .......................... 72

D. 2a. Overview of Studies Reviewed....................................... 72

D. 2b. Study Designs ................................................................. 74

D. 2c. Patterns of Findings......................................................... 76

D. 2d. Implementation of Professional Development................ 79

D. 2e. Sustainability of Effects.................................................. 82

VI: Conclusions ................................................................................................................ 83

References......................................................................................................................... 89

Appendix A......................................................................................................................103
v

Figures and Tables

Figure 1. Targets of Early Childhood Professional Development Initiatives......................x

Table 1. Characteristics of Language and Literacy Studies Reviewed ............................ 27

Table 2. Characteristics of Early Mathematics Studies Reviewed ....................................50

Table 3. Characteristics of Child Social Behavior Studies Reviewed...............................61

Table 4. Characteristics of Comprehensive Curricula Studies Reviewed .........................69

Table 5. Characteristics of General Approaches Studies Reviewed..................................73

Table A-1a. Language and Literacy Studies: Methodology............................................105

Table A-1b. Language and Literacy Studies: Features of Professional 

Development........................................................................................................120

Table A-1c. Language and Literacy Studies: Outcomes.................................................135

Table A-2a. Early Mathematics Studies: Methodology...................................................150

Table A-2b. Early Mathematics Studies: Features of Professional 

Development........................................................................................................157

Table A-2c. Early Mathematics Studies: Outcomes........................................................164

Table A-3a. Child Social Behavior Studies: Methodology..............................................171

Table A-3b. Child Social Behavior Studies: Features of Professional 

Development........................................................................................................184

Table A-3c. Child Social Behavior Studies: Outcomes...................................................197

Table A-4a. Comprehensive Curricula Studies: Methodology .......................................210

Table A-4b. Comprehensive Curricula Studies: Features of Professional 

 Development.........................................................................................................218

Table A-4c. Comprehensive Curricula Studies: Outcomes.............................................226

Table A-5a. General Approaches Studies: Methodology................................................234

Table A-5b. General Approaches Studies: Features of Professional 

Development........................................................................................................240

Table A-5c. General Approaches Studies: Outcomes.....................................................246
vi
vii

Acknowledgments

We wish to thank Nicole Forry, Laura Wandner, Meagan McSwiggan and Julia Wessel 

for multiple contributions to the preparation of this literature review. The authors thank 

the members of the Technical Work Group who provided a great deal of thoughtful and 

thought-provoking feedback on an earlier draft of this literature review. We also wish to 

thank several anonymous reviewers of an earlier draft of this paper for their extremely 

helpful comments. The feedback we received has guided a deeper exploration of this 

literature and has been greatly appreciated.
viii
ix

Executive Summary

Programs and policymakers face numerous challenges as they develop and implement 

professional development strategies for the early childhood workforce. The field lacks 

consistent standards and requirements for professional preparation, and, as a result, low 

levels of education and a minimum of specialized training in early childhood education 

are the norm. Less than one-third of the institutions of higher education offering twoand four-year degrees have programs in early childhood education, and those programs 

that exist must address the needs of nontraditional students who are likely to be juggling 

family and work responsibilities and logistical issues that make it difficult to attend class 

and complete course requirements (Early and Winton 2001). And, low wages and 

benefits for early childhood educators are linked to high turnover of staff in both centerbased and home-based programs.

Yet, policymakers and parents have high expectations for the early childhood field and 

the children who are cared for in early childhood settings. There is an increasing 

recognition that the relationship a child has with a teacher or caregiver that is both 

sensitive and stimulating is the central and most critical component of quality in early 

care and education (National Research Council and Institute of Medicine, Shonkoff, and 

Phillips 2000). In a comprehensive review of what is known about how young children 

learn and develop and the implications of this knowledge for the care and education of 

children, the Committee on Early Childhood Pedagogy concluded, “There is a serious 

mismatch between the preparation (and compensation) of the average early childhood 

professional and the growing expectations of parents and policy makers” (National 

Research Council 2001, p. 261). Current strategies of professional development do not 

adequately prepare all educators for the array of responsibilities, knowledge, and skills 

they are expected to demonstrate in their work with young children and their families. 

Methods 

This review incorporates findings from research on four targets of early childhood 

professional development: 1) strengthening human or social capital; 2) strengthening 

practices at institutions or organizations providing professional development; 3) 

strengthening early educator practices related to specific child outcomes; and, 4) 

strengthening overall quality in classroom or group settings (see Figure 1). Research in 

each target area was reviewed, and for the two last areas (on specific content areas and 

overall quality of education and care for young children) for which there is a body of 

evaluation research, details about the specific studies were analyzed.

The literature review analyzed the research on professional development of early 

childhood educators to work toward identification of a set of core features that 

characterize effective professional development. 
x

Figure 1. Targets of Early Childhood Professional Development Initiatives 

Targets of Early Childhood Professional Development Initiatives

Strengthening 

Educator 

Human and/or 

Social Capital

Increasing 

early educator 

educational 

attainment 

Increasing 

early educator 

training in early 

childhood 

education

Improving 

early educator 

literacy

Improving 

early educator 

psychological 

well-being

Strengthening Practices at 

Institution or Organization 

Providing Professional 

Development

Improving overall program 

quality in higher education ECE 

programs and training 

programs

Aligning content of courses 

or workshops with research 

and standards 

Adapting IHE programs for 

nontraditional learners 

Modify approach to include 

all early educators and 

administrators in a site in 

professional development to 

create community of learners 

Strengthening Early 

Educator Practices 

Related to Specific Child 

Outcomes

Provide training on 

implementation of early 

childhood curricula focusing 

on specific content areas:

Language and literacy

Math

Social and emotional 

development

Provide on-site follow-up 

support 

Use targeted measure of 

quality to improve practices 

in specific domains

Language and literacy 

Math

Strengthening 

Overall Quality in 

Classroom or 

Group Setting

On-site coaching 

or technical 

assistance to 

improve overall 

quality, using quality 

measure to set goals

Introduce 

comprehensive or 

integrated curricula 

and assure fidelity of 

implementation 

Note:

ECE: Early Childhood Education

IHE: Institutions of Higher Education

The research team gathered relevant materials for the review (1) by conducting database 

searches using strategic search terms; (2) by pursuing sources included in earlier reviews; 

and (3) by following up on leads of relevant work suggested by the project officers and 

members of the Technical Work Group. 

Various combinations of the following key words were used as criteria for inclusion: 

professional development; training; preschool teachers; curriculum; literacy; language; 

early; prekindergarten; preschool; day care; child care; preschool age group. The 

following databases were searched for relevant articles: (1) Child Care and Early 

Education Research Connections (CCERC); (2) Educational Resources Information 

Center (ERIC); (3) National Child Care Information Center (NCCIC); (4) Psychology 

and Behavioral Sciences Collection; (5) PsycInfo; (6) Social Sciences Abstracts; and (7) 

Sociological Collection. 

The evaluation studies in the third and fourth target areas were subject to the following 

inclusion criteria: 

• Peer-reviewed Journals, Edited Volumes, or Government Report of Evaluation 

Studies—In order to be summarized in both text and table, a study had to have gone 
xi

through a rigorous review process, by being published in either a peer-reviewed 

journal or in an edited volume, or reported on in a reviewed government report. 

• Rigor of Evaluation—Evaluations summarized in both text and table were rated as 

falling in one of five different methodology levels, including experimental, quasiexperimental, pre-post with comparison group, pre-post without comparison group, 

and descriptive. Although relying strictly on experimental evaluations would have 

been preferable, the relative infrequency of these evaluations forced reviewers to 

include all relevant evaluations, and to consider the rigor when weighing and 

comparing results.

• Age Range—Evaluations of professional development programs involving children 

from birth through kindergarten were included in the review. Most of the studies 

reviewed pertained to children in the 3–5 age range. 

• Early Educator—For the purpose of the review, “early educator” included 

preschool teachers, prekindergarten teachers, kindergarten teachers, and child care 

staff caring for children 0–5. Educators in both private and public settings were 

included. Workers in family child care settings were not excluded from the review, 

although few evaluations focused on these environments. 

• Professional Development—Evaluations included in the review had to include some 

form of professional development as part of the treatment intervention. For 

example, they had to include credit bearing classes, training on a curriculum, inclass coaching, or other activities aimed to improve educators’ knowledge of child 

development or practice in the classroom or home-based child care setting. 

• Assessment of Effectiveness—Evaluations had to measure or evaluate changes in at 

least one of three key areas: early educator knowledge; practice; and child 

outcomes.

For each document reviewed summary tables were prepared (see Appendix A) 

summarizing the study findings in tables focusing on study methodology (research 

questions, research design, sample, measures, rigor of the evaluation), content of 

professional development (mode of delivery, linkages with infrastructure such as state 

early learning standards, temporal aspects of the professional development such as 

number, frequency and length of sessions, outreach approach for example to including 

providers in low income areas, research base of the professional development approach, 

description of the content or curriculum used in the professional development), and 

outcomes (outcomes for educator knowledge, for educator practice and for children’s 

development). 

Also summarized are the extent and rigor of the evidence for each of the four identified 

targets of early childhood professional development, emerging patterns of findings and 

their implications, and notes on research needs.

Findings

With input from the Technical Work Group for this project, it was determined that the 

research on early childhood professional development is at an early stage. Much of the 
xii

research is descriptive and correlational rather than involving rigorously executed 

experimental studies. When evaluations have been carried out, the focus is much more on 

curricula and their implementation than on the preparation of early childhood educators 

to use them. Significant questions remain about which features of professional 

development for early childhood educators, singly and in “packages,” are most effective 

for improving both educator and child outcomes. 

The literature does point to an initial set of conclusions that can serve as a starting point 

toward the identification of effective practices in early childhood professional 

development. These initial conclusions are in accord with the conclusions of the 

Committee on Early Childhood Pedagogy (National Research Council 2001) and the 

findings from other evaluations of professional development programs (Epstein 1993; 

Garet et al. 1999). These initial conclusions can serve as hypotheses for future work. The 

evidence suggests that professional development for early childhood educators may be 

more effective when:

• There are specific and articulated objectives for professional development. A 

meta-analysis of studies in which there was “specialized caregiver training 

with a focus on interaction skills with children” found a statistically 

significant effect of specialized training on caregiver competence overall, with 

a medium effect size (d=.45) (Fukkink and Lont 2007, p. 297). When the 

content of the training was more specific, rather than open in content, effects 

on early educator practice were larger (Fukkink and Lont 2007). Use of an 

observational measure of quality can help to provide specific and articulated 

goals for quality improvement (QUINCE Research Team 2009). The content 

of the measure of quality chosen to guide efforts needs to be aligned with the 

areas of practice in which improvement is sought and the child outcomes 

considered of importance (Zaslow et al. April, 2009, under review). 

Consensus documents that summarize research about what is appropriate and 

important for young children to know in the areas of language and literacy and 

early mathematics provide a strong research basis for developing appropriate 

curricula and approaches for preparing early educators to implement the 

curricula (National Reading Panel 2000; Snow, Burns, and Griffin 1998; 

National Early Literacy Panel 2008).

 

• Practice is an explicit focus of the professional development, and attention is 

given to linking the focus on early educator knowledge and practice. Multiple 

studies are reviewed which focused not only on strengthening early educator 

knowledge but on strengthening practice. This emphasis is in keeping with the 

principles of adult learning summarized by the National Research Council 

(National Research Council 2001). In the studies reviewed, such approaches 

usually combined course work or training with individualized modeling and 

feedback on interactions with children in the early educator’s classroom or 

home-based care setting. However, in some instances, the professional 

development involved only the individualized on-site component. In others, 
xiii

the individualized modeling and feedback was provided through the Internet 

rather than on-site, or practice in applying new techniques was incorporated 

directly into course work or training without on-site modeling and feedback

(Assel et al. 2007; Campbell and Milbourne 2005; Clements and Sarama 

2008; Dickinson and Brady 2006; Dickinson and Caswell 2007; Fantuzzo 

1996; Fantuzzo et al. 1997; Gettinger and Stoiber 2007; Landry 2002; 

Neuman and Cunningham 2009; Palsha and Wesley 1998; Pianta et al. 2008; 

Raver et al. 2008). Not all evaluation studies involving individualized 

professional development showed positive effects on practice or child 

outcomes, yet there is promising evidence for these approaches. It is important 

to identify the specific processes underlying positive effects in practicefocused professional development approaches (Zaslow 2009; Smith et al. 

2001). More thought is being given to the issue of whether or not the 

presentation of information through course work or training alone is effective 

in changing early educator practice and child outcomes (Burchinal, Hyson, 

and Zaslow 2008; Early et al. 2007), or whether professional development 

aimed at strengthening knowledge needs to be closely tied to practice. (see for 

example, the discussion of timing of training and practice opportunities and 

intentional interspersing of group training and opportunities for application in 

Dickinson and Brady 2006).

• There is collective participation of teachers from the same classrooms or 

schools in professional development. Joint participation can help to support a 

professional culture and ensure the sustainability of new techniques and skills. 

Professional development that includes administrators helps to assure that 

early educators do not receive contradictory messages about what practices to 

implement or emphasize. Likewise, including teachers of different age groups 

or grades can foster continuity in the children’s experiences as they move 

through classrooms in the future (Baker and Smith 1999; Assel et al. 2007; 

Burchinal, Hyson, and Zaslow 2008; Donovan, Bransford, and Pellegrino 

1999; Birman et al. 2000; Bierman et al. 2008).

• The intensity and duration of the professional development is matched to the 

content being conveyed. The appropriateness of the length of time spent in 

professional development activities depends on the goals of the activities 

themselves. A one-time workshop is not effective if the goal is to convey 

theory and practice to improve multiple aspects of early language and literacy 

development, such as oral language, phonological awareness, alphabetic 

principle, and awareness of print. It may, however, be appropriate for 

preparation on a single specific activity or strategy (Whitehurst, Arnold et al. 

1994; Donovan, Bransford, and Pellegrino 1999; Raikes et al. 2006). 

• Educators are prepared to conduct child assessments and interpret their 

results as a tool for ongoing monitoring of the effects of professional 

development. Assessments can help early childhood educators view their 

knowledge and skills as contributing to improvement in children’s outcomes, 

and can serve as a source of feedback for how to target instruction overall and 
xiv

for individual children (Foorman and Moats 2004; Garet et al. 2008; Gettinger 

and Stoiber 2007; O'Connor et al. 2005).

• It is appropriate for the organizational context and is aligned with standards 

for practice. The effectiveness of professional development approaches will 

differ according to features of organizational context, articulated standards for 

practice and with the extent of ongoing monitoring and supervision (Vu, Jeon, 

and Howes 2008; Fulgini et al. 2009). Increasingly, approaches to 

professional development also need to take into account state standards 

regarding pedagogy (for example in early language and literacy, Roskos et al., 

2006; and early learning guidelines, Strickland and Riley-Ayers, 2006).

As noted above, a number of gaps were identified in the research on early childhood 

professional development that need to be addressed:

• Coordinated secondary analyses carried out with the data from seven major 

studies of early care and education provide little indication of stronger 

observed classroom quality or larger gain scores on children’s academic 

achievement when early educators had completed a higher education degree, 

according to the highest education level among those with an early childhood 

major, or according to whether those with a bachelor’s degree had an early 

childhood major (Early et al. 2007). The quality of the educators’ degreegranting higher education programs could not be examined in these analyses 

and may be an important underlying factor (Burchinal, Hyson, and Zaslow 

2008; Hyson, Tomlinson, and Morris 2008). We are only beginning to see 

evaluations of planned variations in higher education approaches for early 

childhood educators. There is a clear need for careful examination of the 

features and overall quality of higher education programs. We need to ask if 

higher education programs that incorporate specific course content and 

approaches are associated with stronger outcomes. 

• The literature tends to focus on the content that should be conveyed to 

children, rather than on the specific processes that can be used to guide early 

educators in implementing practices to convey or engage children with this 

content effectively (Sheridan et al. 2009). 

• The literature does not adequately address the issue of cultural and linguistic 

competence for early childhood educators. This review did not reveal any 

peer-reviewed articles that examined or evaluated professional development 

strategies to improve cultural and linguistic competence despite the growing 

diversity of the early childhood population. Early childhood educators are 

calling for improvements in their preparation on these topics and are looking 

for strategies to improve their abilities to address the needs of diverse children 

and families (Daniel and Friedman 2005). Strategies to improve teacher 

preparation in cultural and linguistic competence cited by Daniel and 

Friedman (2005) include increasing faculty knowledge and willingness to 

adapt and respond to the diversity in early childhood education, requiring 
xv

practica and internships in diverse settings, integrating issues of diversity into 

course content, and requiring Teachers of English to Speakers of Other 

Languages (TESOL) courses for teachers. There is a need for research 

focusing on the effectiveness of these strategies.

• Further focus is needed on the language and literacy skills that early educators 

bring to their work, and possible approaches to strengthening these. Although 

low literacy is not universal among early care and education providers, and 

may vary by the requirements for those working in different types of early 

care and education settings (such as child care, Head Start and prekindergarten), the 1992 National Adult Literacy Survey found that between 44 

percent and 57 percent of child care workers perform at the lowest levels of 

proficiency on standardized literacy assessments (Kaestle et al. 2001). A 

more recent study of child care providers in Alameda County, Calif., indicated 

that almost one-third (31 percent) of the providers in that county had “limited 

proficiency” in English, based on their scores on the Test of Applied Literacy 

Skills (TALS) (Phillips et al. 2003). Research is needed focusing on the 

potential of professional development to strengthen the spoken language and 

literacy skills of early childhood educators. For children who are dual 

language learners, consideration should be given to the language and literacy 

skills of educators in both the child’s home language and English. 

• The literature focuses heavily on professional development for educators 

working in center-based settings including Head Start and prekindergarten 

programs. Yet, this group of educators constitutes only 24 percent of the 

workforce. The majority of paid educators in early childhood care and 

education work in licensed (28 percent) and unregulated (48 percent) homebased settings (Burton et al. 2002). Home-based early educators often have 

less formal education and access to training opportunities and serve more and 

larger percentages of low-income children than educators working in centerbased settings., It is important to consider strategies to improve the 

professional development of those working in home-based as well as centerbased settings, and to conduct rigorous evaluation research across both types 

of settings (e.g. Neuman and Cunningham 2009). 

• Likewise, the literature emphasizes professional development for educators 

working with preschool-age children: most of the studies covered in this 

review focused on children in the year or two years before entry into 

kindergarten. There is a need to expand understanding of the strategies that 

are most effective for educators working with infants and toddlers. 

• Further research is needed on how best to target professional development 

approaches, both in terms of timing (whether the professional development is 

offered preservice or in-service) and in terms of the settings the early 

educators work in (prekindergarten within public schools, prekindergarten in 
xvi

community-based settings, Head Start, center-based child care, and homebased child care). Different professional development approaches may be 

more effective when included as part of early educators’ preservice 

preparation or alternatively once they are already working in early childhood 

settings, and for early educators working in particular settings. 

• The methods and analytical strategies used in evaluations of professional 

development need more rigor. There is a small but growing body of 

experimental studies contrasting different professional development strategies. 

Effect sizes are rarely reported in the literature, and provisions are often not 

made to account for the “nested” nature of studies that include children within 

classrooms within programs. 

• A final gap to note in the literature is the need for further work on integrating 

content across topical areas. For example, how should early childhood 

educators blend early literacy, math and social behavior strategies to achieve 

the best results for children? What professional development strategies are 

most effective at helping teachers balance multiple content areas to create 

learning environments that promote development of the “whole child”? This 

is a challenge for the next generation of studies on professional development 

for early childhood educators. 
1

I: Introduction

Programs and policymakers face numerous challenges as they develop and implement 

professional development strategies for the early childhood workforce. Currently, the 

field of professional development for early childhood educators is “a patchwork of 

preservice and in-service education opportunities and credentials, characterized by 

various state and local requirements across types of programs, auspices, and roles” 

(National Research Council 2001, p. 276). Across the nation, only 23 states have any 

early childhood education preservice requirements for teachers (14 states) or master or 

lead teachers (9 states) in child care centers (LeMoine 2005). Most states require 

ongoing clock hours of education or training for early childhood educators, but the range 

of hours required across states varies widely (from 0 to 30 hours per year) (LeMoine 

2005). Likewise, according to the Committee on Early Childhood Pedagogy which 

reviewed the literature on early childhood education and teacher preparation, “the 

amount, scope, and quality of professional development provided to early childhood 

teachers is inconsistent, fragmented, and often chaotic” (National Research Council 2001, 

p. 276). Without consistent standards for professional preparation, the early childhood 

workforce continues to have low levels of education and a minimum of specialized 

training in early childhood education (Ackerman 2004; National Research Council 2001).

The capacity for training new early care and education teachers in the United States is 

low. Fewer than 30 percent of the institutions of higher education (IHEs) that offer twoand four-year degrees have early childhood programs (that is, 1,244 IHEs, with only 

about 300 offering bachelor’s degrees) (Early and Winton 2001). In addition, early 

childhood programs at two- and four-year institutions may not represent adequately the 

ethnic diversity of the early childhood workforce or children in early childhood programs 

(Early and Winton 2001). In a survey of 438 IHEs, over 80 percent of the full-time and 

part-time faculty members in early childhood education programs were white, nonHispanic (Early and Winton 2001). While one study (Saluja, Early, and Clifford 2002)

estimated that the early childhood workforce is also predominantly white (78 percent), 

the study only surveyed center-based programs serving 3- and 4-year-olds, and it 

achieved only a 43 percent response rate. An estimate of the workforce that includes the 

full range of family child care programs and center-based programs serving birth to 5-

year-olds would likely yield a more diverse picture.

Because the average early childhood teacher is 39 years old (Saluja, Early, and Clifford 

2002), teacher preparation programs are also challenged to address the needs of 

nontraditional students who are likely to be juggling family and work responsibilities and 

logistical issues that make it difficult to attend class and complete course requirements 

(Ackerman 2004). Finally, the wages and benefits for early childhood teachers are 

extremely low and are linked to high rates of teacher turnover (Whitebook et al. 2001). 

The median hourly wages for child care workers and preschool teachers are $8.37 and 

$10.67 respectively, compared to $20.38 per hour for kindergarten teachers (Center for 
2

the Child Care Workforce: A Project of the American Federation of Teachers Educational 

Foundation 2004). These low levels of compensation make it difficult for the field to 

attract and maintain high quality early childhood educators.

Despite the minimal standards for educators and the poor wages and benefits available to 

them, early childhood educators are responsible for providing high quality care and 

education for young children. A consensus has emerged in the developmental sciences 

that the relationship a child has with a teacher or caregiver—including the degree to 

which the child experiences care that is sensitive and responsive, and ample in verbal and 

cognitive stimulation, attention and support—is the central and most critical component 

of child care quality (National Research Council and Institute of Medicine, Shonkoff, and 

Phillips 2000). Acknowledging this centrality of early childhood educators in child care 

quality, the Committee on Early Childhood Pedagogy concluded:

“There is a serious mismatch between the preparation (and compensation) of the 

average early childhood professional and the growing expectations of parents and 

policy makers....Teachers of young children are being asked to promote high 

levels of achievement among all children, respond sensitively and appropriately to 

a wide array of diverse student needs, implement complex pedagogy, have a deep 

understanding of subject-matter disciplines, engage in serious reflection about 

their practices, and work collaboratively with colleagues and families.” 

(National Research Council 2001, p. 261)

What professional development strategies are most effective at addressing the mismatch 

between the preparation of early childhood educators and the expectations of parents and 

policymakers for their knowledge and skills in early childhood settings? The purpose of 

this literature review is to analyze the research on professional development of early 

childhood educators. As noted by the Technical Work Group for the Evaluation of the 

Early Childhood Educator Professional Development Program, this body of research is at 

an early stage of development. Significant gaps in the evidence base as well as 

methodological limitations hinder the capacity of a review to reach firm conclusions 

about the core features that characterize effective professional development. As such, we 

review the available evidence to reach a preliminary set of conclusions, acknowledging 

that these conclusions should be further examined in future rigorous research. Our 

preliminary conclusions are intended also to provide a framework for future reports from 

the Evaluation of the Early Childhood Educator Professional Development (ECEPD) 

program. In these reports, we will examine the extent to which activities supported by the 

ECEPD program have incorporated the features we propose as starting points in the 

identification of effective professional development. We also believe that the findings of 

this literature review can generally inform professional development for early childhood 

educators who serve children from birth through kindergarten.

A. The Literature on Professional Development of Early Childhood Educators

It is important to acknowledge at the outset that the body of research on professional 

development of early childhood educators is growing though as yet quite limited. Zaslow 
3

and Martinez-Beck (2006) point out that policymakers and practitioners pose specific 

questions that “often outstrip the research base” (p. 10). For example, what is the most 

important content to highlight in the preparation of early childhood educators? What is 

the most important investment—training or formal education—to make in the early 

childhood workforce? The extant literature does not offer the precision needed to 

compare different approaches to professional development and their implications for 

children’s outcomes.

The literature on early childhood professional development has four broad areas of 

emphasis. We refer to these as “targets of professional development initiatives” because 

professional development efforts and evaluated interventions are targeted at 

strengthening one or more of these. The research on early childhood professional 

development focuses on approaches targeted at:

• improving the human and social capital of early childhood educators; 

• strengthening the institutions or organizations providing the professional 

development; 

• improving children’s outcomes in specific developmental domains; and 

• improving the overall quality of children’s experiences in early childhood 

settings. 

The approach taken in this review is to summarize the research in each of the four areas 

targeted by early childhood professional development efforts and to conclude with an 

integrated summary of the professional development features that emerge as most 

promising in improving the knowledge and skills of early childhood educators and 

outcomes for young children. 

Research on the first target of early childhood professional development considers the 

degree to which qualifications of early childhood educators are related to the quality of 

the environment, interactions with children, and in a subset of studies, children’s 

outcomes. In addition, recent research in this area is beginning to examine the social and 

emotional well-being of early childhood educators, including their stress and depression, 

as important to the quality of the care and education they provide and as targets of 

professional development efforts. However, this literature does not evaluate strategies to 

increase the human or social capital of early childhood educators, examining changes in 

early educator practices or child outcomes in light of differing intervention approaches. 

Rather, as yet, this body of research examines naturally occurring associations between 

early educator human and social capital and these outcomes. As such, key conclusions 

drawn from recent reviews of this literature (Barnett 2003; Tout, Zaslow, and Berry 

2006; Whitebook 2003; Zaslow et al. 2004) will be described below without a detailed 

discussion of the individual studies or inclusion of the studies in tables. 

Research on the second target of early childhood professional development focuses on 

the quality of higher education programs in early childhood as well as the quality of 

training provided outside of institutions of higher education. Recent research focuses 

also on the potential effects of tailoring programs of higher education and of training to 

the needs of nontraditional learners. The research in this area is at a preliminary stage, 
4

primarily documenting the need to develop programs appropriate for this population of 

learners rather than providing systematic evaluations of such efforts. The emerging 

descriptive research in this area is summarized, but in the absence of evaluation studies, 

we do not provide tables profiling individual studies.

The third target of early childhood professional development efforts focuses on the 

effectiveness of various approaches to improving children’s outcomes in specific 

developmental domains, such as early literacy, mathematics, and social behavior. This 

set of studies usually involves implementation of specific curricula or activities and an 

examination of early educator practices or children’s outcomes after implementation. 

There are multiple evaluation studies focusing on whether children’s experiences change 

and whether their development is affected when early educators are, or are not, given 

preparation to implement a specific curriculum or set of activities. Given the availability 

of multiple evaluation studies, this literature is discussed in detail, with separate 

subsections focusing on specific developmental domains. In addition, to complement the 

discussion in the text, results of evaluation studies for each developmental domain (early 

literacy, mathematics, and social behavior) are presented in tables. 

Fourth, we look at approaches to professional development aimed at improving the 

overall quality of children’s experiences and outcomes. This area covers diverse studies 

that vary in their scope and methodology. It also includes discussions of best practices 

proposed by individual researchers or expert review panels. In contrast to approaches 

that emphasize the content that early childhood educators should convey to children, this 

area of research provides insights into the processes of professional development that are 

most effective: the specific activities engaged in with early educators during education, 

training and work with early educators at the workplace that are effective in bringing 

about change in early childhood environments and child outcomes. 

B. Strategy of Review 

The research team for this review gathered relevant materials for the review (1) by 

conducting database searches using strategic search terms; (2) by pursuing sources 

included in earlier reviews the research team and others had conducted; and (3) by 

following up on leads of relevant work suggested by the project officers and members of 

the Technical Work Group. 

The database search aimed to identify evaluation articles relating to approaches to 

professional development for early educators, with the heaviest emphasis on the topic of 

professional development focusing on children’s language and literacy development 

during the preschool years. Articles that directly evaluated strategies for professional 

development were preferred, but documentation of best practices and evaluations for 

specific curricula or classroom activities that included educator preparation on use of the 

curriculum as a key element of the intervention was also pursued. 
5

Various combinations of the following key words were used in the course of literature 

searches: professional development; training; preschool teachers; curriculum; literacy; 

language; early; prekindergarten; preschool; day care; child care; preschool age group. 

The following databases were searched for relevant articles: (1) Child Care and Early 

Education Research Connections (CCERC); (2) Educational Resources Information 

Center (ERIC); (3) National Child Care Information Center (NCCIC); (4) Psychology 

and Behavioral Sciences Collection; (5) PsycInfo; (6) Social Sciences Abstracts; and (7) 

Sociological Collection. 

Research was reviewed pertaining to all four target areas identified in Figure 1. However 

a body of work in involving evaluation studies was found only for the targets involving 

improving children’s outcomes in specific developmental domains, and improving the 

overall quality of children’s experiences in early childhood settings (the third and fourth 

target areas noted above). We provide detailed appendix tables summarizing the 

evaluation research in these two target areas to support the discussion of the research in 

these two areas in the text. Brief summary tables are also included in the text identifying 

the studies profiled in the detailed appendix tables. For the target area of improving 

children’s outcomes in specific developmental domains, there are separate sets of 

appendix tables focusing on:

• early literacy, 

• early mathematics, and 

• child social behavior. 

For the target area of improving the overall quality of children’s experiences in early 

childhood settings, we provide separate sets of appendix tables focusing on:

• comprehensive curricula, and 

• general approaches to professional development. 

The evaluation studies in the third and fourth target areas that are summarized in table 

format as well as in the text of the review were subject to the following inclusion criteria: 

• Peer-reviewed Journals, Edited Volumes, or Government Report of Evaluation 

Studies—In order to be summarized in both text and table, a study had to have gone 

through a rigorous review process, by being published in either a peer-reviewed 

journal or in an edited volume, or reported on in a reviewed government report. 

• Rigor of Evaluation—Evaluations summarized in both text and table were rated as 

falling in one of five different methodology levels, including experimental, quasiexperimental, pre-post with comparison group, pre-post without comparison group, 

and descriptive. Although relying strictly on experimental evaluations would have 

been preferable, the relative infrequency of these evaluations forced reviewers to 

include all relevant evaluations, and to consider the rigor when weighing and 

comparing results.

• Age Range—Evaluations of professional development programs involving children 

from birth through kindergarten were included in the review. Most of the studies 

reviewed pertained to children in the 3–5 year age range. 
6

• Early Educator—For the purpose of the review, “early educator” included preschool 

teachers, prekindergarten teachers, kindergarten teachers, and child care staff caring 

for children from birth through kindergarten entry. Educators in both private and 

public settings were included. Workers in family child care settings were not 

excluded from the review, although few evaluations focused on these environments. 

• Professional Development—Evaluations included in the review had to include some 

form of professional development as part of the treatment intervention. For 

example, they had to include credit-bearing classes, training on a curriculum, inclass coaching, or other activities aimed to improve educators’ knowledge of child 

development or practice in the classroom or home-based child care setting. 

• Assessment of Effectiveness—Evaluations had to measure or evaluate changes in at 

least one of three key areas: early educator knowledge; practice; and child 

outcomes. 

In addition to evaluations, summaries have also been provided of discussions of best 

practices in which reviewers considered them to provide foundations for the evaluations 

reviewed and to add insight into strategies for effective professional development. 

Statements of best practice come from consensus development groups in which 

researchers and practitioners reach agreement on standards for positive practice based on 

their review of research findings and knowledge of practice issues. Examples include 

such efforts by the National Research Council as How people learn: Bridging research 

and practice (Donovan, Bransford, and Pellegrino 1999), and Eager to learn: Educating 

our preschoolers (National Research Council 2001) as well as the standards for 

professional development developed by the National Association for the Education of 

Young Children (Hyson and Biggar 2006), As noted by Strickland and Riley-Ayers 

(2006), state early learning guidelines also provide consensus documents based on the 

work of researchers and practitioners regarding what young children should know and be 

able to do in specific domains of development, including early language and literacy. 

C. Orientation to the Tables

Accompanying the written summary for each of the two target areas in which a body of 

evaluation research is available are tables summarizing the relevant studies. The full set 

of tables appears in Appendix A. Brief summary tables, listing the studies covered, the 

research design (e.g., experimental, quasi-experimental), and outcome areas covered 

(early educator knowledge, early educator practice, and child outcomes) are included in 

the text. Three sets of tables are prepared for each of the topical areas of early language 

and literacy, early mathematics, behavior and social skills, comprehensive curricula, and 

general approaches. The first table summarizes the methodology of each study, the 

second table summarizes the content of the professional development, and the third 

summarizes the studies’ outcomes.
7

In some cases a single project may have resulted in multiple published articles or chapters 

(e.g. a pre-post study and a follow-up study two years later), and in these cases, each has 

been tabled separately. In other cases, a single published chapter or article may contain 

information on multiple studies, and these have been tabled separately. 

The elements of the three sets of tables are described in greater detail below. 

C. 1. Methodology Table

1. The study column indicates the authors of the study and the year in which it was 

published. 

2. The research questions column summarizes the key questions the authors aimed 

to answer by conducting the study. Depending on the focus of the study, the 

question may or may not directly address the effectiveness of the professional 

development approach; however, those studies that address professional 

development indirectly were chosen because the effectiveness of the professional 

development may be inferred from the outcomes measured. 

3. The research design column provides a general overview of the evaluation, 

including a brief description of the intervention as well as the type of data 

collected at different points during the evaluation, and whether or not participants 

were randomly assigned. 

4. The sample column notes the number and characteristics of participants, and, if 

relevant, the size of the intervention and control groups. 

5. The measures column describes the data collected in the evaluation, including the 

names of standardized assessment or structured observation tools used, if any, as 

well as questionnaires or interviews. If the study reported reliability or validity of 

measures used, this information was also included. 

6. The rigor of the professional development evaluation column identifies the 

strength of the evaluation design. Evaluations designated as Experimental 

(random assignment to treatment and control groups) are the most rigorous, and 

the results from these evaluations should be considered the most robust. Other 

categorizations include: Quasi-Experimental (intervention and comparison groups 

not randomly assigned); Pre-Post with Comparison Group (not randomly 

assigned); Pre-Post without Comparison Group; and Descriptive. 

7. The general comments column provides comments on relationships of the studies 

with one another, methodological issues, reasons for caution in interpreting 

findings or other concerns. 

C. 2. Table on Content of Professional Development

1. The study column repeats the information in the parallel column in the first table, 

indicating the authors of the study and the year in which it was published. 

2. Mode of delivery is the first of three columns indicating the type of professional 

development in the intervention. The mode of delivery column describes what 

elements were included in the delivery of the professional development 

intervention (e.g. workshop, coaching, etc.). 
8

3. Linkages with infrastructure indicates the ways in which the professional 

development is supported through connections with the educator’s colleagues, 

through ties to curriculum or learning standards already in place, or to a larger 

system of professional development. 

4. The temporal aspects of the professional development column indicates (1) the 

number of sessions of professional development; (2) the frequency of sessions or 

the spacing between them; (3) the length of each session; and (4) the total 

duration of the professional development intervention. 

5. The outreach column indicates whether the intervention aimed to provide 

professional development to early educators serving a disadvantaged group of 

children or who themselves were from disadvantaged backgrounds. 

6. The grounded in research column indicates whether the professional 

development content has been validated by prior research. In some cases, this may 

mean that educators are being taught research-based information on aspects of 

child development. In other cases, this may mean that the curricular approach or 

set of activities the early educator is prepared to use through the professional 

development has been shown to be, or is expected to be, effective due to prior 

research. 

7. Description of content/curriculum describes the categories of information 

conveyed to educators via professional development or the elements of the 

curricula or activities encouraged through the professional development.

C. 3. Table on Outcomes

1. The three columns in this table indicate the outcomes assessed after the 

implementation of the professional development and, in some cases, specific 

curricula or activities in classrooms. The first column in this table focuses on 

educator knowledge. This column indicates whether researchers measured 

associations between assignment to receive the professional development and 

increases in what educators know about child development or strategies to support 

it through specific curricula or classroom activities. 

2. The column focuses on educator practice. This indicates whether or not 

researchers measured a change in educators’ activities in the classroom, how they 

interacted with children, or how they set up the classroom. 

3. The final column focuses on child outcomes. This column indicates whether 

researchers measured linkages between the professional development intervention 

and child outcomes, and if so, the associations that were found. 

Additionally, each of these tables has a summary table found in the text. The summary 

table highlights the design of each of the reviewed studies and the outcome areas it 

focuses on.
9

II: Toward the Identification of Features of Effective Professional Development for 

Early Childhood Educators 

In this section, findings regarding each of the four identified targets of early childhood 

professional development are discussed. We turn first to strengthening the human and 

social capital of early childhood educators as targets of professional development 

activities, and then to strengthening the entities that provide early childhood professional 

development as a focus. In the most detailed sections, supported by tables, we summarize 

the evaluation research on efforts to strengthen children’s development in specific 

content areas (in which the research provides a focus on preparing the early childhood 

educator on curricula or activities in a content area), and professional development efforts 

targeting the overall quality of early childhood settings. 

A. Enhancing the Human and Social Capital of Early Childhood Educators as 

Targets of Early Childhood Professional Development

The first set of studies examines links between the human capital (education, training, 

and literacy level) and the social capital (especially psychological well-being) of early 

childhood educators and the quality of center-based programs or family child care homes. 

Of the different forms of capital that have been conceptualized, including also, for 

example, cultural and economic capital (Bourdieu 1972), the two forms that have been 

considered as possible targets for strengthening the professional development of early 

educators and for which there is a research base are human and social capital. This body 

of work is primarily correlational. The question asked across this body of work is 

whether or not more human or social capital is related to higher levels of observed 

program quality; that is, does quality improve as qualifications improve (Tout, Zaslow, 

and Berry 2006; Zaslow et al. 2004)? 

A.1. Education of Early Educators

Formal education attainment is measured in total years of education, by highest degree 

attained, and by whether the degree is in a major related to early childhood development. 

Reviews of the research focusing on the linkages between education and quality in early 

childhood settings have generally concluded that higher levels of educational attainment, 

and education with specialization in early childhood education, are related to higher 

observed quality (Tout, Zaslow, and Berry 2006; Barnett 2003; Whitebook 2003). 

However, in an important recent development, new analyses of existing data from seven 

major studies of early care and education have raised questions about the strength and 

consistency of this association (Early et al. 2007). Early and colleagues (2007) as well as 

Burchinal, Hyson and Zaslow (2008) consider several possible reasons for this difference 

in findings regarding the linkages between education and quality. Below we provide a 

brief overview of the key conclusions of earlier reviews, and then note in greater detail 

the way in which more recent research is challenging the conclusions of these reviews. 
10

A.1a.Earlier and more recent evidence linking the education of early educators with 

educator knowledge, educator practice and child outcomes. Previous reviews pointed to 

studies as finding a linkage between educational attainment and the quality of the early 

care and education settings in center-based child care (Blau 2000; Honig and Hirallal 

1998; Howes, Whitebook, and Phillips 1992; Phillipsen et al. 1997; de Kruif et al. 2000); 

family child care (Clarke-Stewart et al. 2002; Weaver 2002); and other studies including 

both center and home-based settings (NICHD Early Child Care Research Network 2000, 

for quality at 24 and 36 months). These reviews did, however, identify a few studies in 

which no linkage was found between quality of the environment and years or level of 

formal education (Phillips et al. 2000; Burchinal et al. 2002; NICHD Early Child Care 

Research Network 1996, for quality at 6 months). Further, the earlier reviews also 

identified a set of studies in which having more education specifically with early 

childhood content was found to be related to higher program quality (Howes 1997; 

Weaver 2002), though here too there were some exceptions for programs serving 

preschoolers (Clarke-Stewart et al. 2002; Phillips et al. 2000). 

As noted above, however, in recent work, a consortium of researchers from seven major 

studies of early care and education has reexamined this issue in a set of rigorous, 

coordinated secondary analyses (Early et al. 2007). Following up on analyses 

specifically focusing on the National Center for Early Development and Learning studies 

of prekindergarten that appeared to challenge assumptions about the role of early 

childhood educator educational attainment (Early et al. 2006), Early and colleagues 

jointly analyzed the data from the Early Head Start Follow-up Study, the Head Start 

Family and Child Experiences Survey, the Georgia Early Care Study, the More at Four 

Evaluation, the National Center for Early Development and Learning studies of Prekindergarten (the Multi-State Study of Pre-kindergarten and the Study of State-Wide 

Early Education Programs), the Study of Early Child Care and Youth Development (the 

NICHD Study) and the Preschool Curriculum Evaluation Research (PCER) Program. 

Their analyses considered highest level of education attained by the lead teacher or 

caregiver, whether the early educator or caregiver had a bachelor’s degree, and the 

student’s major for the highest degree attained (in child development or early childhood 

education, any other education major, or noneducation related major). Analyses 

examined the three different markers of educational attainment in relation to observed 

quality of early childhood classrooms using the Early Childhood Environment Rating 

Scale–Revised or the Observational Record of the Caregiving Environment and in 

relation to gain scores on measures of academic achievement of 4-year-olds, using a 

common set of control variables across analyses of the different datasets. For the analyses 

of classroom quality, control variables included site, ratio, class size, length of day, 

teacher ethnicity, proportion of white students in the class, and proportion of poor 

students in the class. Analyses of child achievement gains controlled for site, child 

gender, ethnicity, years of maternal education, poverty, family income, and previous 

assessment score.

These replicated secondary analyses provided little indication that degree, highest 

education level among those with an early childhood major, or having an early childhood 
11

major among those with a bachelor’s degree were related either to observed classroom 

quality or to children’s gain scores on measures of academic achievement:

Using seven recent major studies of classroom-based educational programs for 4-

year-olds, these analyses, taken together, do not provide convincing evidence of 

an association between teachers’ education or major and either classroom quality 

or children’s academic gains. Most of the analyses yielded null findings. 

Although there were some statistically significant associations, no clear pattern 

emerged. (p. 573).

A.1b. Possible Interpretations of the Recent Findings. The consortium of researchers 

considers three possible interpretations of these unexpected findings. First, they note that 

the teacher preparation programs in which these early educators participated may not 

have prepared the teachers adequately. Indeed these teachers may have completed their 

education during a time when expectations for children’s learning during the year prior to 

kindergarten were lower. A second interpretation is that while teachers may have 

received high quality formal education, they may not have received sufficient supports to 

implement what they had learned when actually interacting with and teaching young 

children. That is, their formal education may have focused on knowledge but not 

sufficiently on practice. A third interpretation concerns the recent expansion of publicly 

funded prekindergarten and the market forces this may be creating. The higher wages and 

better supports of such programs may be attracting the most skilled and experienced early 

educators without bachelor’s degrees, while those early educators who do have 

bachelor’s degrees may find it easier to climb the ladder to elementary education 

programs. That is, there may be different selection effects than in other time periods, as 

reflected in earlier studies.

Burchinal and colleagues (2008) point to the further possibility that there may be 

moderating factors that these analyses could not examine. For example, the quality of the 

educators’ degree-granting higher education programs could not be examined and may be 

an important underlying factor (Hyson, Tomlinson, and Morris 2008). In addition, they 

note emerging evidence that the early childhood educators’ educational attainment may 

play a differing role depending on the type of program. They summarize recent findings 

from a study in California by Vu and colleagues (2008) indicating that having a 

bachelor’s degree did predict quality in programs with fewer resources and supports, such 

as community-based child care, but did not predict quality in programs with more 

resources as well as ongoing supports and monitoring, such as state-funded 

prekindergarten. Thus the overall program context may be important to the relationship 

between educator educational attainment and program quality. Burchinal and colleagues 

also note that studies to date have considered the educational attainment of lead teachers 

in isolation, not also considering whether program administrators, other lead teachers, 

and assistant teachers in the program have received similar content in their education. It 

may be important to consider whether those working together in a program have similar 

preparation and orientation. Methodological differences, and especially the degree to 

which studies consistently control for key background characteristics that may be 

associated both with education and with observed quality or child outcomes, may be a 
12

further factor in helping to explain the differences between earlier studies and the 

coordinated analyses reported on by Early and colleagues.

The issue of whether higher education in general (or higher education with specific 

content), is associated with improved early educator knowledge, practice, and child 

outcomes needs further examination through experimental evaluation studies in which 

early educators are, or are not, offered the opportunity to pursue higher education (or 

higher education covering specific content) and outcomes considered include not only 

educator knowledge but also educator practice and child outcomes. Interestingly, the 

need for such research has been identified in the work on the preservice education of 

K–12 educators as well. The National Reading Panel (National Institute of Child Health 

and Human Development 2000), focusing specifically on teacher preparation in the area 

of reading instruction, found that while there was a small set of rigorously conducted 

studies examining the effects of preservice teacher education, these studies examined 

effects on teacher knowledge but did not extend out to an examination on teacher 

instructional practice or student achievement. The report underscores the importance of 

examining effects on teacher practice and student outcomes as well as teacher knowledge 

in confirming the effectiveness of higher education in preparing teachers for reading 

instruction. The National Reading Panel concluded that there is a critical need for 

rigorous studies focusing on the preservice education of teachers. 

In an update and extension of the review conducted for the National Reading Panel, Pang 

and Kamil (2006) note that there are more descriptive correlational studies of preservice 

teacher education in reading than experimental or quasi-experimental studies. They note 

that there is a need for both types of studies. Descriptive research can provide a context 

for understanding effects of preservice education that may be important for understanding 

underlying processes explaining the effects of preservice education. For example, they 

point to descriptive research that suggests that teachers with certain initial attitudes and 

motivation (for example, willingness to experiment, sense of efficacy, and philosophical 

acceptance of an instructional approach) may be more responsive to instruction on the 

use of an instructional approach. Pang and Kamil’s review (2006) concludes that there is 

a continuing need both for rigorous evaluation research examining the role of higher 

education in preparing teachers to provide instruction in reading as well as for descriptive 

research that will yield a better understanding of how and for whom preservice education 

is effective. 

In other respects as well, the research to date on educational attainment by early 

childhood educators mirrors discussions on the preparation of K–12 teachers. Thus, for 

example, the possibility that the preparation that early educators receive in higher 

education might be undermined if they return to early education settings in which other 

teachers and administrators are not informed or supportive of the approaches they have 

learned is clearly reflected in these other bodies of research. The National Research 

Council report How People Learn (Donovan, Bransford, and Pellegrino 1999), in 

considering how broad principles of learning apply to teacher preparation, concluded that 

many professional development opportunities for teachers are pursued in isolation, by 
13

individual teachers who may not go on to have sustained contact with others who have 

experienced similar preparation. Further:

School administrators at the individual school and school district level are responsible 

for facilitating teacher learning and evaluating teacher performance. If they are to 

support teachers’ efforts to incorporate the principles of learning into classroom 

practice, they will need professional development opportunities that provide an 

understanding of the principles and their enactment in a classroom environment 

(Donovan, Bransford, and Pellegrino 1999 p. 48).

In sum, the new findings on the educational attainment of early childhood educators 

challenge us to go beyond the markers of formal educational attainment, such as having 

completed a bachelor’s degree, to consider in greater depth the initial characteristics of 

the educators, the content and quality of the higher education program, and the context 

into which the early educator takes the degree and seeks to apply what has been learned.

We concur with the conclusion of Pang and Kamil (2006) that complementary research 

approaches, both rigorous evaluations and in-depth descriptive studies, are needed. Such 

research will yield a more complete understanding of the potential impact of different 

facets of the educational attainment of early childhood educators on program quality and 

children’s development in different early childhood settings. Finally, the strongest 

evidence on the effects of higher education as well as of other approaches to early 

childhood professional development will involve all three sets of outcomes: educator 

knowledge, educator practice and child outcomes. 

A. 2. Training of Early Educators

Training refers to professional development that does not result in credits toward a higher 

education degree. Training may be provided through workshops or professional meetings. 

Ongoing training may be an in-service requirement in different types of early care and 

education. There may also be initial or preservice training requirements for licensing in 

child care.

There is a limited body of correlational research examining the associations between 

extent of training and observed program quality. There is also an emerging body of 

evaluation research examining the effects of training on both program quality as well as 

child outcomes. This body of research has recently been reviewed by Fukkink and Lont 

(2007). 

A. 2a. Studies of Association. In studies of the association between participation in 

training and observed quality in early childhood settings, whether or not an early 

childhood educator has received training has been found to be related to the quality of 

programs and sensitivity of interactions between educators and children (Burchinal et al. 

2002; Burchinal, Howes, and Kontos 2002; Clarke-Stewart et al. 2002; Kontos, Howes, 

and Galinsky 1996; Norris 2001). These studies offer almost no specific information 

about how variation in the type, mode, dosage, and content of training is related to 

quality. There are a few important exceptions to this generalization, with more precise 
14

information emerging about the dosage of training in relation to quality. Thus, for 

example, there is some evidence that it is more recent training that is important to quality, 

raising the possibility that the effects of training may fade out over time and that training 

needs to be ongoing or renewed periodically (Norris 2001; Burchinal et al. 2002). In 

addition, Raikes and colleagues (2006) found that more intensive training, involving 

sequenced rather than stand-alone workshops, may be more closely linked with observed 

quality (Raikes et al. 2006). Here too, results from recent research on early childhood 

professional development agree closely with the broader conclusions of the National 

Research Council regarding aligning teacher education with the research on how people 

learn:

For teachers to change their practice, they need professional development 

opportunities that are in-depth and sustained. In the words of one workshop 

participant, a one-shot workshop simplifies complex ideas until they become 

“meaningless mantras sold as snake oil.” Many of the learning opportunities 

provided for teachers and other professionals violate the principles for optimizing 

learning. Teachers need opportunities to be involved in sustained learning... 

(Donovan, Bransford, and Pellegrino 1999, p. 27)

A. 2b. Evaluation Studies. We turn now from descriptive research looking at naturally 

occurring associations between training and quality, to evaluation research looking at the 

effects of training using comparative research designs. In this research, training has been 

more carefully defined, and a broader set of outcomes has been examined. Fukkink & 

Lont (2007) recently completed a meta-analytic examination of experimental and quasiexperimental evaluations of the effects of specialized training of early childhood 

educators. They included only studies in which there was “specialized caregiver training 

with a focus on interaction skills with children ...in a regular childcare setting” (p. 297). 

They examined effect sizes for outcomes on caregiver knowledge, attitudes and skills. 

They also summarized effects on child outcomes, however, noting the number of studies 

in which child outcomes were considered to be limited. 

Overall, the aggregated results indicated a statistically significant effect of specialized 

training on caregiver competence, with a medium effect size (d=.45). Considered 

separately, effect sizes for findings regarding caregiver knowledge, attitudes and skills 

were .43, .65 and .40 respectively. There was substantial variation in effect sizes across 

studies, with about a quarter of the effects falling within the negative to zero range. 

Thus, while the results point overall to the effectiveness of specialized training on 

caregiver competence, not all approaches are effective and there is variation across 

approaches in the degree of effectiveness. Effect sizes were larger when the training 

involved a fixed curriculum rather than open content, when the outcome measures 

aligned more closely with the content of the training, and when there were fewer training 

sites. The small sample size of studies examining child outcomes limited the strength of 

the conclusions for this set of outcomes. The few studies included in the analysis that did 

focus on child outcomes showed positive, but not statistically significant, effects. 

Fukkink and Lont conclude that: 
15

Training seems to matter. Taken together, the current empirical evidence 

demonstrates that specialized training improves the pedagogical competencies of 

caregivers in childcare, including their professional attitude, knowledge and skills. 

Further study is still needed to reach firmer conclusions with regard to the effects 

of caregiver training at the child level....Despite the positive general outcome of 

caregiver training at the caregiver level, it should be stressed that not all 

interventions are equally effective. (Fukkink and Lont 2007, p. 305-306)

We note several important cautions to this encouraging conclusion regarding training. A 

meta-analysis uses summary data presented in published reports of studies as they were 

executed, including whatever control variables were taken into account in the analyses. 

The consistent replicated secondary analyses carried out by Early and colleagues 

introduced a set of standard and rigorous covariates across the studies of the association 

of education with quality and child outcomes. The introduction of a similarly broad and 

consistent set of covariates might change the conclusions for the studies of training. We 

urge caution when comparing the summary of studies of education and of training, 

especially urging readers not to conclude that only the latter is effective. To make this 

comparison in a rigorous way, one would need to conduct comparable analyses across the 

two sets of evidence. We also underscore the lack of rigorous evaluation research that 

focuses on the potential impact of early educators’ education level on program quality. 

Finally, it is difficult to confirm that all of the studies included in the Fukkink and Lont 

meta-analysis define training as it is defined in this review—as professional development 

outside of credit-bearing courses for a higher education degree.

A. 2c. Needed Next Steps in Research on Training. In sum, an important next step in the 

research on training is to distinguish among different approaches to training to discern 

which specific features of training interventions show the strongest evidence of desirable 

outcomes. Coordinated secondary analyses of the data from training studies using a 

common set of covariates would also be extremely useful. The recommendation of the 

National Reading Panel (2000), and subsequently by Pang and Kamil (2006), that 

professional development needs to be studied across three sets of outcomes: educator 

knowledge, educator practice, and child outcomes, is clearly important, with limited 

study as yet especially of child outcomes. 

A. 3. Literacy Levels of Early Educators

Another potential objective of professional development for early educators focuses on 

improving their literacy levels. Research on the intergenerational transmission of 

illiteracy would suggest that children are placed at risk for low levels of literacy and 

academic attainment if their caregivers do not themselves have strong literacy skills 

(Askov 1991; Poff Roman 2004). 

A. 3a. Low Literacy as an Issue Among Early Educators. Although low literacy is not 

universal among early care and education providers, and may vary by the requirements 

for those working in different types of early care and education settings (such as child 
16

care, Head Start and prekindergarten), the 1992 National Adult Literacy Survey (NALS)

1

indicates that a substantial proportion of child care workers (44 percent to 57 percent) 

perform at the lowest levels of proficiency on standardized literacy assessments (Kaestle 

et al. 2001). A more recent study of child care providers in Alameda County, Calif.,

indicated that almost one-third (31 percent) of the providers in that county had “limited 

proficiency” in English, based on their scores on the Test of Applied Literacy Skills 

(TALS) (Phillips et al. 2003). Given the emphasis on promoting early language and 

literacy skills among preschool children (Halle et al. 2003), the literacy skills of early 

childhood educators has recently been identified as a target for intervention (Halle et al. 

2008). However, few if any professional development efforts have yet to be focused on 

supports for this aspect of the early care environment. 

A. 3b. Possible Approaches to Strengthening Literacy Among Early Educators.

Unfortunately, much of the literature on adult literacy lacks a clear focus on the literacy 

needs of early childhood educators, and many of the evaluations of adult literacy 

programs lack rigor in their evaluation design. Despite these limitations, a recent review 

of the research on adult literacy programs (Halle et al. 2008) identifies possible emphases 

for efforts to enhance the literacy levels of those early childhood educators for whom this 

is an issue. This review suggests that professional development efforts to support early 

childhood educators’ literacy development should focus on specific content, and have an 

instructional approach well-matched to the adult learners’ goals (Beder 1999). 

For example, Phillips and colleagues (2003) point out that the current measures of adult 

literacy do not fully take into account aspects of literacy that are important for supporting 

children’s language and literacy development. Specifically, they recommend that studies 

of adult literacy assess child care providers’ oral language and book reading in addition to 

the traditional prose, document, and quantitative assessments. Indeed, adult literacy 

programs generally cover the major elements of language and literacy development, such 

as alphabetic knowledge, phonological awareness, word recognition, reading 

comprehension and fluency, vocabulary development, writing, speaking, and listening; 

they also often cover mathematical computation, use of computers, and the development 

of critical thinking skills (Kruidenier 2002). However, they typically do not address the 

language and literacy skills specifically needed to work with young children. For 

instance, interactive book reading and providing a rich oral language environment are 

two important components of the child’s literacy environment that support young 

children’s vocabulary growth (Halle et al. 2003). 

In sum, a recommendation for future studies of caregiver literacy would be to supplement 

traditional measures of adult literacy with measures of both oral language and book 

reading skills of the early childhood educator. An additional recommendation is to 

develop and evaluate programs aimed at improving early educators’ literacy. Finally, it 

will be important to explore whether improving an early childhood educator’s literacy 

 1 The 1992 NALS is the last national assessment of adult literacy conducted prior to the 2003 National 

Assessment of Adult Literacy (NAAL). The 2003 NAAL is the most recent national assessment of adult 

literacy. 
17

affects the overall quality of the literacy environment in the early education setting, or the 

literacy skills of the children in the providers’ care. 

A. 4. Early Educators’ Psychological Well-being

A small set of studies is beginning to suggest that stress and depressive symptoms may be 

issues for early childhood educators that affect the quality of the education and care they 

provide. These issues may be especially troubling for those working in isolation (as in 

home-based care settings), and those working with groups of children who are 

themselves stressed because of such issues as exposure to violence at home or in the 

community and ongoing family financial stress. We are beginning to see the emergence 

of evaluation studies focusing on the provision of professional development with a 

component involving the psychological well-being of early educators. Thus, 

consideration of the human capital of early educators is now being complemented with a 

focus on social capital.

A. 4a. Descriptive Studies of Depressive Symptoms and Stress and Their Correlates. A 

study of children’s expulsions from preschool in the state of Massachusetts by Gilliam 

and Shahar (summarized in Gilliam 2005) found that the likelihood of a teacher expelling 

at least one child was significantly related to teacher self-report of job stress. Preschool 

expulsions were also higher when class size was larger and when there were more 3-yearolds mixed in with 4-year-olds in a class. Expulsions were also more likely in for-profit 

child care programs or other community-based programs than in public school or Head 

Start programs, raising the possibility that supports available to teachers through their 

programs may be important. In addition, expulsion rates were related to teacher access to 

an expert who could help them in working with children with emotional or behavioral 

difficulties. Expulsion rates were lowest in programs in which teachers had regular onsite visits from a mental health consultant, followed by those in which teachers had 

access to such consultation on-call, and were highest when teachers had no access to 

mental health consultation.

Analyses of the data from the NICHD Study of Child Care and Youth Development 

underscore the potential role of isolation versus support for early educators in affecting 

program quality. Hamre and Pianta (2004) found that about 10 percent of caregivers in 

this large study of early care and education reported clinically significant levels of 

depressive symptoms for themselves. Across different types of early care and education, 

those caregivers reporting higher levels of such symptoms were observed to be less

sensitive in their interactions with children, to engage less often in affectively positive 

verbal interactions, and to be rated as more withdrawn. In addition, in home-based care 

only, caregivers with higher levels of depressive symptoms also showed more affectively 

negative and intrusive interactions. The link between negative interactions and depressive 

symptoms was stronger when caregivers spent a majority of the observational period as 

the only adult interacting with the child. The authors raise the possibility that when a 
18

caregiver has another adult present, she can more readily withdraw from a frustrating 

interaction with a child than when she is alone with the child.

Raver and colleagues (2008) note that early educators working in low-income 

communities may be especially prone to emotional burnout. Higher rates of child 

exposure to stressors such as domestic and community violence and economic hardship 

are associated with higher levels of behavior problems, with between 20 and 23 percent 

of young children in low-income communities showing elevated rates of externalizing 

(acting out, aggressive) and internalizing (depressed, withdrawn) behavior problems 

Elevated rates of behavior problems among multiple children in a class can pose ongoing 

challenges to early educators.

A.4b. Initial Findings from Intervention Studies. The initial findings from a randomized 

trial involving a mental health consultant providing training as well as in-class coaching 

on behavior management for early educators in low-income communities indicate 

positive effects of the intervention on classroom climate. In its next stages, the research 

will analyze the impact of the mental health consultant focusing on strategies for stress 

reduction with the educators. 

Future research should examine whether professional development approaches directly 

targeting the psychological well-being of early childhood educators result in increased 

instructional time and achievement gains for children. 
19

III: Strengthening the Institutions and Organizations Providing Professional 

Development 

The second major target for strengthening early childhood professional development 

focuses on the institutions or organizations providing the professional development. 

There is emerging research suggesting the need for strengthening higher education 

programs, strengthening the content of course work provided either through higher 

education or training, and for engaging early educators who are nontraditional learners in 

higher education. Rather than assessing the effects of such efforts on key outcomes (the 

knowledge and practice of early educators and children’s development), the research is at 

an early stage, primarily providing evidence of the need for efforts targeting this area. 

B. 1. Quality of Higher Education Programs

Early and colleagues (2007) and Burchinal and colleagues (2008) have suggested that it 

is important to look directly at the quality of degree granting early childhood higher 

education programs in order to understand the associations (or lack of associations) 

between attainment of a higher education degree, program quality, and child outcomes in 

early care and education. A new study by Hyson, Tomlinson and Morris (2008) provides 

further insight into the potential need to target higher education program quality in efforts 

to improve early childhood professional development.

Hyson and colleagues note that there are about 1,200 institutions of higher education with 

programs in early childhood, with about 60 percent providing associate degrees, and 40 

percent providing bachelors’ degrees. Approximately 36,000 students graduate from 

these programs each year, making the quality of the programs a concern just from the 

perspective of the number of students affected by them. 

B. 1a. Accreditation of Higher Education Programs for Early Educators. The quality of 

early childhood programs offering bachelor’s and graduate degrees can be evaluated 

through the accreditation process of the National Council for the Accreditation of 

Teacher Education (NCATE). Program review is carried out in light of the set of 

standards for early childhood professional development developed by the National 

Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC). A new process for 

accreditation of associate degree programs is under development by NAEYC. Hyson and 

colleagues note that of the approximately 450 institutions of higher education offering 

bachelors’ degrees and graduate programs, fewer than half are recognized for quality by 

NAEYC through the NCATE accreditation process. Some institutions of higher 

education do not participate in the NCATE accreditation process. Of those that do 

participate in the review process, over the past three years, approximately 25 percent 

have been unsuccessful in their first application for accreditation. 

Hyson and colleagues note that unsuccessful applications for accreditation can reflect 

how application materials were prepared and presented rather than quality per se. 

However their review of comments from the applications that were not successful also 

reveals some recurring tendencies that reflect concerns about quality. These include: 
20

student assessments and assignments that are not in keeping with goals for teacher 

competencies identified in the NAEYC standards; assessments that focus on general 

teacher knowledge rather than knowledge of early childhood; assessments of students 

that focus on knowledge but not also application in practice; field placements that are not 

of high quality or that lack supervision; and faculty without appropriate background in 

early childhood. 

B. 1b. Perspectives of Directors of Higher Education Programs. In order to learn about 

the perspectives of program administrators and faculty members, Hyson and colleagues 

carried out a Web-based survey. There was a response rate of 46 percent, with 250 

program leaders completing the survey from among 546 invited to participate. Results 

help to identify both the strengths of these programs and the challenges they face.

When asked for program priorities for strengthening student competence, program 

directors most often indicated that their goal was to have students be able to implement 

high quality early childhood curricula effectively. Other priorities included using early 

childhood assessments appropriately, working effectively with families, and addressing 

challenging behaviors in children. Hyson and colleagues note with concern that project 

directors infrequently prioritized strengthening educators’ capacity to have supportive 

interactions with individual children or imparting the ability to access and use research in 

practice. 

When asked what quality improvement activities they were currently undertaking, a 

majority of program directors identified improving assessments of student competencies, 

improving field placements for students, and designing or redesigning courses. Most 

programs indicated placing little or no effort on building faculty capacity, citing lack of 

budget or lack of institutional support. However, when asked what programs needed to 

assist their quality improvement efforts, program directors noted as most central the need 

for more faculty, more instructional time, and more institutional support for their 

programs. 

The authors note with concern that 40 percent of the respondents did not reply to a 

question about the research resources that they used to guide program improvement. 

Those that did reply did not always actually point to research sources. Further raising 

concerns about program quality, 18 percent of programs described themselves as in 

“survival mode,” just teaching courses and advising students but not progressing in terms 

of quality. 

The researchers conclude by noting that the priority placed by program directors on 

strengthening their students’ ability to implement high quality early childhood curricula 

is in keeping with research. The directors’ current focus on improving assessments of 

students and improving the quality of field placements is closely aligned with the 

comments of reviewers during the NCATE accreditation process. However there are 

reasons for concern about the lack of emphasis placed on research as a resource for 

guiding program improvement and lack of emphasis being placed on improving students’ 
21

capacity to access and build on research in their practice. There are also reasons for 

concern about lack of institutional support and resources to build faculty capacity.

In sum, the results of this survey suggest that efforts to improve early childhood 

professional development might also target overall quality improvement in institutions of 

higher education. Future research might focus on knowledge and observed quality of 

classrooms in which the lead teachers have and have not graduated from NCATEaccredited programs as well as the gains in achievement made by children in the 

classrooms of these teachers. 

B. 2. Content of Course Work

The survey reported on by Hyson and colleagues raises concerns about the degree to 

which faculty in institutions of higher education are accessing the research base in 

guiding the development of courses, as well as emphasizing student reliance on research. 

A pilot study by Roskos, Rosemary and Varner (2006) further underscores the possibility 

that there may be variability in course content and emphases within the Child 

Development Associate credential (CDA), associate degree, and bachelor degree levels. 

Their research examined materials from course work focusing on instruction in early 

literacy including such materials as syllabi, course descriptions, and field work 

assignments in light of differing standards. We summarize the evidence of this pilot study 

with respect to two of the standards applied: first, a review of curricular materials in light 

of state sponsored professional education curricula in reading pedagogy (called “external 

alignment”); and second, a review of the “extent to which a curriculum offers a 

comprehensive treatment of early literacy pedagogy through coverage of curricular 

components that emphasize...knowing, assessing, planning, and teaching...and content 

that emphasizes both knowledge and direct application” (p. 271-1) (called “horizontal 

alignment”). 

B. 2a. Exploratory Findings on Course Content and External Standards. Results point to 

strong alignment to external standards for the early literacy curricula at the bachelor

degree level but diminishing alignment for programs at the associate degree level (which 

showed only minimal or moderate alignment) and at the CDA level (which showed only 

weak or minimal alignment). There was greater variation across programs at the associate

degree and CDA levels than the bachelor degree levels. The authors note that this 

variation may be positive, indicating that some programs are accessing and utilizing the 

research base on reading and the standards that have been developed based on them. 

B. 2b. Exploratory Findings on Balance of Course Focus on Knowledge, Assessment, 

Planning and Teaching. None of the programs showed strong horizontal alignment or a 

focus on how to teach reading through a balance of knowledge, assessment, planning, and 

teaching. Programs without balance may overemphasize theoretical topics or practice 

and may fail to connect knowledge to practice. This concern with imbalance between 

conveying knowledge and guiding its application is in keeping with some of the concerns 

expressed in the NCATE review process noted earlier. 
22

Due to its limited size, this study cannot be taken to mean that programs as a whole do 

not rely enough on standards and research in developing course content, or do not 

implement a balanced emphasis on knowledge and practice in course work. Yet taken 

together with the findings reported by Hyson and colleagues, the findings here do provide 

sufficient basis to raise the possibility that an appropriate target for improvement of early 

childhood professional development programs may be to help implement course work 

that is informed by and aligned with recent research and with relevant standards. 

Assistance in designing appropriate course work may be particularly appropriate at the 

associate degree or certificate levels. 

B. 3. Strategies to Engage Adult Learners 

Another possible target for strengthening early childhood professional development is 

addressing the needs of nontraditional students in pursuing higher education. Whitebook 

and colleagues (2008) have recently reported on the first year results of a five-year 

longitudinal descriptive study of an approach intended to support such nontraditional 

students. In the study, six college programs in California have developed cohort 

approaches in which small groups of students in early childhood bachelor’s programs 

enroll in courses together, receive financial assistance, are given flexibility in scheduling 

courses and field placements, and are offered tutoring and advising on how to fulfill 

degree requirements. Interviews have been conducted with 90 percent of the 124 

participating students, administrators, and faculty at three of the institutions of higher 

education. 

B. 3a. Characteristics of “Nontraditional” Students. Whitebook and coauthors note that 

students with an early childhood focus in California’s college and university programs 

are often “nontraditional” students, defined as having four or more of the following 

characteristics: 

• having a GED or other certificate rather than high school diploma or lacking 

formal completion of a certificate;

• delayed enrollment in college beyond the last year in high school;

• part-time attendance in college; 

• full-time work while attending college; 

• financial independence according to the criteria for financial aid; 

• responsibility for a dependent; and

• being a single parent.

According to the researchers, nontraditional students face challenges that result in their 

being more likely to leave college before completing a degree than other students. They 

may face competing demands from work or home, limited financial resources, or limited 

understanding of college requirements. Those who are learning English may be 

challenged by written assignments in English. This longitudinal study will be tracking 

retention and graduation rates. 
23

B. 3b. Early Perceptions of Participants in Cohort Approaches to Supporting 

Nontraditional Students. At this early point in time, it is interesting to note that nearly all 

of the students (96 percent) indicated that the program’s cohort structure helped them to 

be successful in their course work, and more than two-thirds indicated that they benefited 

from the personal support of cohort members and helped each other in their courses. 

Only about one-quarter indicated that there was something about the cohort structure that 

did not work well for them, and this was usually something related to group dynamics. 

Faculty members also felt the cohort structure was beneficial.

The authors note that the additional supports provided for nontraditional students can 

involve additional costs, and faculty members were concerned about sustainability. They 

note that the research involved here is primarily descriptive in nature and cannot help to 

determine which of the multiple elements of the approach used (including joint 

scheduling of classes for the cohort, advising, tutoring, access to technology, financial 

supports, and accommodations to the students’ work schedules) are most important to 

sustain if budget cuts are necessary. It will be important to continue to follow the results 

of this longitudinal study especially in terms of degree completion. Future research might 

consider examining and evaluating specific variations of the cohort approach to 

determine the specific program elements that are of greatest importance. 

B. 4. Need for Focus on Strengthening the Institutions That Provide Training as Well as 

Higher Education

In concluding this section, we note that we have emphasized targeting professional 

development efforts primarily to strengthening programs in institutions of higher 

education, yet much professional development occurs through training. We note that the 

National Association of Child Care Resource and Referral Agencies has recently 

developed a set of standards for accrediting child care resource and referral agencies’ 

training programs. Components focus on both the qualifications of those providing the 

training and the content of workshops. Another focus for future research might be to 

evaluate the skills of those early childhood educators pursuing training through 

accredited and nonaccredited agencies. 
24
25

IV: Professional Development Targeting Improvement in Specific Developmental 

Domains for Children

This section of the review turns to efforts to strengthen professional development through 

focusing on specific domains of children’s development. We turn first to efforts to 

strengthen professional development in early language and literacy, then in early 

mathematics, and finally in children’s social development. Because the research in each 

of these areas includes a body of evaluation studies, we support the summary of the 

evidence in the text with detailed tables providing an overview of each study’s 

methodology, a description of the professional development approach, and results for 

each major outcome (educator knowledge, practice, and child outcomes). 

C. 1. Early Language and Literacy

C. 1a. Overview of Studies Reviewed 

Table 1. Characteristics of Language and Literacy Studies Reviewed

Study 

Number Citation Design* Outcome Areas Examined†

Exp QuasiExp

P/P

With

Comp

P/P

Without

Comp

Desc EK EP CO

1 Adger, Hoyle & Dickinson 

(2004) X 

2 Assel, Landry, Swank & 

Gunnewig (2007) X  

3 Baker & Smith (1999) X 

4 Byrne & Fielding-Barnsley

(1995) X 

5 Dickinson & Brady 1 (2006) X 

6 Dickinson & Brady 2 (2006) X  

7 Dickinson & Brady 3 (2006) X 

8 Dickinson & Brady 4 (2006) X 

9 Dickinson & Brady 5 (2006) 

10 Dickinson & Caswell (2007) X 

11 Foorman & Moats (2004) X   

12 Fountain, Cosgrove & Wood 

(2008) X  

13 Gettinger & Stoiber (2007) X 

14

Jackson, Larzelere, St. Clair, 

Corr, Fichter & Egertson 

(2006) X  

Continues next page
26

Study 

Number Citation Design* Outcome Areas Examined†

Exp QuasiExp

P/P

With

Comp

P/P

Without

Comp

Desc EK EP CO

15 Justice, Mashburn, Hamre & 

Pianta (2008) X 

16 Justice, Pence & Wiggins 

(2008) X 

17 Landry (2002) X  

18 Landry, Assel, Gunnewig & 

Swank (2008) X  

19 Landry, Swank, Smith, Assel 

& Gunnewig (2006) X   

20 Lonigan & Schatschneider 

(2008) X  

21 Lonigan & Whitehurst (1998) X 

22

McCutchen, Abbott, Green, 

Beretvas, Cox, Potter et al. 

(2002)

X   

23 McGill-Franzen, Allington, 

Yokoi & Brooks (1999) X  

24

National Center for Education 

Evaluation and Regional 

Assistance, Institute of 

Education Sciences (2007)

X   

25 Neuman (1999) X  

26 Neuman & Cunningham 

(2009) X  

27 O’Connor, Fulmer, Harty & 

Bell (2005) X  

28 Podhajski & Nathan (2005) X  

29 Pence, Justice & Wiggins 

(2008) X 

30 Roskos, Rosemary & Varner 

(2006) X 

31 Wasik & Bond (2001) X  

32 Wasik, Bond & Hindman 

(2006) X  

33

Whitehurst, Arnold, Epstein, 

Angell, Smith, & Fischel 

(1994)

X 

34

Whitehurst, Epstein, Angell, 

Payne, Crone, & Fischel 

(1994)

X 

35

Whitehurst, Zevenberegen, 

Crone, Schultz, Velting, & 

Fischel (1999)

X  

36

Yaden, Tam, Madrigal, 

Brassell, Massa, Altamirano & 

Armendariz (2000) X 

Continues next page

Table 1. Characteristics of Language and Literacy Studies Reviewed (Continued)
27

Study 

Number Citation Design* Outcome Areas Examined†

Exp QuasiExp

P/P

With

Comp

P/P

Without

Comp

Desc EK EP CO

37 Zevenbergen, Whitehurst & 

Zevernbergen (2003) X 

Total Studies Reviewed: 37 15 8 8 1 4 8 26 26

(*Exp= Experimental, Quasi-Exp= Quasi-Experimental, P/P With Comp= Pre-Post with comparison group, P/P Without Comp= Pre-Post without 

comparison group, D= Descriptive;

†

EK= Educator Knowledge, EP= Educator Practice, CO= Child Outcomes)

The preschool years play a critical role in children’s literacy development (Neuman and 

Dickinson 2002; Snow, Burns, and Griffin 1998). Not surprisingly, then, professional 

development strategies for improving the teaching of early literacy skills are abundant in 

the literature. A total of 37 studies were reviewed that reported on evaluations of 

professional development approaches aimed at promoting children’s early language and 

literacy development. As mentioned in the orientation to the tables, some studies in the 

table discuss related projects. Of the 37 literacy studies, there are 22 studies with no 

relation to others and four groups of related studies. One of these groups, by Dickinson 

and colleagues, documents the progression of the project known as the Literacy 

Environment Enrichment Program (LEEP). There is one paper describing the pilot 

project that provided the foundation of later steps of the LEEP project, three papers on 

different evaluations of LEEP training, and three papers reporting on evaluations of 

LEEP’s predecessor professional development programs, T-LEEP, STARS-LEEP, and 

PD-LIT (Adger, Hoyle, and Dickinson 2004; Dickinson and Brady 2006). Another group 

of studies, by Whitehurst and colleagues, are evaluation studies of a dialogic reading 

intervention as administered in 4-year-old Head Start classrooms by videotape-trained 

educators. The five studies documenting this project and its outcomes vary in their 

precise research questions. The third group of related studies is part of the Institute of 

Education Sciences’ PCER initiative, designed to conduct experimental evaluations of 

preschool curricula (U.S. Department of Education 2008). The initiative focused on the 

impact of curricula on child outcomes, as well as preschool classroom quality, teacherchild interaction, and instructional practice. Finally, in a set of two studies by Wasik and 

colleagues (Wasik and Bond 2001; Wasik, Bond, and Hindman 2006), the researchers 

examine the effects of an interactive book reading curriculum on children’s language and 

literacy skills. 

Many of the interventions reviewed were directed primarily at children from low-income 

families, or children most at risk for language or reading delays. Virtually all of the 

interventions targeted educators in center-based settings (such as Head Start, child care 

centers, or kindergarten classrooms). 

A recurring comment in the best practices literature on professional development is that 

all professional training for early childhood educators should be research-based. Without 

exception, all of the professional development approaches reviewed were based on the 

Table 1. Characteristics of Language and Literacy Studies Reviewed (Continued)
28

most recent theory and research on reading development and effective literacy 

intervention. That research base is reviewed very briefly here. 

Experts note that effective literacy instruction should address the components of reading 

that have been linked to reading improvement in experimental studies. These 

components include phonemic awareness (i.e., the ability to isolate and manipulate the 

sounds of spoken words), phonics (i.e., the linkage of speech sounds to alphabet letters 

and letter combinations), vocabulary (i.e., the meanings of words), fluency (i.e., the rate 

of reading), and comprehension (i.e., understanding sentences and the overall meaning of 

a passage) (National Reading Panel 2000; Snow, Burns, and Griffin 1998; National Early 

Literacy Panel 2008). However, early language development also needs support, with the 

provision of rich adult-child conversation to build vocabulary and learn other oral 

language skills such as the pragmatics (i.e., functioning) and semantics (i.e., meaning) of 

verbal communication. 

With regard to professional development in particular, the Committee on the Prevention 

of Reading Difficulties in Young Children suggests that early childhood educators should 

be trained in: 

• How to provide rich, conceptual experiences that promote growth in vocabulary 

and reasoning skills;

• Lexical development, from early referential (naming) abilities to relational and 

abstract terms and finer-shaded meanings;

• The early development of listening comprehension skills, and the kinds of 

syntactic and prose structures that preschool children may not yet have mastered;

• Young children’s sense of story;

• Young children’s sensitivity to the sounds of language;

• Developmental conceptions of written language (print awareness);

• Development of concepts of space, including directionality;

• Fine motor development; and

• Means for inspiring motivation to read. (Snow, Burns, and Griffin 1998, p.280)

The National Reading Panel (National Institute of Child Health and Human Development 

2000) concluded that in-service training was beneficial in improving teachers’ skills in 

teaching reading. Studies of preservice education for teachers focused on changes in 

knowledge but did not examine classroom practice once teachers were placed in 

classrooms. 

The professional development approaches reviewed conveyed information that had basis 

in scientific research. For example, the training provided by McCutchen and colleagues 

(2002) included a component that “outlined...the typical sequence of development in 

children’s phonological awareness,” and this information was based on published 

research articulating the progression of children’s phonological awareness (p. 73). 

Similarly, activities recommended by the professional development strategies reviewed 

had evidence of effectiveness in scientific research or through field testing of the 

curriculum. For example, in Wasik and Bond (2001), on-site mentors trained educators 
29

to use interactive book reading strategies and themed vocabulary building with 4-yearolds. This intervention was based on multiple previous studies that showed that 

interactive book reading could improve preschoolers’ language skills (Whitehurst, Arnold 

et al. 1994; Whitehurst, Epstein et al. 1994), and studies that showed that children need

repeated exposure to words to integrate them into their vocabulary (Huttenlocher, Levine, 

& Vevea, 1998, and Robbins and Ehri, 1994, as cited in Wasik and Bond 2001).

Furthermore, three professional development programs reported sharing actual research 

articles with educators to inform them about current research findings in children’s early 

language and literacy development (Dickinson and Brady 2006, Example 1; Baker and 

Smith 1999; O'Connor et al. 2005). A superficial change in teachers’ practice may have 

little sustainability, but changing how teachers think about their practice by providing 

them with research-based information may support a more permanent change in practice 

and continued self-reflective practice. 

A previous review of the literature that the authors conducted for the Child Care and 

Early Education Research Connections Web site (Halle et al. 2003) identified three 

targeted strategies implemented in early childhood care and education settings that show 

evidence of improving children’s language and literacy skills in preschool and beyond. 

These include (in no particular order of importance): (1) reading aloud to children in an 

interactive style, (2) phonological skill development, and (3) increasing access to books 

and environmental print in early childhood settings. Similarly, but using more stringent 

review criteria, The Institute of Education Sciences’ What Works Clearinghouse 

identified two recommended practices that had evidence of supporting preschoolers’ 

language and literacy development: (1) development of phonological awareness skills 

and (2) interactive reading and dialogic reading.2

 In the current review, which focuses on 

evaluations of professional development to improve literacy development in early care 

and education settings, similar topics were addressed in professional development 

activities and materials.3 However, additional strategies and content areas covered in 

professional development were found as well. These are outlined below. 

Content of Professional Development to Improve Language and Literacy. Across the 

reviewed studies, one of the content areas within the professional development curricula 

was fostering strong interactive book reading practices; specific strategies included 

having educators engage children by asking open-ended questions, discussing 

 2 See http://dww.ed.gov/topic/topic_landing.cfm?PA_ID=7&T_ID=15&Tab=2. 3 Although there is overlap in the articles reviewed for the Halle, Calkins, Berry, and Johnson (2003)

literature review and this literature review, the information assessed in the publications and the conclusions 

drawn reflect the different aims of the two literature review tasks. The focus of the literature review for 

Research Connections was to identify research evidence for effective activities within early care settings 

that promoted early literacy skills in young children. The focus of the current review is an analysis of the 

foundation for and implementation of professional development strategies for early childhood educators as 

they relate to three outcomes across a range of educational domains (reading, math and social behavior). 

The three outcomes include improving educators’ knowledge, improving educator practice, and improving 

child outcomes. Consequently, some of the articles in the previous literature review were not relevant for 

the current review, due to lack of information on professional development (or lack of including early 

childhood educators in the intervention at all). In addition, publications not included in the previous review 

are reviewed here, due to the different search and inclusion criteria employed for this review. 
30

illustrations, and extending the story into art and writing activities (Wasik and Bond 

2001; Wasik, Bond, and Hindman 2006; Whitehurst, Arnold et al. 1994; Landry et al. 

2006). Another content area stressed in professional development was using book 

reading and environmental print to support children’s print awareness (Neuman 1999; 

McGill-Franzen et al. 1999; e.g. Lonigan and Whitehurst 1998). A third content area 

included in professional development activities in multiple studies was developing 

supports for children’s phonological awareness (e.g., Podhajski and Nathan 2005; 

Starkey et al. 2008), and in some cases, forging a connection between sound and print 

and including phonemic awareness and letter knowledge (McCutchen et al. 2002; e.g., 

Adger, Hoyle, and Dickinson 2004; Assel et al. 2007). The importance of developing 

children’s vocabulary and oral language was stressed in multiple studies, and rich 

educator-child dialogue was encouraged (Whitehurst, Arnold et al. 1994; Dickinson and 

Brady 2006). Supports for emergent writing were encouraged such as integrating literacy 

activity into play by using literacy props (McGill-Franzen et al. 1999). Another recurring 

element of professional development in the studies reviewed included strategies for 

creating literacy-rich environments, including modifying the physical setup of the 

classroom, creating a separate book area, and utilizing attractive environmental print 

(McGill-Franzen et al. 1999; Neuman 1999). Finally, some studies included educating 

teachers on screening and monitoring children’s literacy skills, and providing 

differentiated instruction (Gettinger and Stoiber 2007; Garet et al. 2008). 

In some cases, professional development activities were focused on single components of 

literacy development, such as phonological awareness (Byrne and Fielding–Barnsley 

1995), or interactive book reading (Lonigan and Whitehurst 1998; Wasik and Bond 

2001). However, it was much more common for professional development models to take 

a more comprehensive approach. That is, the majority of the reviewed studies addressed 

multiple components of children’s early literacy skills, and employed various strategies to 

address the development of these skills. For example, several interventions covered a 

wide range of topics and instructional strategies through intensive in-service training, the 

sharing of commercially available curricula, role playing, lesson planning, and ongoing 

coaching and mentoring in the classroom (e.g., Landry 2002; McGill-Franzen et al. 1999; 

Podhajski and Nathan 2005; Assel et al. 2007; Gettinger and Stoiber 2007). Topics 

covered in these more comprehensive formats included phonological awareness, 

phoneme segmentation, interactive book reading, effective read aloud sessions, extending 

stories through class projects and discussion, developing vocabulary through book 

reading, print and book awareness, motivation to read, letter knowledge and early word 

recognition, environmental print, literacy activity during play, relationships between 

speech and print, comprehension, and emergent writing. Collectively, training in these 

comprehensive instructional models provided professional development that encouraged 

supports for multiple aspects of early language and literacy development. 

Thus, one of the emerging themes within this area of professional development is an 

acknowledgement that early literacy encompasses multiple skills, and consequently, early 

childhood educators need a variety of strategies with which to address these multiple 

components of early literacy. Interestingly, the research base has not clearly articulated 

whether there is a distinct sequencing of skills that should be fostered in children during 
31

the preschool years to promote language and literacy development. Rather, the literature 

indicates that multiple components are important during the preschool years (e.g., oral 

language, vocabulary development, phonemic awareness, letter knowledge, concepts of 

print and book knowledge, early word recognition, and motivation to read). Implicitly, 

the amount of focus on phonemic awareness within the literature suggests that this 

particular skill is foundational for other literacy skills. However, it remains an empirical 

question whether phonemic awareness is indeed more important to the development of 

reading skills than, say, oral language development. Only one of the reviewed studies 

introduced different aspects of early literacy development in a sequenced manner during 

professional development sessions, and this was a study that was designed for teachers in 

kindergarten through third grade (O'Connor et al. 2005). Specifically, the content of 

professional development sessions shifted across the four-year study, as teachers in the 

later grades were gradually included in professional development. In kindergarten and 

first grade, topics covered during professional development sessions included phonemic 

awareness, phonics, and vocabulary. In first and second grades, topics included the 

alphabetic principle, vocabulary, word study, and fluency. In second and third grades, 

topics included multisyllabic word reading approaches and comprehension strategies 

such as retelling and summarizing. Studies that sequence the introduction of literacy 

instruction within the early childhood years (from birth through kindergarten entry) were 

not identified in this literature search. However, it would be important to determine 

whether this type of sequencing of skill development could be successfully extended 

downward to the preschool age range. 

Several professional development interventions taught educators how to utilize 

assessments of children’s language and literacy development to identify developmental 

delays and to assess progress with the implementation of the new techniques learned 

through professional development (Foorman and Moats 2004; O'Connor et al. 2005; 

Gettinger and Stoiber 2007; Garet et al. 2008). Training early childhood educators on the 

proper use and interpretation of child assessments for ongoing program monitoring may 

be a particularly useful component of professional development. The ability to match 

child progress on outcome measures with changes in classroom practice over time would 

give early childhood educators immediate feedback and validation for successful 

implementation of professional development activities. Additionally, this information 

would provide teachers with the information necessary to differentiate their approaches to 

instruction. For example, Gettinger and Stoiber (2007) use a three-tiered approach. They 

begin by providing educators with professional development training sessions on literacy 

activities, and then in Tier 2, daily small group instruction is targeted toward children 

needing additional assistance. Finally, in Tier 3, individual tutoring is provided to 

children who are identified as being at the highest risk for reading difficulties. 

At least five studies in this review mention inclusion or outreach to parents as part of the 

intervention. For example, a series of studies by (Whitehurst, Arnold et al. 1994)

examined whether training parents in dialogic reading, in addition to exposure to dialogic 

reading in the classroom, was more effective than exposure to dialogic reading in the 

classroom alone. Similarly, a study by (Lonigan and Whitehurst 1998) examined 

differences in three training conditions for dialogic reading: school reading, home 
32

reading, and school-plus-home reading. Finally, Yaden and colleagues (2000) examined 

whether providing English-language and literacy supports to parents, extended family 

members, and child-care center employees, including a book-lending library and offering 

parent workshops at home, could affect Spanish-speaking children’s literacy outcomes. A 

few additional studies reference outreach to families or family involvement as part of 

their curricula (e.g. Assel et al. 2007; Fountain, Cosgrove, and Wood 2008). However, in 

all of these examples, the professional development offered to early childhood educators 

does not train them on strategies to involve or engage parents in literacy techniques to 

support children’s language and literacy development. Research suggests important 

connections between school and home literacy practices and child outcomes among 

English-speaking children (Baker et al. 1996; Dickinson and Tabors 1991; Snow et al. 

1991; Weigel, Martin, and Bennett 2005) and among English language learners (August 

and Shanahan 2006). This is a topic for teachers’ professional development that may 

warrant further attention. 

Finally, more study is needed of professional development efforts geared to working with 

early sequential bilingual children and English language learners (ELLs). Although 

several of the studies reviewed included children who spoke a language other than 

English at home (Assel et al. 2007; Garet et al. 2008; Landry et al. 2008; U.S. 

Department of Education 2007) with one notable exception, none of the studies included 

cultural and linguistic competence as part of their professional development. Yaden et al. 

(2000) examined whether in-classroom support and ongoing in-service training regarding 

English-language and literacy support to early childhood educators improved Spanishspeaking children’s literacy skills. Results suggested that children who participated in a 

full year of the intervention showed significant gains in literacy skills. However, there is 

little methodological detail provided, and it is unclear which components of the 

intervention led to positive outcomes in the intervention group. Not only was there a lack 

of focus on professional development training related to supporting ELL students, but 

researchers also did not control or test for differences in child outcomes based on ELL 

status. Assel et al. (2007) note that they were not able to assess differences in children’s 

outcomes for ELL versus non-ELL children due to the varying number of children across 

sites. A review of this research suggests that cultural and linguistic competence is not a 

focus of professional development, nor are researchers examining the differential impacts 

of various professional development approaches based on children’s ELL or bilingual 

status. A major barrier to making the linkage between professional development efforts 

and ELL children’s developmental outcomes is the paucity of child outcome measures 

that are reliable and valid for use with ELL children and that permit adequate assessments 

of individual strengths and weaknesses (August and Shanahan 2006).

Professional Development Strategies to Improve Language and Literacy. A variety of 

approaches to professional development were found in the reviewed studies on language 

and literacy, including workshops, course work, on-site work, and, in one instance, 

combinations of these approaches. Many of the professional development sessions 

included workshops or course work with a didactic element of conveying information on 

children’s language and literacy development to educators (Foorman and Moats 2004; 

McCutchen et al. 2002; Pence, Justice, and Wiggins 2008), and some taught educators 
33

specific classroom activities and strategies or curricula (Byrne and Fielding–Barnsley 

1995; Whitehurst, Epstein et al. 1994; Landry et al. 2008). Sometimes this took the form 

of lectures or readings (Taylor and Pearson 2004; Dickinson and Brady 2006, Example 

1); other times researchers showed educators video-tape vignettes of book reading or 

other activities (Taylor and Pearson 2004; Whitehurst, Epstein et al. 1994). In one 

instance, the professional development consisted of a satellite broadcast that allowed for 

dial-in questions, and an interactive Web site for further support and collaboration 

(Jackson et al. 2006). Some of the professional development sessions included more 

open-ended aspects, such as encouraging discussion between educator colleagues 

regarding their experiences in the classroom, or collaboratively designing lesson plans 

based on their new knowledge of language and literacy development (Landry 2002; 

McCutchen et al. 2002; Fountain, Cosgrove, and Wood 2008). Sometimes when there 

were multiple sessions, educators completed homework that encouraged self-reflective 

practice and linked their classroom experiences to what they learned in the training 

(Dickinson and Brady 2006, Example 2). 

On-site mentoring or coaching was a professional development approach used in many 

studies (Baker and Smith 1999; Landry 2002; Podhajski and Nathan 2005; Assel et al. 

2007; Gettinger and Stoiber 2007; Landry et al. 2006). A new study by Neuman and 

Cunningham (2009) is one of the first that examines empirically a coordinated approach 

to professional development (that is, combining course work with ongoing coaching). In 

this case, the coaching specifically supported the content conveyed in a 15-week course 

and provided ongoing on-site assistance for 17 weeks beyond the end of the course. This 

study is also one of the few that provides some detail on the characteristics of the coaches 

and their training, as well as detail about how the on-site work was carried out. 

Another innovative approach to providing professional development was involving 

cohorts of early childhood educators within a single institution. In a few cases, the 

professional development was given to teams of educators, such as teacher-assistantteacher teams, or teacher-director teams, so that educators could mutually support each 

other during implementation (Dickinson and Brady 2006; Dickinson and Caswell 2007). 

In still other cases, administrators as well as special education providers were included in 

the professional development intervention along with regular classroom educators 

(O'Connor et al. 2005; Taylor and Pearson 2004). 

C. 1b. Study Designs and Methodologies. The majority of studies reviewed use an 

experimental design with random assignment to treatment and control groups (e.g. Assel 

et al. 2007; Garet et al. 2008; Justice, Pence, and Wiggins 2008; Lonigan and 

Schatschneider 2008; Whitehurst et al. 1999). The PCER studies, the studies on dialogic 

reading by Whitehurst and colleagues, and several others use this rigorous design, and 

therefore contain the most robust evidence for the effectiveness of professional 

development strategies. There is a group of studies that utilize quasi-experimental designs 

in evaluating professional development relating to early language and literacy (e.g., 

Dickinson and Brady 2006, Examples 3 & 4; McCutchen et al. 2002; Yaden et al. 2000). 

There is one (O'Connor et al. 2005), that uses a longitudinal, lagged design, that 

addresses a typical confound with professional development studies: Can the effects of 
34

professional development be disassociated from level of teacher competence in general? 

Because data on child outcomes were gathered from these teachers’ classrooms before 

and after the teachers’ exposure to the professional development, this confound was 

eliminated in the study. Several studies also used a pre-post design with a comparison 

group that was not randomly assigned, and analyses do not control for baseline 

differences between groups (e.g., Baker and Smith 1999; Byrne and Fielding–Barnsley 

1995; Landry 2002; O'Connor et al. 2005; Podhajski and Nathan 2005; Gettinger and 

Stoiber 2007). The findings of these studies contribute useful information about strategies 

for effective professional development, but because they are not experimental, the 

findings should be considered preliminary evidence of what later should be confirmed 

through more rigorous evaluation designs. The few descriptive (e.g. Adger, Hoyle, and 

Dickinson 2004; Dickinson and Brady 2006; Roskos, Rosemary, and Varner 2006) and 

pre-post studies without comparison groups (e.g., Foorman and Moats 2004; Taylor and 

Pearson 2004) should likewise be considered preliminary evidence. 

C. 1c. Patterns of Findings. In this section we provide a summary of findings relating 

professional development to differing outcomes. We turn first to results separated out by 

whether the outcome focused on is educator knowledge, educator practice, or child 

outcomes, noting the proportion of the studies reviewed showing effects in each area and 

briefly describing them. We then look across those studies that reported effects in at least 

one of these areas, describing the professional development approaches in these studies 

with the aim of gleaning which approaches were most consistently linked with key 

outcomes.

Examination of Educator Knowledge. Six of the 37 studies reported effects for educator 

knowledge (Adger, Hoyle, and Dickinson 2004; Foorman and Moats 2004; Garet et al. 

2008; McCutchen et al. 2002; Podhajski and Nathan 2005; Roskos, Rosemary, and 

Varner 2006). Typically, participation in professional development was found to increase 

caregiver knowledge, although one study only descriptively evaluated alignment of one 

state’s early childhood credentialing programs’ curricula with the recommendations of 

scientifically based reading research and with the goals for child outcomes in reading and 

writing, as defined by that state’s early learning guidelines (Roskos, Rosemary, and 

Varner 2006). An exception was the study by Neuman and Cunningham (2009) which 

found no significant differences in teacher knowledge between teachers who received 

course work plus coaching, course work alone, or “business as usual.”4

 

Examination of Educator Practice. Twenty-six of the 37 studies measured educator 

practice, and typically participation in professional development was found to improve 

educator practice, although not in all cases (McCutchen et al. 2002; see, for example, 

Foorman and Moats 2004; Fountain, Cosgrove, and Wood 2008). In studies that found 

significant differences between treatment and control groups, effect sizes ranged from 

small or moderate (d = .13 and .45) (Gettinger and Stoiber 2007) to large (d = 1.26 and 

1.41; (Lonigan and Schatschneider 2008). 

 4 A more elaborated discussion of outcomes can be found in the following sections. 
35

Examination of Child Outcomes. Twenty-six of the studies measured child outcomes, and 

typically outcomes for treatment participants were found improved at post-test compared 

to controls. The sustainability of improved outcomes was rarely measured; when child 

outcomes were measured, they proved difficult to sustain (Neuman 1999; Whitehurst, 

Epstein et al. 1994; Garet et al. 2008). Sustainability of results will be discussed in more 

detail below. 

Measurement approaches in studies examining these outcome areas. A notable feature of 

this corpus of studies is the use of standardized measures of child language and literacy 

outcomes (e.g., PPVT), as well as standardized measures of the literacy environment in 

the classroom (e.g., the ELLCO) to measure the effectiveness of professional 

development efforts. Unlike other content areas, such as mathematics, measures of 

children’s language and literacy development are widely available and readily called 

upon for use in evaluations of early childhood interventions and professional 

development training. As mentioned earlier, a particularly promising feature of several 

professional development models was the training of early childhood educators in the use 

and interpretation of standardized measures of children’s language and literacy 

development for the purpose of monitoring progress for individual children and for the 

effective implementation of the professional development program. 

The creative use of discourse analysis to analyze discussions among educators and 

trainers within professional development sessions was also described in one study 

(Adger, Hoyle, and Dickinson 2004). Although descriptive in nature, this study goes a 

long way in addressing the processes by which professional development takes place and 

describes explicitly the type of educator knowledge that is acquired or consolidated in 

professional development settings.

Professional Development Approaches Most Consistently Linked With Outcomes. This 

section will describe patterns in professional development approaches that were 

associated with positive effects in at least one of the three outcome categories. It is 

important to note that while positive outcomes were found in many of the studies 

reviewed here, most of these studies combine multiple features of professional 

development (knowledge transfer, ongoing mentoring, self-reflective practice, etc.) into a 

single implementation, and thus it is impossible to tease apart which features of 

professional development are responsible for the programs’ effectiveness. Ideally, 

planned variation experiments would isolate individual factors of professional 

development programs to understand the functioning of each factor in isolation. Some 

studies are making progress in this area, as they test competing curricula that differ on 

only one feature. For example, (Landry et al. 2008) compared child outcomes on two 

curricula that are similar, but one has more of a focus on phonological awareness. 

Another group of studies compared professional development that provided just training, 

to a training plus mentoring approach (e.g. Garet et al. 2008; Jackson et al. 2006). The 

studies under review are informative for understanding what professional development 

approaches help to improve educators’ knowledge or skills in the teaching of early 

literacy, with the ultimate goal of improving literacy outcomes among children. 
36

The major components of a strong foundation for professional development relate to 

defining the goals and objectives that educators will learn or the strategies they will take 

away from the training: Are the goals firmly established before the training begins, or 

will participants be included in establishing goals and objectives? Have information and 

strategies dispensed during the training been demonstrated by rigorous research to be 

effective with children? Will the professional development consider the educators’ 

experiences, including current practice, population served, and resources available? What 

sorts of resources are educators provided to support implementation of new information 

and activities? The foundation of each professional development program may be just as 

important as the method by which it is implemented.

Establishing Goals and Objectives. Across the studies reviewed, there exists 

some tension between establishing clear program goals and objectives before educators 

begin training and encouraging educators to develop their own goals during the course of 

the training. The dialogic reading professional development program conducted by 

Whitehurst and colleagues took a highly didactic approach, presenting educators with 

book reading guidelines, showing them vignettes of strong dialogic book reading, and 

giving them opportunities to practice via role-playing but did not encourage educators to 

shape their own approaches to language and literacy supports (Whitehurst, Epstein et al. 

1994; Whitehurst, Arnold et al. 1994). Evaluations showed that this straightforward 

dialogic reading training program was successful in improving child outcomes (teacher 

knowledge and practice were not assessed). Those few programs that primarily focused 

on collaborative development of language and literacy strategies instead of providing preestablished strategies suggest that more structure may have given the program more 

focus. After piloting a professional development approach in which teachers were 

encouraged to discuss their language and literacy practices, and given some readings on 

children’s development to deepen their discussion, Dickinson and colleagues found that 

teachers wanted more clear-cut, didactic guidance on specific strategies to strengthen 

their practice (Dickinson and Brady 2006, Example 1). 

In another program that combined prescriptive and more open-ended approaches to 

establishing the goals and objectives of professional development, researchers found that 

“teachers welcomed the structure imposed by...pacing guides, lesson scripts, and lesson 

plans...many protested that they had been overwhelmed by too many choices of activities 

in publishers’ teaching manuals and too little assistance choosing essential lesson 

components” (Foorman and Moats 2004, p. 56). The majority of the successful studies 

under review use some combination of the two approaches: articulating information 

about children’s language and literacy development and strategies for supporting it, and 

allowing educators to discuss and modify strategies as they are applied in the naturalistic 

classroom setting. Combining approaches makes sense because providing clear 

recommendations for practice can help ensure that the activities are aligned with the 

research on children’s language and literacy development, while encouraging educators 

to adapt practices to their own classrooms promotes teacher buy-in to the new techniques 

and continued self-reflective practice. 
37

Understanding the Current Classroom Context. Another important foundational 

element is for the people who are implementing the professional development strategies 

to gain a general understanding of the classroom contexts of the educators in training 

prior to initiating changes in classroom context and teaching behavior. This practice 

serves two key purposes. First, it establishes a respectful and reciprocal tone to the 

trainer-trainee relationship, which aids transmission of information and strategies later in 

the professional development program. Baker and Smith (1999) found that, “Learning 

about teachers’ classrooms...helped establish a sense of trust and collegiality. As we 

began to introduce ideas about instructional changes, this positive atmosphere contributed 

to teachers’ willingness to experiment with new approaches” (p. 248). Similarly, Assel et 

al. (2007) developed a training that was “learner-centered and knowledge-based” and 

built upon what teachers already knew and were practicing in their classrooms. In 

addition, sometimes researchers found that the approach to professional development or 

even the classroom strategies themselves had to be tailored to the context of the teachers. 

The Books Aloud training program (Neuman 1999) originally had planned to train all 

participating teachers in group sessions at local libraries. However, due to the “great 

variability among centers” (some had “highly trained staff and were accredited....others 

were extremely needy, suffering from tremendous turnovers in personnel, little 

curriculum planning, and paltry budgets”), trainers had to revise the original professional 

development approach to make it much more “context-specific” than originally planned 

(Neuman 1999, p.294). Similarly, Baker and Smith concluded that they “needed a firm 

understanding of teachers’ current practices before initiating changes” (Baker and Smith 

1999, p.248). Interestingly, only these two studies addressed the importance of 

establishing an understanding of existing classroom contexts prior to implementing 

professional development programs within classrooms. This approach is consistent with 

the National Research Council Report How People Learn (Donovan, Bransford, and 

Pellegrino 1999), which has as one of its three principles for learning that the starting 

point needs to be understanding the preconceptions of learners that can serve as the 

foundation for new learning, or that involve misconceptions that may need to be changed 

before progress can be made.

Provision of Resources. Instructional materials provide another key foundational 

piece for strong professional development programs. Materials that may facilitate the 

effectiveness of professional development include resources on children’s language and 

literacy development, such as summaries of key principles or timelines of developmental 

benchmarks; materials that outline suggested activities, such as a curriculum manual or 

activity guide; and resources to which educators may refer further questions or go to for 

more information, such as a Web site. Several but not all of the studies under review 

explicitly mention instructional materials that educators take with them after the training 

is completed. For the studies that did not mention instructional materials, this omission 

may demonstrate an oversight of the importance of these materials by the evaluation 

teams when reporting on their study rather than an absence of them from professional 

development programs. These materials may be extremely valuable to the sustainability 

of the training, as they can remind the educator about key take-home points of the 

training long after memory of its details has begun to fade. The clarity and ease of utility 

of these materials is important in determining whether or not educators will use them as a 
38

resource when planning classroom activities. The types of materials that were mentioned 

include: a page of examples of open-ended questions to use during interactive book 

reading (Wasik and Bond 2001); prop boxes which contain books and related concrete 

objects representing target words (Wasik, Bond, and Hindman 2006); a handout of book 

reading tips (Neuman 1999); a handout of recommended books for reading aloud 

(Neuman 1999); written instructions for activities that reinforce themed vocabulary 

(Wasik and Bond 2001); copies of lesson plans developed cooperatively during training 

to develop early language and literacy (McCutchen et al. 2002); copies of instructional 

suggestions developed by researchers (McCutchen et al. 2002); handouts defining 

important components of early literacy (such as fluency and letter-sound sequences) as 

well as descriptions of methods for teaching these components (Baker and Smith 1999); 

overhead transparencies and videotapes (Dickinson and Caswell 2007); a Web site with 

suggestions of books and activities to support children’s phonological awareness and 

early literacy (Dickinson and Brady 2006, Example 3); and materials to send home with 

parents to practice skills that children are learning in the classroom (Assel et al. 2007). 

The element that all these materials have in common is creating a bridge between the 

educator’s training and his or her classroom practice. Unfortunately, the study designs do 

not permit an analysis of the linkage between provision of these foundational elements of 

professional development and educator knowledge, educator skill, or child outcomes. 

C. 1d. Implementation of Professional Development. Our analysis of the effectiveness of 

implementation of professional development included several key aspects of 

implementation: (1) the target audience for the professional development program (i.e., 

was the scope of professional development narrow or broad?); (2) any incentives or 

supports provided to educators for attending; (3) the content covered within the 

professional development model (i.e., was there narrow or comprehensive coverage of 

topics within the area of children’s early literacy development?); (4) the mode or modes 

of delivery of the professional development content; (5) the intensity or duration of the 

professional development activities (i.e., dosage); and (6) the fidelity of implementation 

carried out by the educators during and after the receipt of professional development. 

Target Group. The majority of studies targeted individual educators or child care 

providers in their professional development interventions. However, several studies 

included administrators and other support staff (such as speech or English language 

development specialists) in the training (Adger, Hoyle, and Dickinson 2004; Baker and 

Smith 1999; Dickinson and Brady 2006; O'Connor et al. 2005; Taylor and Pearson 2004). 

In almost all cases in which administrators were included in the professional development 

training, the researchers articulated a desire to increase institutional capacity more 

broadly for improved instruction of early literacy skills within the child care center or 

preschool classroom. In one study, the senior research team met monthly with the head 

administration of the program, citing the need for “buy in” from administrators, as 

ownership of a program can be crucial to its success (Assel et al. 2007). Results indicate 

that this more inclusive approach to professional development helped to foster joint 

knowledge building across staff within an institution, and was related to beneficial 

improvements in classroom literacy environments as well as improvements in child 

outcomes over time. 
39

Incentives. Seven studies reported using incentives such as academic credits and tuition 

coverage in support of teacher attendance at the professional development programs 

(Adger, Hoyle, and Dickinson 2004; Dickinson and Brady 2006; Foorman and Moats 

2004; McCutchen et al. 2002; Neuman 1999; Podhajski and Nathan 2005; Dickinson and 

Caswell 2007). While such incentives are likely to have had a direct effect on levels of 

attendance (and thus, dosage of the professional development intervention), it is not clear 

how incentives might have affected outcomes in terms of educator knowledge, practice, 

or child outcomes. That is, study designs and analysis plans did not permit a direct 

analysis of the effects of incentives on dosage or on outcomes. 

Coverage of Content. As discussed earlier, many professional development models for 

early literacy addressed multiple aspects of early literacy in the content of their 

professional development programs. Such comprehensive models of professional 

development were generally associated with positive outcomes in terms of educator 

knowledge, educator practice, or child outcomes. One drawback of the comprehensive 

approach to professional development in the area of literacy development is that it is 

unclear which components of the intervention were responsible for the positive outcomes 

identified for the intervention group. This was true even when only two components of 

early literacy (interactive book reading and phonemic awareness) were combined within 

a single professional development intervention (e.g., Whitehurst, Epstein et al. 1994; 

Whitehurst et al. 1999). As noted earlier, there was a study that compared two different 

curricula with emphasis on different language and literacy skills. Assel and colleagues 

(2007) compared Let’s Begin with the Letter People with a strong focus on letter 

knowledge and phonological awareness to Doors to Discovery, which places more 

emphasis on language comprehension. They found that, as expected, children receiving 

the Let’s Begin curriculum showed more robust growth in letter knowledge and 

phonological awareness. Studies like these, that compare two interventions or curricula 

that are similar overall, but differ in their focus, may provide clues as to which 

components of various interventions lead to desired child outcomes. 

Mode of Delivery. The mode of delivery of professional development tended to align 

with the content being conveyed. That is, in professional development programs in 

which comprehensive information on children’s early literacy development was covered, 

the approach for delivering the professional development information tended to be multimodal. For example, Baker and Smith (1999) describe a professional development 

approach that included (1) in-service training sessions; (2) meetings with teachers in 

large-group, small-group and individual settings; (3) classroom observations; and (4) 

informal and formal interviews with teachers. Furthermore, within each of these 

modalities, multiple activities were carried out. To use Baker and Smith (1999) as an 

example again, the in-service training sessions included the sharing of research-based 

benchmarks for critical skills, the introduction of commercial curricula that targeted 

specific components of early literacy, the demonstration of specific behaviors to be 

performed by educators, and time for practice and feedback on the use of new teaching 

techniques, materials, and strategies. Conversely, professional development programs 

that had a much narrower focus on a single aspect of literacy development tended to have 
40

less-elaborated methods of delivering the professional development. At the extreme was 

an intervention that merely gave teaching materials and a teaching manual to preschool 

teachers with the instruction to “work from the program’s manual in whatever way best 

fitted the school’s regimens, consistent with the aim of increasing phonemic awareness in 

the children” (Byrne and Fielding–Barnsley 1995, p. 498). However, typically, even 

professional development programs that focused on a single aspect of literacy 

development tended to include workshops as well as ongoing feedback and assistance via 

coaching or mentoring in the classroom. 

Several of the studies reviewed compared an instruction-only approach with instruction 

plus an on-site approach to help assure implementation practices, which the researchers 

refer to sometimes as mentoring and sometimes as coaching. We use the terminology 

chosen by the researchers themselves here, while noting that there is a clear need for 

clarification and consistent use of terminology. (Assel et al. 2007) compared a mentoring 

and non-mentoring condition and found that the impact of mentoring depended on the 

type of skill being measured and the type of early childhood program being implemented. 

For example, they found that mentoring had the greatest impact on child outcomes in 

Title I or universal pre-K programs compared to Head Start programs, and that the 

advantage of mentoring was greater for literacy rather than language skills. In a study by 

Neuman and Cunningham (2009), a coordinated approach to professional development 

that combines course work and ongoing coaching in early language and literacy 

development was compared to course work alone and “business as usual” in center- and 

home-based settings. They found no significant differences in teacher knowledge 

between teachers who received course work plus coaching, course work alone, or 

“business as usual.” Specifically, neither treatment group outperformed the control group 

on post-test knowledge scores (accounting for pre-test scores as a covariate). The two 

control groups had equivalent post-test scores, indicating that coaching did not provide 

additional benefit for teacher knowledge. However, significant improvements in language 

and literacy practices were found for teachers who received both the three-credit course 

on language and literacy and the ongoing coaching. The effect size was large and 

considered to be educationally meaningful for both center-based and home based settings 

(Cohen's d = .77 for center-based and d = .82 for home-based settings). This study 

provides compelling evidence for the impact of professional development models that 

combine course work with ongoing, on-site coaching that is coordinated with the course

work in such a way as to reinforce the concepts and teaching strategies being emphasized 

in the course work. Although this study clearly demonstrates that course work plus 

coaching obtains greater impacts on teacher practice than course work alone or “business 

as usual,” it does not rule out the possibility that equivalent gains in teacher practice 

could be obtained with coaching alone. 

Although coaching is becoming an increasingly popular mode of professional 

development, more research needs to be done to determine the most effective strategies 

for providing coaching, and determine who may benefit the most and in what settings. In 

addition, one of the important inquiries in designing interventions targeted at improving 

children’s language and literacy skills (or any area of children’s development) is the 

efficiency and cost-effectiveness of the intervention. Although more intensive 
41

interventions that involve coaching and mentoring may be more time-consuming and 

expensive, if they lead to greater gains in child outcomes, they may be worth the cost.

Dosage. The discussion of mode of delivery of professional development is closely 

related to the intensity and duration of professional development. Many of the 

professional development programs reviewed started off with intensive workshops or 

kick-off sessions, which tended to last for several full days or weeks, followed by shorter 

follow-up sessions or classroom observations at regular intervals over the course of 

several weeks or months (e.g., Adger, Hoyle, and Dickinson 2004; Landry 2002; 

McCutchen et al. 2002; McGill-Franzen et al. 1999; O'Connor et al. 2005; Podhajski and 

Nathan 2005; Justice, Pence, and Wiggins 2008; Landry et al. 2008). In general, models 

with a high “dosage” of professional development tended to be associated with positive 

outcomes for both educators (increased support for children’s language and literacy 

development) and children (improvements on language assessments). However, it was 

also true that models with a lower “dosage” of professional development were also 

associated with positive outcomes. Most notably, the series of studies by Whitehurst and 

colleagues involved a one-time, 30-minute training in dialogic reading, a specific 

interactive book reading technique, which resulted in mostly favorable child outcomes at 

post-test, although there were some mixed results (Whitehurst, Epstein et al. 1994), and 

effects did not last through first and second grade (Whitehurst et al. 1999).

5

 Similarly, 

Wasik and Bond (2001) employed a four-week professional development training (not 

necessarily implemented in consecutive weeks) on interactive book reading. The training 

resulted in significant effects on both educator practice, such as using relevant vocabulary 

words during book reading, and children’s vocabulary and expressive language 

development. 

Dickinson and colleagues (2006) experimented with different levels of duration and 

dosage of their professional development model. Across a series of studies described in 

Dickinson and Brady (2006), the LEEP training was administered in the following 

dosages: two three-day sessions of discussions separated by three months, ten sessions 

spaced two to three weeks apart over a six-month span of time, three two-day sessions 

spaced five weeks apart, and eight four-hour modules. Regardless of these variations in 

duration, timing, and dosage of the professional development, results indicated positive 

changes in the literacy environment of the classroom, such as the presence of a book area, 

words and letters displayed in the classroom, facilitation of children’s language, 

interactive book reading. Further, children performed better compared to controls on 

various measures of language and literacy development. Given the consistent positive 

results regardless of timing and dosage, it is likely that dosage is not the decisive factor in 

determining positive effects of the LEEP training.

Taken together, these studies’ findings suggest that intensive and extensive 

administration of professional development tends to be associated with positive outcomes 

for both educators and children, but even small dosages of professional development 

have been associated with positive child outcomes. These seemingly inconsistent 

 5 A more thorough review of results of the Whitehurst et al. (1999) study is presented in our later 

discussion regarding sustainability of effects. 
42

findings can be explained if we look more closely at the goals of the professional 

development in these studies. Professional development targeted on a discrete set of 

skills (such as dialogic reading) may only require short-term and brief professional 

development activities. But professional development that has a broad focus (e.g., 

programs that aim to affect change across a wide range of language and literacy skills) 

appears to require more extensive professional development activities, perhaps spread 

over time. In addition, professional development that aims to teach early childhood 

educators new skills may require professional development models that are more 

intensive or longer in duration. While the studies reviewed above suggest that the 

appropriate dosage of professional development depends in part on the goals or focus of 

the professional development, additional studies are needed to examine this hypothesis 

systematically. 

This conclusion is in keeping with the perspective presented by Joyce and Showers 

(2002) based on their work in providing training and structuring peer coaching for 

teachers of K–12 classrooms. They conclude that trainers need to be able to gauge both 

the complexity of what teachers are being instructed to implement, and the newness of 

the content in terms of previous knowledge and practice of the teachers. “Trainers need to 

be able to gauge the difficulty level to help plan the intensity and duration of training and 

select the components they will use accordingly” (Joyce and Showers 2002, p. 2).

Fidelity of Implementation. Relatively few studies addressed fidelity of implementation. 

One explicit strategy for assessing fidelity of implementation was conducting classroom 

observations on a regular basis after delivery of the professional development training 

(Baker and Smith 1999; Byrne and Fielding–Barnsley 1995; O'Connor et al. 2005; 

Podhajski and Nathan 2005; Assel et al. 2007).

6

 Such observations at times yielded 

information on important deviations from the original professional development activities 

(O'Connor et al. 2005; see Baker and Smith 1999). Several researchers reported analyses 

of “high compliant” versus “low compliant” centers or teachers (e.g., Lonigan and 

Whitehurst 1998; Whitehurst, Epstein et al. 1994) or “high-reform-effort” versus “lowreform-effort” schools (Taylor and Pearson 2004), which suggests that some centers or 

schools were not applying the professional development strategies in a manner or 

intensity that was anticipated given the original professional development training. Pence 

and colleagues (2008) tracked fidelity of preschool teachers’ adherence to a languagefocused curriculum over time, and reported that treatment teachers’ fidelity to the 

intervention transitioned from high scores in the fall to low scores in the winter and then 

to a rebound in high scores in the spring (matching those in the fall). These findings 

suggest that it may be important to assess treatment fidelity at multiple time points in 

order to get a complete understanding of teachers’ adherence to an intervention. 

In a few instances research suggests that low adherence to the instructional methods 

taught in professional development was responsible for lack of improved child outcomes. 

 6 Not all classroom observations were conducted for the explicit purpose of monitoring fidelity of 

implementation. For example, McCutchen et al. (2002) conducted classroom observations to provide 

feedback on instructional practices. However, implicit in this feedback could be redirection of teacher 

practice to better align with models imparted through the original professional development training. 
43

Specifically, Whitehurst and colleagues (1994) reported that children in the least 

compliant Head Start centers (i.e., those with the lowest frequency of classroom dialogic 

reading) did not benefit from the intervention as did those children in the other, more 

compliant centers. In a study designed to examine the impact of procedural fidelity on the 

quality of instruction, Justice, Mashburn, Hamre, & Pianta (2008) found that although 

teachers were able to implement a language and literacy curriculum with a high degree of 

fidelity to routines (e.g., calling children’s attention to the lesson), this was not linked to 

quality of instruction. However, fidelity to teaching aspects of the lessons (e.g., teacher 

makes explicit attempts to engage the children’s participation in the lesson) was a 

positive predictor of quality of literacy instruction. The results of this study suggest that 

measures of procedural fidelity alone may not be sufficient indicators of the quality of 

language and literacy instruction (Justice et al. 2008). Overall, most researchers did not 

analyze how fidelity of implementation was linked to child outcomes. 

In sum, many aspects of the implementation of professional development can influence 

outcomes in educator knowledge, educator practice, and child outcomes. However, the 

current corpus of studies does not permit us to disentangle which aspects of the 

implementation of professional development are causally linked to outcomes. Some 

features that can be considered potential contributors in this set of studies include: a 

strategy that includes supervisors as well as early childhood educators in professional 

development activities; comprehensive coverage of content in early literacy research and 

literacy instruction; multi-modal approaches to delivering professional development; 

intensive and extensive administration of professional development (rather than a onetime, short dosage for comprehensive professional development content); and ongoing 

monitoring of fidelity to the implementation of professional development training 

through on-site follow-up observations and mentoring. 

C. 1e. Sustainability of Effects. The Committee on the Prevention of Reading Difficulties 

in Young Children noted that staff development efforts often lack the systematic followup necessary for sustainability (Snow, Burns, and Griffin 1998, p. 331). Although studies 

of the sustainability of professional development efforts to improve early literacy 

instruction and early literacy outcomes are rare, the few that exist can be informative to 

guide future professional development efforts. 

Sustainability of Teacher Practice. Of the 37 articles reviewed, only three studies 

explicitly addressed the sustainability of improved teacher practice over time in their 

analyses. Baker and Smith (1999) reported on a three-year project to improve 

kindergarten teachers’ literacy practices in two different schools. The three-year project 

included a base year, an implementation year, and a sustainability year. The intervention 

targeted primarily kindergarten teachers but also included Title I and English language 

development specialists as well as principals in the two schools. Intervention activities 

focused on introducing phonemic awareness and alphabetic understanding in the 

kindergarten classrooms. Activities included experimentation with commercially 

available research-based curricula, the reading of academic articles to provide a researchbased grounding in the importance of phonemic awareness and alphabetic understanding, 

and individual, small group, and large group meetings with the researchers on a regular 
44

basis. Researchers also conducted observations in the classrooms and provided coaching 

during the implementation year. The teachers involved in the intervention were actively 

engaged in decision-making regarding the type of intervention activities that would be 

conducted within the classroom. In addition, teachers from first, second, and third grades 

were included in large-group discussions to inform these teachers who were not involved 

in the intervention about the intervention activities so that they could assist with 

sustaining those activities once children moved into the older school grades. The 

research found that children in one school’s intervention classroom out-performed the 

control classroom in the same school during both the Implementation and the 

Sustainability years. Children in the intervention classroom during the Sustainability 

year in the other school did significantly better than the children in the intervention 

classroom in the same school during the Implementation year (effect sizes were small but 

improved over time). These findings suggest that not only were changes being sustained, 

but the overall program was improving with growing teacher expertise. However, there 

was some uncertainty regarding whether the reading program in first grade would support 

the gains children made in kindergarten. 

A study described in Dickinson and Brady (2006, Example 4) found that information 

imparted during two intensive three-day training sessions (separated by three months) 

resulted in enduring changes in Head Start providers’ classroom practices with regard to 

child language and literacy development. Specifically, informal observations of teachers 

two to three years after the training indicated sustained changes in how and how often 

books were read, the types of books read, and the use of thematic instruction. 

Supervisors who had attended the trainings with the teachers were found to provide 

positive feedback and encouragement to the teachers two to three years later. 

Building on this study, Dickinson and colleagues are expanding the scope of the training 

of book reading to include all members of a child care center (Dickinson and Brady 2006, 

Example 5). Their method involves training one teacher who becomes the in-house 

expert responsible for training the rest of the child care staff. Overhead transparencies 

and videotapes on children’s language and literacy development were given to the center 

as permanent training materials. While this evaluation study is ongoing, preliminary 

results indicate that classrooms in centers that experienced this type of group training had 

higher ratings of the literacy environment (according to the ELLCO) than did comparison 

classrooms. It is still unclear whether this strategy will result in long-term, sustained 

improvements in teacher knowledge or practice. 

A common thread among the above-mentioned studies is the explicit intent on the part of 

the researchers to have the teachers as collaborators in the professional development 

intervention and to have the teachers and the educational institutions take ownership of 

their reform efforts. This model is akin to the concept of professional learning 

communities in K–12 settings (DuFour, Eaker, and DuFour 2008). It is noteworthy that 

the Baker and Smith (1999) and Dickinson and Brady (2006) studies involved all relevant 

educators within the institution, including the principal or center director. This suggests 

that interventions that engage a wide range of early childhood educators are more likely 

to result in sustainable change in teacher practice. Although this is in keeping with recent 
45

thinking about the nature of systems change in schools (Fullan 2007), this hypothesis 

warrants empirical testing in early care and education settings.

There were no studies that examined sustainability of teacher knowledge about 

supporting children’s early language and literacy development. 

Sustainability of Child Outcomes. Three studies addressed whether positive child 

outcomes that resulted from professional development interventions were sustained over 

time. Two of these studies address the long-term sustainability of joint book reading 

techniques. Neuman (1999) found that the effects of the Books Aloud program, which 

involved the provision of high-quality children’s books to child care centers, along with 

10 hours of professional development to center staff focused on book-reading strategies 

and thematic instruction, resulted in sustained child outcomes six months later. 

Specifically, children exposed to the Books Aloud program scored above comparison 

children on five of six measures of language and literacy development, such as letter

name knowledge, at this six-month follow-up. Whitehurst et al. (1999) conducted an 

experimental study that assessed the effectiveness of an intervention introduced during 

the Head Start year. The intervention included a 30-minute, one-time training of Head 

Start teachers and parents in dialogic reading techniques, as well as the implementation of 

curriculum in phonemic awareness. Pre- and post-tests of child language and literacy 

outcomes were gathered during the Head Start year, and follow-up child assessments 

were also collected at the end of kindergarten, first, and second grade. Results indicated 

that children in the intervention groups performed significantly better than the control 

group on measures of language and literacy development at the end of the Head Start and 

kindergarten years, but there were no significant differences between experimental and 

control groups at the end of first or second grades. In sum, the results of these two 

studies indicate short-term rather than long-term effects of joint book reading techniques. 

Whitehurst and colleagues (1999) suggest that for interventions to have a long-term effect 

on children’s reading ability, they should include a focus on pre-reading skills such as 

letter recognition and letter-sound matching (alphabetic principle).7 It is important to 

note that studies examining long-term effects of interventions must adequately control for 

the quality of the subsequent learning environments. 

The third study that addressed sustained child outcomes was the Baker and Smith (1999)

study mentioned above. Results indicated that children in the intervention classrooms in 

one of the two schools had higher scores on phonemic awareness and alphabetic 

understanding than did the comparison groups at the end of the intervention year as well 

as at the end of the sustainability year. The children in the second school showed 

significant gains in both phonemic awareness and alphabetic understanding across both 

years but did not reach the level of performance of their peers in the other school in either 

year. It should be noted that the children in the latter school were part of an intervention 

 7 As noted in Taylor and Pearson (2004), the relationship between story book reading and children’s 

reading achievement is complex. While children’s knowledge of word meanings and story comprehension 

can be improved through exposure to story book reading (Dickinson et al. 2003; DeTemple & Snow, 2003, 

and Stahl 2003, as cited in Taylor and Pearson 2004), adults rarely focus on word recognition during story 

book reading. 
46

for one hour after regular kindergarten because they were identified as being at particular 

risk for reading difficulties. On the other hand, all kindergartners in the intervention 

group in the former school were exposed to the literacy interventions within the regular 

kindergarten classroom. 

Taken together, these studies examining sustained effects on child outcomes suggest that 

professional development for literacy instruction can have short-term, sustained effects 

on child outcomes. Long-term effects may in part depend on the introduction of 

additional elements of literacy instruction that build on the mastery of earlier elements, as 

well as supports for continued language and literacy growth received in later years of 

schooling. 

C. 1f. Overall Summary of Findings for the Early Language and Literacy Studies 

Reviewed. 

The 37 studies examining the promotion of young children’s early language and literacy 

skills that were reviewed provide a great deal of information about professional 

development strategies in this area. In particular, because early language and literacy 

encompasses multiple skills (including, for example, the development of oral language 

skills, vocabulary development, phonological awareness, letter knowledge, print 

awareness, and emergent writing skills), early childhood educators need to be trained and 

supported in the faithful execution of a variety of strategies to support children’s 

language and literacy development in early childhood settings. Such strategies include—

but are not limited to—the use of interactive book reading practices, arranging a separate 

and inviting book area, increasing environmental print, using props such as writing 

materials in play areas, and assessing individual children’s language and literacy skills 

for the purpose of monitoring progress for individual children and for the effective 

implementation of the professional development program. Many of the 37 studies 

reviewed emphasized more than one of these strategies within the same professional 

development intervention. As such, it is difficult to disentangle which strategies are 

related to specific outcomes for educators and children. It should be noted that although 

engaging parents was acknowledged as an important part of promoting children’s 

language and literacy development and was explicitly mentioned in at least five studies, 

none of the professional development examples in this set of studies provided early 

childhood educators with training on strategies to involve or engage parents in literacy 

techniques to support children’s language and literacy development. 

Not only did many of these studies address multiple language and literacy practices at the 

same time, they also often used a variety of professional development delivery methods to 

convey the knowledge and practice components of early language and literacy 

development. Specifically, many studies employed course work or workshops to convey 

the research base supporting the promotion of language and literacy practices, as well as 

on-site support in the classroom or periodic workshops after the more intensive initial 

training to provide ongoing support for the establishment of new practices in the early 

childhood setting. Only one study systematically compared providing course work plus 

on-site professional development activities to course work alone or “business as usual” 
47

(Neuman and Cunningham 2009). This study indicated that there were no differences in 

educator knowledge across the different conditions, but there are benefits to educator 

practice by providing on-site work in addition to course work. Further research is needed 

to assess whether on-site work alone could achieve comparable levels of benefit for 

teacher practice. 

In addition to combining modes of professional development delivery, there are several 

additional “promising practices” that emerged from the review of the findings from this 

body of studies focused on promoting children’s early language and literacy skills. First, 

establishing goals and objectives for the professional development appears to be 

important. The majority of the successful studies provided early childhood educators 

with clear recommendations based on research for practices that should be adopted in the 

early childhood setting but also permitted educators to set their own goals during the 

course of the training and encouraged them to engage in self-reflection throughout the 

process. Another key element of successful professional development is understanding 

the current classroom context and being responsive to and respectful of the educator’s 

current set of skills and contextual constraints. In addition, provision of resources may 

be important for successful professional development programs. Resources could come 

in the form of summaries of key take-home points of a training, curriculum manuals, 

activity guides, sample handouts to send home with parents, and lists of reference 

materials (e.g., links to websites or developmental timelines). Although no studies 

specifically assessed the effectiveness of these additional resources for the success of the 

professional development intervention, provision of resources has the potential to sustain 

knowledge and practice components delivered through professional development 

activities within the early childhood setting. More research would be helpful to 

empirically examine the benefits of provision of resources within professional 

development programs. 

Another “promising practice” includes engaging a cohort of educators in professional 

development together within an institution. Involving administrators as well as early 

childhood educators and additional support staff (Dickinson and Brady 2006, Example 5)

has many benefits, including establishing “buy-in” from all levels of the organization, 

creating a “learning community,” creating in-house experts who can be used as resources 

for current and future staff, and providing sustainability of the professional development 

in light of staff turnover. More empirical examination of whether this method of 

providing professional development is related to change throughout an early care and 

education setting is warranted. 

Assessing the fidelity of implementation was another important component of 

professional development interventions. Fidelity was examined in 9 of the 37 studies. In 

general, fidelity of implementation was not examined in relation to child outcomes but 

rather in relation to educator practice. Collectively, the findings suggest that it may be 

important to assess treatment fidelity at multiple time points through ongoing, on-site 

observations in order to get a complete understanding of teachers’ adherence to an 

intervention. Furthermore, procedural fidelity does not necessarily translate into 
48

improved quality of educator practices. Follow-up on-site professional development may 

be necessary to insure quality improvements in educator practice. 

There were several features of professional development programs to promote language 

and literacy that did not result in a clear conclusion about their benefits for educator or 

child outcomes. One example is the use of incentives to engage participants. There was 

no clear effect on either fidelity of implementation or on outcomes of the studies that 

used incentives. Another is the intensity of the dosage of professional development

delivered. As a whole, the studies seem to suggest that intensive and extensive 

administration of professional development for language and literacy practices tends to 

be associated with positive educator and child outcomes, but there were several examples 

in which even a small dosage of professional development (e.g., 10 hours in one case, 30 

minutes in another) was associated with positive child outcomes (Neuman 1999; 

Whitehurst et al. 1999). Our examination of the studies for which this was the case 

suggests that short-term or brief dosages of professional development may suffice when a 

discrete set of skills is targeted (such as joint book reading), but professional development 

that has a broad, comprehensive focus (such as a combined focus on phonological 

awareness, print knowledge, and oral language skills) may require more long-term and 

intensive professional development activities. 

Sustainability of improved outcomes for educators and children is related to issues of 

dosage of professional development, and also to the breadth and depth of the strategies 

that are being newly introduced to the early childhood setting. However, the 

sustainability of improved outcomes was rarely measured in this set of studies. 

Specifically, out of 37 studies, only three studies examined sustainability of education 

practices, and another four studies examined sustainability of child outcomes; no studies 

examined the sustainability of educator knowledge; no studies examined the 

sustainability of educator knowledge. The key for sustaining educator practice outcomes 

appears to be engaging educators in the intervention process and encouraging them to 

“own” the changes they are making. When child outcomes were measured, they proved 

difficult to sustain beyond six months or a year (Neuman 1999; Whitehurst, Epstein et al. 

1994; Garet et al. 2008; Whitehurst, Arnold et al. 1994; Whitehurst et al. 1999). It is 

important to note that these few studies that examined long-term effects of interventions 

did not always adequately control for the quality of the subsequent learning 

environments. Future research examining sustainability of child outcomes should attempt 

to capture those aspects of subsequent learning environments which might affect child 

outcomes, including subsequent educator characteristics. 

A major limitation of this body of work is the lack of detailed information on the process

of professional development to support young children’s language and literacy 

development. In general, the studies provided sufficient detail on the content of the 

curriculum or literacy practice to be implemented, but provided little detail on what it 

took to get the early childhood educators to be able to implement the new curriculum or 

practice with fidelity. There were, however, a few notable exceptions. A study by Adger 

and colleagues (2004) used discourse analysis to analyze discussions among educators 

and trainers within professional development sessions, which permits an explicit 
49

description of the type of educator knowledge that is acquired or consolidated in 

professional development settings and the processes by which professional development 

takes place (Adger, Hoyle, and Dickinson 2004). In addition, a study by Neuman and 

Cunningham (2009) is one of the few that provides some detail on the characteristics of 

on-site professional development staff and their training, as well as detail about how the 

on-site work was carried out (Neuman and Cunningham 2009). The field would benefit 

greatly if future research studies would include greater detail on the characteristics and 

qualifications of the staff used to deliver the professional development, the training and 

ongoing support offered those providing the professional development, and detailed 

information on how the professional development was delivered to early childhood 

educators. By providing such information, we may be able to determine in future work 

the most effective strategies for providing on-site professional development activities, 

and the most efficient and cost-effective combination of professional development 

strategies. 

Finally, more research is needed on the particular language and literacy practices that will 

support ELLs in the preschool years. As stated earlier, with one notable exception, none 

of the studies included cultural and linguistic competence as part of their professional 

development (Yaden et al. 2000). Furthermore, researchers tended not to control or test 

for differences in child outcomes based on ELL status. Better measures of the aspects of 

the early childhood environment that support ELL children, as well as better measures of 

individual ELL children’s developmental status, are needed in order to examine the 

effects of professional development in support of ELL in early childhood settings 

(August and Shanahan 2006).
50

C. 2. Early Mathematics

C. 2a. Overview of Studies Reviewed. 

Table 2. Characteristics of Early Mathematics Studies Reviewed

Study 

Number Citation Design* Outcome Areas Examined†

Exp QuasiExp

P/P

With

Comp

P/P

Without

Comp

Desc EK EP CO

1 Arnold, Fisher, Doctoroff & 

Dobbs (2002) X  

2 Casey, Erkut, Ceder & Young 

(2008) X 

3 Clements & Sarama (2008) X  

4 Sophian (2004) X 

5 Starkey, Klein, Clements & 

Sarama (2008) X  

6 Starkey, Klein & Wakeley 

(2004) X 

7 Young-Loveridge (2004) X 

Total Studies Reviewed: 7 4 1 2 0 0 1 2 7

(*Exp= Experimental, Quasi-Exp= Quasi-Experimental, P/P With Comp= Pre-Post with comparison group, P/P Without Comp= Pre-Post without 

comparison group, D= Descriptive;

†

EK= Educator Knowledge, EP= Educator Practice, CO= Child Outcomes)

Recent descriptive as well as evaluation research is documenting the linkages between 

early educators practices in early mathematics and children’s skills in this area. 

Descriptive Research Linking the Focus on Mathematics in Early Childhood Settings and 

Children’s Early Mathematics Skills. A recent descriptive study points to the potential 

importance of providing professional development to early childhood educators in the 

area of early mathematics. Klibanoff and colleagues (2006) note that by kindergarten 

entrance there are substantial, individual differences in young children’s early 

mathematics achievement scores and, further, that there is already a gap by 

socioeconomic status. While more than two-thirds of young children in the United States 

attend a formal early care and education program (center-based child care, prekindergarten, Head Start or preschool) during the year prior to kindergarten, they observe 

that “...very little is known about the nature and frequency of mathematical input in 

preschool classrooms or about the effects of such input variations on children’s 

mathematical development” (p. 59). This study asked whether children’s gain scores in 

early mathematics were related to the amount of teachers’ talk about mathematics 
51

concepts during and immediately after “circle time” 8 in 26 preschool and child care 

classrooms in which children varied as to socioeconomic status and ethnicity. To rule out 

the possibility that talk about mathematics was one marker of overall classroom quality 

or the complexity of teacher speech, they considered gain scores in math achievement in 

relation to classroom quality and the general complexity of teacher speech, as well as to 

teachers’ talk about mathematics concepts.

The findings of this study replicate previous reports of wide individual difference in early 

mathematics achievement as well as the early emergence of differences in mathematics 

achievement by socioeconomic status. In addition, the early childhood educators in the 

study showed substantial variation in both the amount and quality of their spontaneous 

talk about mathematics. Children’s fall to spring gain scores in mathematics achievement 

were significantly related to the amount of teacher talk about mathematics as recorded 

during the middle of the school year. However, overall observed classroom quality and 

the syntactic complexity of teacher speech did not predict gain scores in early 

mathematics once the amount of teacher talk about mathematics was controlled, 

indicating that children’s gain scores in mathematics were responsive specifically to input 

focusing on mathematics. The pattern of prediction to children’s gain scores in 

mathematics was similar for a measure of the quality of teacher talk about mathematic 

and the measure of amount of teacher talk about mathematics. These findings, while 

correlational, nevertheless point to the possibility that increasing both the amount and the 

quality of early childhood educators’ talk about mathematical concepts may improve 

young children’s math achievement scores and narrow the early-emerging gap by 

socioeconomic status in math achievement. 

Evaluation Studies Focusing on Professional Development in Early Mathematics. A 

small set of evaluation studies is beginning to provide evidence in support of this 

hypothesis. Across these recent studies, children’s achievement scores either on specific 

aspects of early mathematics knowledge or on broad measures of early mathematics 

achievement were significantly improved when early childhood educators were given 

professional development in early mathematics instruction. As will be noted, the studies 

tend to focus on the content of the activities or curriculum provided to strengthen this 

aspect of the early childhood environment. There is limited detail across the studies in 

terms of the specific nature of the professional development provided. Further, the 

research does not focus on the extent to which teacher knowledge and skill were affected 

by the introduction of a set of activities or a new curriculum, with only a few studies 

examining changes in teacher practice. As Griffin (2004) describes, the emerging 

research in this area tends to focus on the new tools provided to early childhood 

educators in the area of mathematics, but not how educators are themselves instructed in 

the use of the tools. 

Seven studies were identified in peer-reviewed journals or reports that analyzed the 

evaluations of professional development for early childhood educators focusing on 

 8 Circle time is a time during formal early care and education programs when the full group meets together, 

often sitting in a circle. Activities may include singing together, reviewing a calendar and completing a 

chart of the weather, planning for the day, sharing, and reading a book.
52

mathematics. Two further papers were identified that described new early mathematics 

curricula but did not report on evaluations of them (Greenes, Ginsburg, and Balfanz 

2004; Griffin 2004). These evaluations are anticipated in the future. There was substantial 

information on the professional development provided in coordination with one of these, 

the Big Math for Little Kids curriculum, but the work to date provides only preliminary 

data on the effects of this approach for teachers and children (Ginsburg et al. 2006), with 

an evaluation of this curriculum in process. While this section will focus on the 

evaluations of professional development coordinated with early mathematics curricula 

that have been completed, the insights on professional development issues concerning 

early mathematics reported thus far by the Ginsburg research group will be summarized 

to provide further context. 

In this set of studies, it is impossible to separate out whether the findings on outcomes are 

related to the curriculum or activities that have been introduced, or to the professional 

development that was provided about implementation of the curriculum or activity. The 

studies present these elements as a package. As noted, they often provide much more 

detail about the curriculum or activities and how and why they were developed than on 

the process used to prepare early educators to implement them. 9

Evidence of Young Children’s Spontaneous Interest in Mathematics. Across the articles 

reviewed concerning professional development for early mathematics, a consistent theme 

is that young children have spontaneous interest in mathematics and informal knowledge 

of mathematical concepts. Researchers noted that this interest and informal knowledge 

can provide a foundation for extending and deepening young children’s mathematical 

skills through a systematically developed set of activities. This set of articles stressed that 

learning early mathematics can be both absorbing and fun for young children; it does not 

need to be approached through didactic instruction but can involve engagement in 

exploration of materials, stories, games, and physical activities. The researchers note the 

need for adult planning and structuring, but this should be done with the goal of 

supporting and extending active child engagement and participation in activities. A 

further theme stressed in a number of the articles was that it is not necessary to separate 

out early mathematics development from language and literacy development. Some 

studies intentionally embedded the presentation of mathematics content within book 

reading or oral storytelling (Casey et al. 2008; Young-Loveridge 2004). We caution, 

however, that the one study that examined children’s language and literacy development 

as well as early mathematics knowledge following the introduction of a preschool 

mathematics curriculum found effects on early mathematics but not on language or 

literacy development (Starkey et al. 2008). 

Variation in Content Covered in Professional Development on Early Mathematics. There 

was a difference across the published studies as to breadth of the early mathematics 

topics covered. Some covered a range of topics while others focused on a more limited 

set viewed as foundational for later development. Those that covered a range of topics 

referred to the joint statement of the National Association for the Education of Young 

 9 The articles summarized in this section report both on the development of the intervention and on its 

evaluation.
53

Children (NAEYC) and the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM) 

regarding the important topical areas to cover in work with young children. For example, 

Starkey et al. (2004) describe the provision of professional development for an 

intentionally broad curriculum that included enumeration and number sense, arithmetic 

reasoning, spatial sense, geometric reasoning, pattern sense and unit construction, nonstandard measurement, and logical relations. Ginsburg and colleagues, following the 

NAEYC and NCTM joint statement closely, focused on numbers and operations; 

geometry, spatial relations and measurement; patterns and logical reasoning; and data

analysis (Ginsburg et al. 2006). In contrast, Sophian (2004) focused more narrowly on a 

concept that can serve as a stumbling block for young children: the use of differing unit 

sizes in measurement and the implications of this for numerical outcomes. Casey and 

colleagues (2008) emphasized children’s spatial reasoning skills, while the curricula or 

activities introduced by Arnold, Fisher, Doctoroff and Dobbs (2002) as well as by 

Young-Loveridge (2004) emphasized numeracy. 

The more comprehensive curricula tended to stress the need for the introduction of 

materials in a manner that permitted deepening and extending children’s understanding of 

topics, building from one topic to the next, and permitting linkages to be made across 

activities. Clements and Sarama (2008) emphasize the difference between curricula, in 

which separate topics are introduced during different activities, and their approach, in 

which topics are returned to repeatedly across activities to help children progress in their 

depth of understanding of particular topics and to consolidate earlier learning. They 

emphasize the importance of weaving together content across activities. Ginsburg and 

colleagues (2006) express concern about programs that are organized as “collections of 

activities” that do not systematically introduce, revisit and enrich specific concepts 

intentionally over time.

Approaches Combining Workshops or Training with On-site Visits. Five of the seven 

evaluation studies report on professional development implemented through workshops 

or days of training followed up through on-site visits to address questions, provide further 

materials, or observe to assure fidelity of implementation and provide feedback. There 

was, however, substantial variation in how long the workshops or training lasted and how 

many follow-up sessions were scheduled. These appeared to be related to the breadth of 

the curriculum and duration of implementation, with the broad curricula involving greater 

extent of exposure to professional development and implementation in classrooms over 

longer periods of time. 

Thus, in the work of Arnold and colleagues (2002) in preparing teachers to implement a 

curriculum over a six-week period with a fairly narrow focus on numbers, counting and 

quantity, an initial training workshop lasted two hours and was followed by brief weekly 

visits. The two-hour training focused on how to implement a range of activities, choosing 

from among 85 provided to the teachers, during different parts of the daily schedule.10

 10 During the first three weeks of implementation, teachers chose an activity each day for circle time. 

During the second three weeks of implementation, teachers chose one activity each day for small group 

time and two for transition or mealtime. 

 

The training also introduced principles for implementation (encouraging and praising the 
54

children, keeping it fun, following children’s lead, and providing feedback and 

scaffolding). 

At the other end of the spectrum, Starkey, Klein and Wakeley (2004) in implementing 

what they label a “conceptually broad” math curriculum during the full duration of the 

prekindergarten year, held a five-day summer workshop for teachers followed by a fourday winter workshop. Teachers received a manual, instruction and practice with 

particular small-group and computer-based activities. In addition, the workshops 

provided an overview of children’s development as related to each early mathematics 

topic covered, focused on assessing children’s mathematics knowledge, and introduced 

teachers to the complementary home curriculum to support the focus in class. The on-site 

component in this instance involved a once-a-month visit to provide training for the 

implementation of each unit in the curriculum. The on-site component also provided the 

opportunity to discuss problems, observe the fidelity of implementation, and provide 

feedback to teachers. Similarly, Clements and Sarama (2008) provided a four-day 

training on the Building Blocks curriculum, with two hours of refresher training every 

other month. They also provided monthly on-site coaching focusing on the 

implementation of the curriculum. 

Other Approaches. Of the two studies that did not evaluate programs that combined 

workshops or training with on-site coaching, one provided training without follow-up 

coaching (Casey et al. 2008), while one provided the on-site feedback without initial 

training (Young-Loveridge 2004). Casey and colleagues (2008) describe a brief training 

for teachers in the intervention condition including videotapes of teachers implementing 

the activities. Teachers received all the materials needed for implementation of the 

activities as well as detailed instructions. Although teachers were observed implementing 

the activities, this was to ensure that the activities were taking place; there is no mention 

of feedback or coaching. The program implemented by Young-Loveridge relied on 

specialists to implement the early mathematics activities. Pairs of children engaged in 

games and book reading with the specialist, each pair for half an hour each day (YoungLoveridge 2004). The specialists were videotaped engaging in the activities and given 

feedback on how to strengthen their approach. 

Need for Focus on Professional Development Provided Both Through Education and 

Training in Mathematics for Early Educators. While six of the seven studies that reported 

full evaluations involved workshops or training sessions that were not part of degree 

programs in higher education, Ginsburg and colleagues (2006) discuss the need for a 

focus on professional development in early mathematics both within degree-granting 

higher education programs and as part of preservice or in-service training that is not 

credit-bearing toward an associate, bachelor or graduate degree in early childhood. In 

their work to date in designing programs for different groups of early childhood 

educators, Ginsburg and colleagues introduce material with different depth and 

comprehensiveness for these two contexts. However irrespective of the level, they 

contend that professional development in early childhood mathematics needs to include 

the same components: (1) an understanding of the mathematical ideas that are conveyed 

through the curriculum (which may need to be introduced or reviewed); (2) a grasp of 
55

children’s informal mathematics knowledge; (3) the ability to assess young children’s 

knowledge and understanding in early mathematics; (4) pedagogy that is appropriate for 

young children; and (5) mastery of the curriculum. 

C. 2b. Study Designs. Different research designs were used in the seven evaluation 

studies. 

Experimental Designs. It is important to note the reliance on experimental designs in four 

of the studies, some of these building in contrasts of multiple curricula or approaches. 

Arnold, Fisher, Doctoroff & Dobbs (2002) used an experimental design with a 

preliminary matching step. Eight Head Start classrooms were matched with respect to 

whether they met for full- or part-day, morning or afternoon. One of each matched pair 

was randomly assigned to the intervention condition. Child assessments and teacher 

surveys were completed prior to and after the implementation of the program in both the 

intervention and control group. The study by Clements and Sarama (2008) involved 

random assignment to the Building Blocks curriculum, the Preschool Mathematics 

curriculum, or to a control group in which teachers continued to follow their school or 

centers ongoing approach to early mathematics instruction. Of 100 teachers of lowincome children in Head Start and prekindergarten classrooms, 24 were randomly 

selected and then these were randomly assigned to one of the three curriculum groups. Of 

an additional 20 teachers of children in mixed socioeconomic classrooms, 12 additional 

teachers were randomly selected, and these were again randomly assigned to the Building 

Blocks, comparison curriculum, or control group. The study by Starkey et al. (2008) was 

part of the PCER program. Forty teachers in Head Start and public preschool programs 

were randomly assigned to the treatment group, implementing the Pre-K Mathematics 

curriculum supplemented with DLM Early Childhood Express Math software, or the 

control group, pursuing the early mathematics approach already being implemented in 

their programs. Random assignment occurred within blocks of teachers from Head Start 

and state-funded prekindergarten in sites in New York and California. 

Casey and colleagues (2008) reported on two studies, both involving random assignment 

of teachers to differing curricular approaches. In Study 1, six kindergarten teachers in a 

lower middle-class public school, each teaching morning and afternoon classes, were 

randomly assigned to the approach combining geometry instruction and storytelling in 

addition to the ongoing curriculum, or pursue the ongoing mathematics curriculum In 

Study 2, four teachers teaching full-day kindergarten classes in a lower-SES community 

were randomly assigned to implement the combination of storytelling and geometry 

instruction, or only the geometry instruction. We note that Casey and colleagues are 

reluctant to call this an experimental design because randomization occurred at the 

teacher rather than the child level; however, all of the studies in this set involving random 

assignment carried out the randomization at the teacher level, sometimes within blocks of 

program types and sites. There was clearly wide variation across studies in terms of 

numbers of teachers involved and the generalizability of results. 

Quasi-experimental Designs. Three further studies used quasi-experimental designs but 

with interesting variations to strengthen the design. Sophian (2004), also focusing on 
56

Head Start settings, compared three groups: one received the early mathematics 

curriculum, one only the pre- and post- testing for the study, but one a literacy curriculum 

(to hold constant the extent and nature of professional development but vary the content). 

Three classrooms received each approach; these were matched on teacher credentials, 

proportion of children with special needs, and attrition statistics at each center. Starkey 

and colleagues (2004), studying prekindergarten classrooms ranging from low-income to 

middle-income, used a successive-cohort design in which an initial cohort did not receive 

the intervention and a subsequent cohort did receive the intervention. The cohort that did 

receive the intervention involved classrooms with the same teachers as those in the prior 

year, so classroom context and many teacher characteristics were held constant. Pre-post 

assessments were carried out in the intervention group, and post-tests only in the 

comparison group. The study by Young-Loveridge (2004) included two contrast groups 

in addition to the intervention group. All children were in their first year of school in lowincome communities in New Zealand. While 23 children from two schools participated in 

the in-school intervention (as noted earlier, working with a specialist in pairs for half an 

hour a day), 83 children were in the contrast group, some from the same two schools 

(within-school contrast) and some from two further schools (across-school contrast). As 

no differences were found between the two contrast groups, these were combined in 

analyses. 

Samples. This set of studies focused heavily on children in low-income settings, though 

some also tested the generalizability of results in more diverse settings. Thus, for 

example, the studies by Clements and Sarama (2008) and Starkey et al. (2008) were 

carried out in both Head Start and prekindergarten programs serving low-income 

communities, though the study by Clements and Sarama (2008) also intentionally 

included a sample involving greater socioeconomic diversity, with both low- and middleincome families. It should be noted that two of the studies involved kindergarteners 

(Casey et al. 2008; Young-Loveridge 2004). In each sample, a substantial proportion of 

the children were of minority backgrounds. For example, in the study by Sophian (2004), 

conducted in Hawaii, most of the children in the sample were Asian-American and 

Hawaiian. In the study by Arnold and colleagues (2002), of 112 children in the sample, 

45 were Puerto Rican, 44 were African-American, six were Asian and six were biracial. 

In the study by Starkey and colleagues (2004), while there was substantial representation 

of minority children, the low-income component of the sample had a higher proportion of 

children who were African-American and Latino (32 percent and 41 percent respectively) 

than the middle income component (10 percent and 7 percent). In the study by YoungLoveridge (2004) in New Zealand, 44 percent of the children were Maori and 4 percent 

Pacific Islander. The studies carried out by Casey and colleagues were conducted in 

school systems in which most students were of minority racial or ethnic groups. 

Inclusion of Key Outcomes. In this set of evaluation studies, child outcome measures 

were consistently included, but measures of teacher knowledge and teacher skills were 

not. It is important to note that two of the most recent studies include observational 

measures of the quality of math stimulation and instruction in the early childhood 

classroom (Clements and Sarama 2008; Starkey et al. 2008). This may have reflected a 

lack of observational measures of math stimulation in early childhood settings until quite 
57

recently and measures development in part in response to the goals of these particular 

studies. For example, the measure of fidelity of curriculum implementation in early 

mathematics, and the Classroom Observation of Early Math Environment and Teaching 

(COEMET), were developed as part of the ongoing work by Clements and Sarama. The 

limited study of teacher knowledge and attitudes is unfortunate, given the discussion by 

some researchers of limited background and sense of competence by many early 

childhood educators in this area (see, for example, discussion by Ginsburg et al. 2006). 

As per earlier sections in this review, we concur with the conclusion of the National 

Reading Panel (National Institute of Child Health and Human Development 2000) that 

measures of teacher knowledge, teacher practice, and child outcomes are all important for 

assessing whether and how professional development approaches are having effects. 

In terms of child outcomes, it is noteworthy that while standardized assessments were 

used in some studies, in others, the researchers felt a need to develop new child 

assessments to more closely reflect and measure the contents of the intervention. Thus, 

for example, Sophian (2004) used a checklist reporting on children’s skills in specific

areas and a newly developed measure to provide more information about the area focused 

on in the curriculum (knowledge of measurement and combinations of shapes). Starkey 

and colleagues (2004) used a measure newly developed for the study, the Child Math 

Assessment, to assess informal math knowledge across a range of topics. Children were 

videotaped completing 16 tasks and their performance was coded based on the 

videotapes. An abbreviated version of the Child Math Assessment was also used in the 

PCER study focusing on early mathematics (Starkey et al. 2008). While the development 

of new child assessment procedures and measures can be a lasting contribution of these 

studies, the lack of data taken from nationally normed assessments limits our capacity to 

relate results from the research using these measures to national samples. 

C. 2c. Patterns of Findings. The seven evaluation studies consistently examined effects 

on child outcomes. However there is a less consistent focus on teacher practice and on 

teacher knowledge or attitudes. 

Findings Regarding Child Outcomes. All seven studies evaluating approaches for 

professional development in early mathematics curricula report gains on measures of 

children’s math knowledge or ability. The studies are informative as to the range of child 

outcomes that particular interventions did or did not affect. For example, Arnold et al.

(2002) reported significantly greater gain scores for children in the intervention group on 

mathematics knowledge as well as on teacher report of children’s interest in math and 

children’s self-report measures of interest in math. Casey and colleagues (2008) found 

the approach of combining storytelling with geometry activities to have effects on a 

closely related outcome measure but not a broader math assessment (that is, evidence of 

near but not far transfer), with results concentrated in female children. The study by 

Young-Loveridge (2004) found a substantial effect of the math story and games activities 

intervention on young children’s numeracy, but follow-ups at six and 15 months showed 

reduction in the effect over time.
58

As noted above, many of the children in the study samples were from low-income and 

minority families, and so positive impacts were found for children from disadvantaged 

backgrounds in multiple studies. In some instances, researchers report greater gains for 

minority or low-income children. For example, the study by Arnold and colleagues 

(2002) reports less change for white than for Puerto Rican and African-American 

children. The study by Starkey et al. (2004) found fall to spring improvements for loweras well as higher-income children. In the spring, the scores of the lower-income children 

in the intervention group did not differ significantly from those of middle-income 

children in the nonintervention group, indicating that the intervention brought lowerincome children to the level of more advantaged children not exposed to the intervention.

Findings Regarding Practice Within Early Childhood Settings. The two recent studies 

examining effects of early mathematics curricula on the classroom environment and 

teaching practices resulted in mixed findings. On the one hand, the study by Starkey and 

colleagues (2008), while showing impacts on children at the end of the prekindergarten 

year on two math assessments, nevertheless showed no evidence of group differences on 

the Early Childhood Environment Rating Scale-Revised, the Arnett measure of the 

emotional tone of teacher interactions, or the Teacher Behavior Rating Scale, including 

the component of the scale focusing on Math Concepts. However, the study by Clements 

and Sarama (2008) found differences by group on the Classroom Observation of the 

Early Mathematics Environment and Teaching (COEMET) scale, with the environments 

of classrooms randomly assigned to use the Building Blocks curriculum as well as the 

Preschool Math Curriculum showing stronger math environments than the control group 

classrooms. In addition, scores on the observational measure were higher for Building 

Blocks classrooms than for Preschool Math Curriculum classrooms. Scores on the 

COEMET helped to explain children’s gain scores on the child assessment. 

Findings Regarding Teacher Knowledge, Attitudes and Skills. The one study reporting on 

the effects of professional development on teacher knowledge, attitudes and skills 

(Arnold et al. 2002) focused on one of the interventions of briefest duration (a two-hour 

workshop with brief weekly follow-up visits). This study found that teachers in the 

intervention group reported significant increases in their liking for and sense of 

competence in the teaching of math from pre- to post-test and had higher scores at posttest than teachers in the nonintervention group. 

Across this small set of studies, a low “dosage” of professional development as well as a 

greater dosage was reported to be associated with positive effects on child outcomes, and 

as noted, the brief dosage also resulted in positive changes in teacher attitudes about 

teaching math. Why might even a brief dosage of professional development with 

frequent but brief follow-up provide the basis for improved child outcomes? It is not 

possible to identify one specific source for this pattern with the information given, but a 

number of possibilities can be offered. As noted above in the section of this review on 

preparation of early educators for instruction in early language and literacy, a small 

dosage of professional development may be appropriate if the curriculum or set of 

activities is limited in complexity or scope. In addition, it is possible that particularly in 

the domain of early mathematics, meaningful input even in a low dose is a marked 
59

improvement to prior educator knowledge. This may be particularly true if educators 

have limited background or do not feel a great sense of competence in mathematics. In 

addition, multiple studies noted that in the absence of the intervention, most programs 

were providing extremely limited input in math. Thus the control groups against which 

the intervention groups were being compared were nearly a no-treatment control. Even a 

limited amount of professional development may provide a basis for group differences 

given the nature of the control groups. 

Each of the evaluation studies described a curriculum that had clear, well-articulated 

goals and objectives and that was explicitly linked to research. For example, Clements 

and Sarama (2008) followed a carefully developed sequence of steps for developing and 

then testing a curricular approach, and the work of Starkey and colleagues (2004) built on 

the NCTM standards. While more limited in focus, the approach taken by Sophian was 

developed based on research findings indicating that children had difficulties with the 

concept of alternative units of measurement. In each of these studies, a specific set of 

activities had been developed for children to engage in, focusing on the topic(s) covered 

by the curriculum or integrating topical areas at increasing levels of complexity across 

activities. Training on the curriculum always involved a manual and practice in 

implementation of the activities. Substantial effort appeared to focus on assuring that the 

activities would be engaging to young children. 

It is impossible to evaluate the content of the activities and manuals from the research 

reported. However, a consistent pattern emerges of a carefully planned foundation for 

professional development in terms of goals, manuals and curricular materials. 

C. 2d. Implementation of Professional Development. In this section we turn to issues in 

the implementation of professional development that were evident across the studies 

focusing on early mathematics. 

Consistent Implementation of Approaches Involving Individualized Support and 

Feedback in the Workplace. A key element that was consistent across most of the 

programs evaluated by the studies in this section of the review and that may have 

contributed to improved mathematics outcomes for children is a design that involved a 

workshop or days of training with on-site follow-up. The prevalence of follow-up 

observations of the teachers implementing the activities or curriculum, in almost all 

instances accompanied by feedback on implementations, raises the possibility that in 

addition to presenting curricular materials and background information, support and 

feedback regarding classroom practices improves implementation. These studies also 

raise the possibility that for sustained implementation of a curriculum, it may be 

important that the on-site component of professional development occur periodically 

throughout the period of the program. 

Matching Comprehensiveness of Professional Development Approach with the 

Comprehensiveness of the Curriculum. It is important to note that the interventions 

involving more comprehensive curricula incorporated professional development with 

more elements. In particular, these programs more consistently provided teachers with 
60

background such as explanations of the mathematics concepts in the curriculum, 

grounding in young children’s early mathematics development, and approaches to 

assessment of children’s mastery of the concepts in the curricula. This pattern is 

consistent with the summary above for early educator preparation for instruction in 

language and literacy, with more comprehensive professional development 

accompanying more comprehensive curricula. As noted in the earlier section as well, this 

matches with discussions of professional development needs for teachers in K–12 by 

Joyce and Showers (2002), who note that those planning professional development 

should judge the complexity of the instructional approach that teachers are being asked to 

implement and match the comprehensiveness of the professional development to the 

complexity of the instructional approach. 

Ginsburg and colleagues (2006), however, describe multiple sources of resistance to 

comprehensive professional development in early mathematics. They note that an 

unstructured approach toward early childhood teaching may result in resistance to the 

introduction of the systematic content of an early mathematics curriculum. For other 

teachers, a didactic approach toward instruction may result in resistance to an approach 

involving children learning through the structuring of activities and materials rather than 

direct instruction. They note that early childhood educators may also resist 

comprehensive professional development in early mathematics when they have limited 

understanding of or confidence about mathematics concepts.

Potential Importance of Including Supervisors or Directors Along with the Educators 

Themselves. While not covered systematically across the set of evaluation studies, the 

intervention approach developed by Ginsburg and colleagues (2006) raise the further 

issue of the potential importance of including site supervisors or center directors in 

professional development rather than instructing individual teachers in isolation. Their 

workshop approach for in-service training evolved to include a summer workshop for the 

leaders in centers in order to assure their “buy in” and ongoing supervision. One of the 

early mathematics evaluation studies called attention to the potential importance of 

including all instructional staff members in Head Start in a professional development 

intervention (Sophian 2004).

In sum, while it is not yet possible to make causal attributions about particular features of 

the professional development as underlying positive outcomes in young children’s math 

achievement, features that can be considered potential contributors in this set of studies 

include: well-articulated and research-based curricular goals; the availability of a manual 

and set of activities for implementing the curriculum; the match between

comprehensiveness of the curriculum and extensiveness of professional development; 

and an approach to professional development that includes supervisors and provides onsite follow-up to educators.

C. 2e. Sustainability of Effects. Only two of these studies included findings pertaining to 

whether effects on child outcomes in mathematics were sustained. Young-Loveridge 

(2004) found that while effects of the pairs of children engaging in math stories and 

activities with a specialist for half an hour a day had substantial effects on children’s 
61

numeracy immediately after the intervention, persisted through 15 months but diminished 

in size. The PCER study of early mathematics by Starkey and colleagues (2008) found 

evidence of greater growth on two measures of early mathematical skills by children in 

the treatment group at the end of the prekindergarten year but found no evidence of 

effects persisting into kindergarten. It is noteworthy that the focus of these examinations 

of sustainability is on impacts on children, not on whether professional development for 

early mathematics resulted in improved or sustained teacher knowledge or skill.

C. 3 Child Social Behavior

C. 3a. Overview of Studies Reviewed. 

This section of the review will focus on studies that evaluate approaches to strengthening 

early childhood professional development in the area of child social behavior. 

Table 3. Characteristics of Child Social Behavior Studies Reviewed

Study 

Number Citation Design* Outcome Areas Examined†

Exp QuasiExp

P/P

With

Comp

P/P

Without

Comp

Desc EK EP CO

1

Brigman, Lane, Switzer, Lane, 

& Lawrence (1999) X 

2 Denham & Burton (1996) X 

3

Domitrovich, Cortes, & 

Greenberg (2007) X 

4 Franyo & Hyson (1999) X 

5

Girolametto, Weitzman & 

Greenberg (2004) X  

6 Gowen (1987) X  

7 Hendrickson, Gardner, 

Kaiser & Riley (1993) X  

8

Lynch, Geller & Schmidt

(2004) X 

9

Raver, Jones, Li-Grinning,

Metzger, Champion, 

& Sardin (2008)

X 

10 Reynolds & Kelley (1997) X  

11 Rhodes & Hennessy (2000) X  

Continues next page
62

Study 

Number Citation Design* Outcome Areas Examined†

Exp QuasiExp

P/P

With

Comp

P/P

Without

Comp

Desc EK EP CO

12 Schottle & Peltier (1996) X 

13 Webster-Stratton, Reid, 

& Hammond (2001) X  

14 Webster-Stratton, Reid 

& Hammond (2004) X  

Total studies reviewed : 14 8 2 1 3 0 3 7 11

(*Exp= Experimental, Quasi-Exp= Quasi-Experimental, P/P With Comp= Pre-Post with comparison group, P/P Without Comp= Pre-Post without 

comparison group, D= Descriptive;

†

EK= Educator Knowledge, EP= Educator Practice, CO= Child Outcomes)

Two Foci of Professional Development Approaches in This Area. A key distinction in this 

body of work is that some approaches focus on strengthening early childhood 

professionals in working with young children in preschool settings who already show 

serious problems in their social behavior, such as oppositional defiant behavior (WebsterStratton, Reid, and Hammond 2004) or social withdrawal (Hendrickson et al. 1993), 

while other approaches focus on helping all children develop better social skills (Brigman 

et al. 1999).

A 1999 literature review by Bryant and colleagues (Bryant et al. 1999) points to the 

potential importance of intervening with young children already showing behavior 

problems. They summarize evidence of great stability in behavior problems from the 

preschool period into adolescence. Therefore, practices that can diminish early behavior 

problems may help to prevent the later emergence of serious behavioral problems that 

may contribute to juvenile delinquency. Indeed, Bryant and colleagues note that long 

term follow-up studies of comprehensive early childhood interventions, such as the 

Abecedarian project, provide evidence of reductions in delinquency. 

Early childhood educators themselves place a high priority on learning how to manage 

behavior positively within the classroom. Disruptive behavior in early childhood 

classrooms detracts from learning experiences not only for the child exhibiting the 

negative behavior but also for the class as a whole. More recent work makes an explicit 

link between young children’s social skills and learning in the classroom. For example, 

Bodrova and Leong (2006) note that improved self-regulation for all children in a 

classroom leads to greater engagement in activities that foster learning. 

Despite the potential importance of strengthening early childhood educators’ ability to 

address problem behaviors and to foster stronger social competence in all children, 

Bryant and colleagues noted limitations in the research on effective approaches. These 

included:

• A focus on older children but few studies of interventions for preschool-age 

children;

Table 3. Characteristics of Child Social Behavior Studies Reviewed (Continued)
63

• Small samples in the evaluation studies;

• A focus on aggressive and disruptive behavior but not strengthening social 

behavior in all children; 

• Methodological problems in this body of work, including lack of experimental 

evaluations; focus on children in middle class families rather than diverse 

samples; limited use of direct observation of child behavior; and a lack of 

examination of whether effects are sustained.

Of particular importance, Bryant and colleagues noted that only a handful of 

interventions trained early childhood educators on working with children with behavior 

problems, with a much greater emphasis on working with parents on these issues. 

The present review found promising work in this area that helps to address both the 

substantive and methodological concerns raised by Bryant and colleagues. As 

summarized below, this work includes a number of recent studies in which early 

educators are prepared to strengthen the social development of all children rather than 

only those with behavioral problems, experimental evaluations of training for teachers to 

work with children, and inclusion in studies of diverse samples of children.

Studies Focusing on Professional Development Aimed at Improving Children’s Social 

Behavior. Fourteen studies were identified involving early childhood professional 

development focused on improving children’s social behavior. Ten of these focused on 

strengthening the social skills of all of the children in an early childhood classroom, 

though sometimes in combination with management of disruptive behavior (Brigman et 

al. 1999; Denham and Burton 1996; Domitrovich, Cortes, and Greenberg 2007; Franyo 

and Hyson 1999; Girolametto, Weitzman, and Greenberg 2004; Gowen 1987; Lynch, 

Geller, and Schmidt 2004; Raver et al. 2008; Rhodes and Hennessy 2000; WebsterStratton, Reid, and Hammond 2001). 

Among those studies focusing on strengthening children’s social behavior, there was a 

range in terms of the specific aspect of social development that the professional 

development emphasized. These included children’s listening and attending skills 

(Brigman et al. 1999), their engagement with peers (Girolametto, Weitzman, and 

Greenberg 2004), time spent in play (Gowen 1987), understanding emotions, and 

interpersonal cognitive problem solving (Denham and Burton 1996; Domitrovich, Cortes, 

and Greenberg 2007), and general social behavior or competence (Rhodes and Hennessy 

2000; Brigman et al. 1999; Lynch, Geller, and Schmidt 2004; Webster-Stratton, Reid, 

and Hammond 2001). One study focused on teachers’ understanding of variations in 

children’s temperament and acceptance of a range in children’s behaviors and expression 

of feelings (Franyo and Hyson 1999). Another focused on teachers’ ability to foster an 

emotionally positive classroom climate (in addition to managing disruptive behavior) 

(Raver et al. 2008). In some instances, the basis in the research for focusing on a 

particular aspect of social development was not fully articulated. For example, it is not 

clear that increasing the sheer frequency of engagement with peers among children not 

showing social withdrawal yields an outcome with long-term benefits.
64

Studies Focusing on Professional Development for Working with Children Already 

Showing Problem Behaviors. Four studies focused on strengthening early educators’ 

approaches for working with children already showing problem behaviors. Three out of 

the four focused on aggressive behavior (Reynolds and Kelley 1997; Schottle and Peltier 

1996; Webster-Stratton, Reid, and Hammond 2004). However one focused on socially 

withdrawn children (Hendrickson et al. 1993).

The professional development approach in this set of studies often involved a 

combination of workshops with on-site consultation. For example, Webster-Stratton and 

colleagues (2004), in implementing and evaluating professional development focusing on 

working with children with oppositional defiant disorder, provided teachers with four 

days of training in a clinic setting followed by two meetings with staff therapists at the 

school to develop an individual behavior plan for the child. The four days of training 

emphasized effective management of misbehavior in the classroom, developing positive 

relationships with the students with oppositional defiant disorder, and fostering social 

skills in everyday school settings. The study by Girolametto and colleagues (2004), 

which describes an approach to helping teachers extending children’s play through 

nondirective verbal supports, involved three group sessions of two and a half hours each 

complemented with three sessions in the day care center involving videotaping caregiverchild interaction in the classroom followed by the discussion and the provision of 

individual feedback. There was variation in the intensity and structure of on-site 

consultation. For example, Raver and colleagues (2008) hired mental health consultants 

to coach teachers one morning a week, providing feedback and stress reduction, and 

providing direct one-on-one services to children. In contrast, Gowen (1987) provided two 

trainers for informal consultation as needed. Exceptions to the pattern of workshops with 

some type of follow-up in the early educators’ workplace included reliance on the 

workshop format without follow-up observation or consultation (e.g., Franyo and Hyson 

1999), and participation in 120 hours of professional development of which 90 hours 

involved in-class instruction and 30 hours involved teachers observing in other 

classrooms (Rhodes and Hennessy 2000). 

C. 3b. Study Designs and Methodology. The professional development approaches in this 

set of studies were evaluated using a range of evaluation designs. More recent studies 

tended to be more likely to use experimental designs. 

Experimental Evaluations. Progress beyond the review by Bryant and colleagues is 

clearly indicated by the fact that eight of the studies involved experimental evaluations 

(Brigman et al. 1999; Franyo and Hyson 1999; Girolametto, Weitzman, and Greenberg 

2004; Webster-Stratton, Reid, and Hammond 2004; Domitrovich, Cortes, and Greenberg 

2007; Lynch, Geller, and Schmidt 2004; Raver et al. 2008; Webster-Stratton, Reid, and 

Hammond 2001). There were delayed post-tests in each of these in order to assess 

maintenance of outcomes. 

Quasi-Experimental and Pre-Test Post-Test Designs. Three studies involved nonexperimental evaluations with pre- and post-tests for both a program and comparison 

group (Rhodes and Hennessy 2000; Schottle and Peltier 1996; Denham and Burton 
65

1996). One study involved the articulation of target levels for the desired teacher 

behaviors, and evaluation of whether the targets were achieved (Gowen 1987). Finally, 

two studies involved studying behavior change over time in small samples of teachers 

and students as the teachers underwent training. In the study by Hendrickson et al., 

(1993), this sometimes involved multiple baselines (tracking child behavior during a 

withdrawal phase). 

Samples. A number of these programs of professional development focused on settings 

with low-income children (Gowen 1987; Schottle and Peltier 1996; Brigman et al. 1999; 

Domitrovich, Cortes, and Greenberg 2007; Lynch, Geller, and Schmidt 2004; Raver et al. 

2008; Webster-Stratton, Reid, and Hammond 2001), while others involved a wide range 

in terms of socioeconomic status (Franyo and Hyson 1999; Reynolds and Kelley 1997; 

Rhodes and Hennessy 2000; Webster-Stratton, Reid, and Hammond 2004). The study by 

Hendrickson and colleagues (1993) focused on socially withdrawn children who also had 

disabilities. Although many of the studies focused on children from ages 3 to 5 years old, 

there was a range in targeted age groups. It is important to note that the study by Schottle 

and Peltier (1996) focused on slightly older children, participating in kindergarten 

through third grade, and Gowan (1987) included classrooms with children whose ages 

ranged from 7–62 months. 

Outcomes Examined. It is not surprising, given the focus of these programs of 

professional development on improving child social behavior, that nearly all studies 

included measures of child behavior. These varied, however, according to the particular 

aspect of social behavior the program emphasized (for example, attending, extent of peer 

interaction, engagement in play, amount of aggressive behavior, social competence, 

overall social behavior). Teacher practice was more often a focus of these evaluation 

studies than teacher knowledge or attitudes, with the emphasis again varying by program 

focus (and including verbal supports for peer interaction, nondirective verbal interactions 

supporting children’s play, positive relationships with children, detachment in 

interactions with children, and teacher management of child misbehavior). Teacher 

attitudes and knowledge were the focus of the study in which teachers were trained with 

the intent of extending their knowledge about temperament and attitudes of acceptance of 

a range of child behaviors (Franyo and Hyson 1999), and in which the training focused 

on the importance of children’s play and of nondirective verbal facilitation of play 

(Gowen 1987). 

Methodological Issues. While it is clear that recent interventions and evaluations have 

made important progress in terms of focus on all children in addition to those showing 

problem behaviors, greater reliance on experimental evaluation, and inclusion of children 

from diverse backgrounds, some methodological issues remain. A concern raised by 

Bryant and colleagues was small sample sizes. Thus it is encouraging that a number of 

recent studies involve larger samples (Franyo and Hyson 1999; Webster-Stratton, Reid, 

and Hammond 2004; e.g., Brigman et al. 1999; Domitrovich, Cortes, and Greenberg 

2007; Lynch, Geller, and Schmidt 2004). However, even though the sample size of 

children in a number of the reviewed studies may be larger than those in the past, they are 

still relatively small when the nested nature of the data (children within classrooms 
66

within centers within programs) is taken into account. The use of multilevel modeling 

(e.g. hierarchical linear modeling) has been suggested when behavior of individuals 

within organizations are studied (Davidson et al. 2002). However, none of the studies 

reviewed here used a nested design. 

Other remaining methodological issues in this set of studies include reliance on a single 

observer who was not blind as to experimental and control group (Rhodes and Hennessy 

2000), reliance on teacher ratings as the sole source of data on children’s behavior 

(Lynch, Geller, and Schmidt 2004), non-equivalent experimental and control groups 

(Webster-Stratton, Reid, and Hammond 2001), a need for further clarification of the 

program of professional development (Hendrickson et al. 1993), focus only on teacher 

attitudes and knowledge without complementary measures of teacher practice or child 

outcomes (Franyo and Hyson 1999), and unexpected patterns of development reported 

for children in a control group (lack of progress from fall to spring in complexity of play 

and peer interactions) (Rhodes and Hennessy 2000). In some instances there was limited 

sample description. For example, Girolametto and colleagues (2004) provide no 

information on the socioeconomic status of families participating in their study. One of 

the most rigorous evaluations, the study by Webster-Stratton and colleagues (2004) had a 

limitation for current purposes that was not rooted in problems with design or 

measurement (which were quite rigorous and well described). This study aimed to 

evaluate whether training teachers in working effectively with children with serious 

behavior problems would augment training of parents and children. Among five groups 

to which families were randomly assigned, none involved teacher training alone. This 

study can address the question of whether the groups that had teacher training in addition 

to other forms of intervention had better outcomes than the other forms of intervention 

alone but not whether teacher training in and of itself is effective. A strength of some 

more recent studies is the ethnic diversity of children included (Domitrovich, Cortes, and 

Greenberg 2007; Lynch, Geller, and Schmidt 2004; Webster-Stratton, Reid, and 

Hammond 2001). 

C. 3c. Patterns of Findings. In this section we describe findings first in studies focusing 

on strengthening professional development of early educators to work with children 

showing behavior problems, and then to findings from studies focusing on preparation to 

strengthen social skills in all of the young children in a classroom or group. 

Findings from Studies Focusing on Children Already Showing Behavior Problems. 

There was evidence of positive outcomes for each of the professional development 

approaches that involved increasing teacher effectiveness in working with children with 

behavior problems (either disruptive or withdrawn). These programs all had the common

element of a clearly articulated set of specific practices for reducing behavior problems 

and enhancing positive peer interaction. All of these programs also included an on-site 

component in which teachers worked with consultants to develop plans for individual 

children and received feedback on their practices. The on-site work was explicitly aimed 

at helping to assure fidelity of implementation in a number of programs; for example, onsite videotaping of the coaching was used to verify fidelity of implementation in the study 

by Hendrickson and colleagues (1993). There were also instances in which goals were set 
67

jointly by the teacher and coach or expert during the on-site work (Schottle and Peltier 

1996). 

Findings From Studies Focusing on Improving All Children’s Social Skills and Behavior. 

Most of the studies that focused on improving children’s social skills and behavior found 

some positive impacts. For example, Domitrovich and colleagues (2007) found that 

intervention children, compared with those in the control group, had a larger emotion 

receptive vocabulary, were more accurate in identifying feelings, and showed less anger 

attribution bias (effect sizes ranged from d = .28 - .40). Franyo and Hyson (1999) report 

an increase in early educator knowledge following the workshop on child temperament. 

However, there was no evidence of a change in teacher attitude of acceptance of the 

range of child behaviors. The experimental evaluation of the Ready to Learn curriculum 

(Brigman et al. 1999), for which training involved two full-day workshops with three 

half-day follow-up workshops, resulted in better scores on observed attending behavior 

and teacher report of child social behavior. The 120 hours of training provided in the 

study by Rhodes and Hennessy (2000) was reported to result in increased observed 

positive relations of teachers with children, diminished teacher detachment, and increased 

complexity of child social play and play with objects. However, as noted, there are 

concerns in this study with respect to observations being carried out by observers not 

blind as to group and because children in the control group did not make progress as one 

might expect during the course of a school year.

The hypothesis that emerges from the evaluations of professional development with the 

aim of improving broader social behavior is that with broader goals comes the need for 

the provision of more background on children’s development and thus more extensive 

course work or training. However there is still an implication in the work that specificity 

of goals in terms of desired teacher behavior, and on-site work to provide feedback and 

assure fidelity, contribute to positive outcomes.

C. 3d. Implementation of Professional Development. We have noted that a number of the 

professional development approaches in this area involved combining training with 

individualized feedback and support in the workplace. Several additional implementation 

issues emerge in this set of studies, some for the studies focusing on early educator 

approaches with children who already show behavior problems, and some for the studies 

focusing on early educator approaches to strengthening all children’s social skills.

Variation in emphasis on the provision of background knowledge. There was variation 

across programs focusing on strengthening early educators’ work with children showing 

behavior problems in terms of emphasis on background knowledge. Some programs 

placed much greater emphasis on providing background and context regarding children’s 

behavioral development and effective behavior management (Webster-Stratton and Reid 

2004) while others focused more narrowly on the development of individual plans for 

children and provision of individualized on-site work with early educators without the 

provision of background knowledge and context (Schottle and Peltier 1996; Reynolds 

and Kelley 1997). Because measures and follow-up periods vary across studies, it is 

impossible to conclude whether the provision of more in-depth information to teachers 
68

resulted in larger or more sustained changes in teacher practice or the ability to approach 

a wider range of specific behavior problems effectively. This is an important issue for 

further focus.

Dosage. In the studies focusing on strengthening early educators’ professional 

development regarding the social skills of all children, the programs involving greater 

intensity or duration were reported to have positive effects for teachers and children. 

These also tended, however, to involve the implementation of more specific curricula or 

classroom approaches, so it is difficult to disentangle specificity of approach from 

dosage. 

Level of Expertise of Provider of Professional Development. The level of expertise of the 

provider of professional development varied across these studies. For example, a skilled 

clinician provided the professional development in the work of both Raver and colleagues 

(2008) and Webster-Stratton and colleagues (2004), and a behavior management 

consultant provided the on-site training and coaching in the work of Schottle and Peltier 

(1996). However, the background of the provider of professional development did not 

appear to be as extensive in other approaches (e.g., Reynolds and Kelley 1997). In some 

cases, coaches were program administrators or other supervisory staff members who were 

selected to participate in the intervention (e.g. Domitrovich, Cortes, and Greenberg 2007; 

Lynch, Geller, and Schmidt 2004). It is difficult to isolate the importance of the expertise 

of the provider of professional development given other differences across these studies, 

for example in outcome measures used and study design. 

C. 3e. Sustainability of Effects. Several of the studies in this set included delayed posttests to examine sustainability of effects. However the duration of the delay varied as did 

the outcome examined. At one extreme, Franyo and Hyson (1999) found sustained 

changes in knowledge about child temperament four weeks after a workshop providing 

training on this topic. Perhaps more impressive is evidence of sustained improvement in 

the behavior of children with conduct disorders into a new school year in the set of 

studies reported by Webster-Stratton and colleagues (2004; 2001). Further work looking 

explicitly at sustainability would contribute to the rigor of this body of work.
69

V: Approaches to Strengthening the Overall Quality of Early Care and Education 

Settings 

In this section of the review we focus on the research on approaches to professional 

development that aim to improve the overall quality of early care and education settings. 

Two approaches are distinguished: those that provide professional development on 

comprehensive curricula, integrating multiple developmental domains rather than 

focusing on specific domains, and those that use broad measures of early care and 

education quality to guide improvement efforts.

D. 1. Comprehensive Curricula

D. 1a. Overview of Studies Reviewed. The studies reviewed in this section examine the 

effectiveness of comprehensive curricula intended to improve teachers’ instructional 

practices in center-based programs as well as children’s developmental outcomes across 

multiple domains. 

Table 4. Characteristics of Comprehensive Curricula Studies Reviewed

Study 

Number Citation Design* Outcome Areas Examined†

Exp QuasiExp

P/P

With

Comp

P/P

Without

Comp

Desc EK EP CO

1

Barnett, Jung, Yarosz, 

Thomas, Hornbeck, Stechuk, 

& Burns (2008)

X  

2 Bierman, Nix, Greenberg, 

Blair, & Domitrovich (2008) X 

3 Chambers & Slavin (2008) X  

4 Diamond, Barnett, Thomas, & 

Munro (2007) X 

5 Farran & Lipsey (2008) X  

6 Lambert & Abbott-Shim 

(2008) X  

7 Powell & File (2008) X  

8 Priest & Zoellick (2008) X  

9 Starkey, Klein, Clements, & 

Sarama (2008) X  

10 Thornburg, Mayfield, 

Morrison, & Scott (2008) X  

Total studies: 10 reviewed 10 0 0 0 0 0 8 10

(*Exp= Experimental, Quasi-Exp= Quasi-Experimental, P/P With Comp= Pre-Post with comparison group, P/P Without Comp= Pre-Post without 

comparison group, D= Descriptive;

†

EK= Educator Knowledge, EP= Educator Practice, CO= Child Outcomes)
70

Seven of the 10 studies reviewed in this category were part of the PCER initiative, 

designed to conduct experimental evaluations of preschool curricula (U.S. Department of 

Education 2008). The seven PCER studies reviewed here were intended to promote 

children’s development across domains in an integrated fashion (as opposed to curricula 

focusing primarily on language and literacy or early mathematics, as described above) 

though the individual curricula assessed were based on different instructional 

philosophies. 

The remaining three studies evaluated curricular strategies for promoting children’s 

executive function (EF). Often considered to be a cognitive skill, EF (and its role in 

supporting the development of self regulation) is now recognized as a central feature of 

children’s development that relates to their abilities to control their behavior and 

emotions, inhibit impulses, and direct their attention toward important tasks. These tasks 

are important not only for cognition but also for language, social interactions and even 

motor development. The first strategy is the Tools of the Mind curriculum (Leong and 

Bodrova 1995), based on the theories of Vygotsky and Luria, which promotes the 

development of self regulation through supporting activities like extended dramatic play 

and private speech. Two of the ten studies focused on the Tools of the Mind Curriculum 

(Diamond et al. 2007; Barnett et al. 2008). A second strategy was tested in the Head Start 

REDI intervention (Bierman et al. under review). In this approach, a comprehensive 

curriculum focused on aspects of language development as well as the development of 

social skills was implemented and the effects on EF as well as other outcomes were 

tested.

D. 1b. Study Designs and Methodology. All of the studies included in this section were 

experimental. As part of a group of funded studies with a common framework, the PCER 

studies (7 of which are reviewed in this section) were required to incorporate an 

experimental design in their evaluation (U.S. Department of Education 2008). In these 

studies, classrooms were randomly assigned to implement the intervention curriculum or 

a control curriculum. Many of the PCER studies were conducted in public prekindergarten classrooms or in Head Start classrooms, so the samples of children and early 

childhood educators included in the studies were quite diverse. 

The PCER studies and one of the reports on the Tools of the Mind curriculum (Barnett et 

al. 2008) included measures to examine changes in educator practices and skills (through 

observation of the global quality of the classroom and instructional practices) as well as 

changes in children’s outcomes.

The general model of professional development used throughout the studies involved an 

initial training for classroom teachers (varying from one to four days) with follow-up 

support or training provided through site visits and consultations from experts in the 

curricula. In some cases (Barnett et al. 2008; Chambers and Slavin 2008; Powell and File 

2008), the follow-up included additional training sessions (in addition to the weekly or 

periodic mentoring or consultation being offered). Note that the follow-up consultation 

or additional training was not available for all of the curricula.
71

D. 1c. Patterns of Findings. This body of studies is informative about the potential of 

curricula in combination with professional development approaches to impact educator 

practices or children’s developmental outcomes. But without systematic variation in the 

professional development approaches employed to prepare early educators to implement 

the curricula, this set of studies does not shed light separately on which professional 

development strategies work best for promoting positive outcomes. 

Findings Regarding Educator Practice. Eight of the 10 studies examined changes in 

educator practices or in overall quality of the classroom environment. The effects noted 

on educator practices were not consistent across the studies. Barnett and colleagues 

(2008) reported large effects of the Tools of the Mind curriculum on all of the measures 

used to assess instructional or classroom practices. The Tools of the Mind curriculum 

improved total scores on the Early Childhood Environment Rating Scale–Revised 

(ECERS-R) (Harms, Clifford, and Cryer 1998), the Supports for Early Literacy 

Assessment (SELA) (Smith et al. 2001) and the Preschool Classroom Implementation 

Scale (PCI) (Frede and Miller 1990). Tools of the Mind classrooms also scored higher 

than controls on one subscale (productivity) of the Classroom Assessment and Scoring 

System (CLASS) (Pianta et al. 2005). Similarly, Lambert and Abbott-Shim (2008)

reported effects of Creative Curriculum on all aspects of classroom practices studied, 

including overall quality, teacher-child relationships, early literacy instruction, and early 

language instruction. 

Three of the studies found mixed effects on educator practices, with positive impacts on 

specific language and literacy instructional practices, but not on overall classroom 

quality. Chambers and Slavin (2008) found positive effects on reading and early literacy 

instruction but no effects on overall classroom quality. Likewise, Priest and Zoellick 

(2008) found effects of a language supplement to Creative Curriculum (Ladders to 

Literacy) on early literacy instruction. Farran and Lipsey (2008) found effects of one 

curriculum (Bright Beginnings) on early literacy and phonological awareness instruction 

but no effects on classroom practices of the other curriculum studied (Creative 

Curriculum). Finally, three of the PCER studies (Powell and File 2008; Starkey et al. 

2008; Thornburg et al. 2008) found no effects on educator practices. 

Findings Regarding Child Outcomes. Across the 10 studies, only isolated and mixed 

effects on child outcomes were reported. Barnett et al. (2008) reported significant effects 

of the Tools of the Mind curriculum on children’s social behavior as reported by teachers 

on the Social Skills Rating System (SSRS) (Gresham and Elliott 1990). Diamond and 

colleagues (2007) also reported positive effects of the Tools of the Mind curriculum on 

children’s inhibitory control. In the study examining the Project Approach (Powell and 

File 2008), children’s behavior was negatively impacted by the curriculum (more 

behavior problems, weaker social skills and fewer learning behaviors) when compared to 

the control group. Starkey and colleagues (2008) and Thornburg and colleagues (2008)

both reported negative effects on one math skill (shape composition) but no other positive 

or negative effects across other developmental domains.
72

D. 1d. Implementation of Professional Development. Looking across the 10 studies, little 

can be gleaned about effective professional development related to the implementation of 

comprehensive or integrated curricula. The only intervention approach for which 

positive effects were reported both on classroom measures and child outcomes was Tools 

of the Mind. It is possible that the other comprehensive curricula placed too many 

expectations at once on early educators, or did not match the extent and 

comprehensiveness of professional development with the complexity of the curricula. 

However, as noted above, the lack of systematic evaluations of variation in professional 

development approaches and dosages makes it impossible to isolate either the nature of 

the curricula or the specific approach to professional development as underlying the 

results. A further possibility is that the relative lack of effects overall on educator 

practices and child outcomes is related to initial knowledge or skills of the early 

educators. It may be that professional development for comprehensive curricula requires 

a higher initial level of educator knowledge and skill. However, the majority of the 

studies reported that the educators in the sample had more than five years of experience 

(in some cases, the average was closer to 10 or 12).

This set of studies is more informative about what needs to be studied systematically in 

the future than about how the present set of results relate to the professional development 

that was implemented. Future studies focusing on comprehensive curricula should 

systematically vary the extent and approach to professional development, especially with 

the goal of identifying whether a more complex set of curriculum elements requires more 

extensive professional development overall, or a greater dosage of particular elements 

(such as initial presentation of underlying concepts, modeling and practice, or on-site 

coaching). Future work should also examine early educator level of previous education, 

training and knowledge as moderators of the effectiveness of professional development 

on comprehensive curricula. Finally, it may be useful to evaluate the effectiveness of 

professional development for comprehensive curricula that, while broad, nevertheless 

vary in terms of the number of different curriculum elements and integration across 

elements that early educators are being asked to master. 

D. 1e. Sustainability of Effects. The sustainability of effects was not addressed in this set 

of studies.

D. 2 General Approaches in Professional Development

D. 2a. Overview of Studies Reviewed. The studies reviewed in this section are much more 

diverse in scope, purpose, and content than studies included in other sections. Unlike the 

literature describing the effectiveness of various curricular approaches, in which the 

professional development of the early childhood educator is often not treated as a 

separate focus of the study, the literature in this category is part of a small body of studies 

focusing explicitly on the processes and principles of professional development. 
73

Table 5. Characteristics of General Approaches Studies Reviewed

Study 

Number Citation Design* Outcome Areas Examined†

Exp QuasiExp

P/P

With

Comp

P/P

Without

Comp

Desc EK EP CO

1 Arnett (1989) X 

2 Campbell & Milbourne (2005) X 

3 Cassidy, Buell, Pugh-Hoese, 

& Russell (1995) X  

4

Fantuzzo, Childs, Hampton, 

Ginsburg-Block, Coolahan & 

Debnam (1997)

X 

5

Fantuzzo, Childs, Stevenson, 

Coolahan, Ginsburg, Gay, 

Debnam, & Watson (1996)

X 

6 Fiene (2002) X  

7 Kontos, Howes, & Galinsky 

(1996) X  

8 Palsha & Wesley (1998) X 

9 Pianta, Mashburn, Downer, 

Hamre, & Justice (2008) X 

10 Wesley (1994) X 

11 Whitaker et al. (2007) X

Total studies reviewed: 11 3 2 3 2 0 3 9 0

(*Exp= Experimental, Quasi-Exp= Quasi-Experimental, P/P With Comp= Pre-Post with comparison group, P/P Without Comp= Pre-Post without 

comparison group, D= Descriptive;

†

EK= Educator Knowledge, EP= Educator Practice, CO= Child Outcomes)

While some of the articles in this section presented results for small empirical studies, 

others discuss best practices or report on the results of small studies that did not use 

statistical analyses to describe results. Only the studies presenting empirical results are 

summarized in table format. The findings described below should be interpreted as first 

steps in establishing a solid body of research on processes and principles. However, a 

majority of the processes and principles described in this work underscore themes that 

emerged from the sections on professional development within content areas or for the 

comprehensive curricula.

The focus of the professional development targeted by most of the studies in this set was 

overall quality of the environment and interactions with children (Cassidy et al. 1995; 

Fiene 2002; Kontos, Howes, and Galinsky 1996; Palsha and Wesley 1998; Wesley and 

Buysse 2004; Arnett 1989; Pianta et al. 2008). One set of studies addressed the issue of 

parent involvement and interactions between parents, teachers, and children in programs, 

which was unique across all of the studies included in this review (Fantuzzo 1996; 

Fantuzzo et al. 1997), with the exception of the work discussed above in which both 

parents and teachers focused on helping children with oppositional defiant behavior 

problems (Webster-Stratton, Reid, and Hammond 2004). The approaches included 
74

workshop training, community college course work, on-site consultation or mentoring, 

Web-based professional development that included video exemplars of classroom 

practices as well as individualized Web-based consultation, and combinations of 

workshops and on-site support.

In all, 11 empirical articles are included in the table. In addition, articles and books were 

reviewed for information on best practices (but are not included in the table). Linkages 

across pairs of articles are evident for two sets of articles: one set is Wesley (1994) and 

Palsha & Wesley (1998); the other set is Fantuzzo and colleagues (1996). In these sets, 

the authors have published a follow-up article that builds on the approach and results 

detailed in an original article. The articles in these sets will be discussed separately since 

the samples and methods differed slightly across the studies.

D. 2b. Study Designs. This area on processes and principles of professional development 

contained a mix of studies using experimental designs and pre-post designs with and 

without comparison groups. In all cases, the samples were small and limited the degree 

to which findings could be generalized to other populations of interest. Yet the studies 

did include groups (of both educators and children) that are considered important targets 

of professional development and of improved practice. The populations targeted in these 

studies included infants and toddlers (Campbell and Milbourne 2005; Fiene 2002; Pianta 

et al. 2008), children with special needs (Wesley and Buysse 2004; Palsha and Wesley 

1998), and children from low-income families (Campbell and Milbourne 2005; Fantuzzo 

1996; Fantuzzo et al. 1997). A study examining the effectiveness of scholarships for 

course work in a community college targeted child care providers who had not previously 

taken college-level courses (Cassidy et al. 1995). One study was also aimed at improving 

practice among family child care providers, a group that has not been discussed 

extensively in the literature on professional development for early childhood educators 

(Kontos, Howes, and Galinsky 1996), though the recent study reviewed in the language 

and literacy section above by Neuman and Cunningham (2009) does include a focus on 

educators in this setting.

None of the studies reviewed in this section presented findings on the implications of 

professional development for child outcomes, though it should be noted that the My 

Teaching Partner intervention (Pianta et al. 2008) will examine child outcomes in future 

publications. Additionally, the forthcoming Quality Interventions for Early Care and 

Education (QUINCE) Evaluation was designed to examine on-site consultation and 

corresponding effects on the quality of the environment and children’s outcomes. The 

most frequently analyzed outcome was the global quality of the environment, usually 

assessed with an environmental rating scale such as the Early Childhood Environment 

Rating Scale, for which a revised edition also exists and was sometimes used in this set of 

studies, (ECERS) (Harms, Clifford, and Cryer 1980, 1998), the Infant-Toddler 

Environment Rating Scale (ITERS) (Harms, Cryer, and Clifford 1990), for which a 

revised edition also exists and was sometimes used, (Harms, Cryer, and Clifford 2003), 

or the Family Day Care Rating Scale (FDCRS, Harms and Clifford 1989).

11

 11 A revised version of this measure also now exists but was not used in this set of studies.

 These scales 

are used to assess multiple dimensions of the environment (classrooms or homes) in 
75

which child care is provided. The scales are tailored to the specific environment they 

assess, but general features assessed across the three scales include: health and safety 

provisions, interactions, activities, language, space and furnishings, program structure, 

and adult needs. Another measure of quality used in a number of the studies reviewed 

here is the Caregiver Interaction Scale (CIS) (Arnett 1989), which rates the quality of the 

adult-child interactions after a period of observation. Qualities of adult-child and adultadult interactions also were assessed using interval coding (every 15 seconds) of a 10-

minute sample of classroom activity. Few studies in this set examined changes in 

caregiver knowledge as a result of professional development.

The goals and objectives described in this set of studies varied in their specificity but 

related in general to improvement of the overall environment and interactions children 

experienced. The approaches to quality improvement and professional development 

included coursework, training plus on-site consultation, and on-site consultation, Webmediated consultation or mentoring (without training). The research base underlying 

these approaches is very thin. The correlational studies described above linking higher 

levels of education and training to higher levels of quality provide the primary rationale 

for these approaches to professional development. In addition, most of the studies take as 

their starting point the assumption that classroom quality and interactions with children 

are not likely to improve if workshop attendance is the only professional development 

that early childhood educators complete. Prior to the publication of the studies reviewed 

here, there were few studies in early childhood education documenting the importance of 

using on-site consultants or mentors alone or in connection with a training course. Thus, 

many of the studies were launched with the expectation that strategies such as on-site 

consultation and mentoring would be more effective than workshops, but there was little 

empirical evidence on which they could build their approach. 

When workshop curricula were used in this set of studies, an attempt was made to 

provide experiential, hands-on learning opportunities for participants (Campbell and 

Milbourne 2005; Fantuzzo 1996; Fantuzzo et al. 1997). Kontos, Howes, and Galinsky 

(1996) do not describe a focus on experiential learning but note that the Family-to-Family 

training projects that were evaluated were allowed to adapt curriculum materials and 

make the training more advanced than it had previously been (usually one-time 

workshops or conferences compared to 15 to 25 hours of class time in the Family-toFamily training).

Another activity used in some of the studies was the completion of a program selfassessment that provided the basis for a quality improvement action plan (Campbell and 

Milbourne 2005; Palsha and Wesley 1998; Wesley and Buysse 2004). Wesley (1994)

notes that the inclusion of a self-assessment was important for three reasons. First, it 

conveyed the message to the staff participating in the consultation that their input about 

their own program and practice was vital to the success of the process. Second, staff 

were taught to use an assessment tool (in this case, the environmental rating scales) that 

could guide their own observations of the program and help them rate the quality 

according to standard benchmarks, a skill that could be used after the consultation was 

over. Thus, program staff were actively involved in setting goals and objectives for 
76

professional development. Third, self assessment allowed the staff to see what they were 

doing compared to what was recommended (on the rating scales). Reflecting on these 

differences can help motivate change.

D. 2c. Patterns of Findings. Which features of professional development appeared to be 

most successful at improving quality of the environments and interactions? The 

discussion of results is organized by the primary strategy of professional development 

that was used. A discussion of the lessons learned from the empirical studies and the 

literature on best practices in professional development will follow the presentation of 

results. The results summarized here complement and extend the discussion above 

focusing on early educator human and social capital.

Completion of Community College Course Work. One study examined whether 

participation in a year of community college course work would improve teachers’ 

beliefs and classroom quality compared to a matched group of teachers from the same 

programs (Cassidy et al. 1995). Gains on both the measure of global quality (ECERS and 

ITERS) and on a measure of teacher’s beliefs about classroom practice were noted for the 

group of teachers receiving a scholarship to complete the community college course

work. The authors offer some explanations for the factors that must be in place to 

support these gains. First, they note that the teachers in the scholarship group may have 

the additional support of coworkers and administrators in their program that helped foster 

the quality improvements. In addition, the authors point out that the course work taken 

by the teachers was focused predominantly on child-related topics and methods, a factor 

they view as critical to changing beliefs and classroom practices.

A second study examined the value of course work using a quasi-experimental design 

(Arnett 1989). Educators in Bermuda took a four-course program studying 

communication and child development in the first year and child care and preschool 

activities in the second year. Educators who had completed half or more of the course

work were observed to be more positive than those who had not yet completed the course

work. They also rated themselves as less authoritarian. The authors view this as 

evidence that the course work can shape both attitudes and behavior with children.

Training plus On-site Support through Consultation or Mentoring. The studies that 

examined workshop training with on-site support through consultation or mentors 

demonstrated mixed success in improving quality. As noted earlier in this review, 

different studies are inconsistent in their use of the terms “mentors” and “consultants.” In 

each instance, the relationship involved working with the early educator at their 

workplace. There is a clear need for efforts to clarify the terminology regarding on-site 

work with educators. Here we use the terms chosen by the researchers. 

In the Family-to-Family training, which included workshops and home visits for family 

child care providers, modest improvements in global quality were reported for two of the 

three training sites (Kontos, Howes, and Galinsky 1996). The quality of interactions with 

children did not improve. When the authors imposed a stricter criterion of detecting 

“observable” changes on the FDCRS of one point or more, only 19 percent of the 
77

providers made observable changes. Nearly three-quarters made no observable changes, 

and 8 percent of providers lost ground on quality. The authors conclude that the training 

may not have been rigorous enough to result in meaningful changes. They note that 

while the training included home visits (viewed as an element of successful training), 

“nonetheless, the emphasis is on the classroom component over the more individualized, 

expensive, and time-consuming coaching that can occur during home visits” (Kontos, 

Howes, and Galinsky 1996, p. 443). 

A second study examining training plus on-site consultation also showed modest to no 

effects. Global quality and caregiver-child interactions were compared before and after a 

15-hour training course for a group that received three hours of on-site consultation 

compared to a group that received no consultation (Campbell and Milbourne 2005). The 

teachers completing the training were infant-toddler caregivers working in programs that 

provided care for children from low-income families. While they were taking a course 

on issues related to infant-toddler care, they received brief consultation sessions (3 

sessions, one hour each). In these sessions, the teachers completed a self-assessment then 

worked with the consultant to create and implement an action plan. No significant gains 

were found on the ITERS or the measure of caregiver-child interactions. One positive 

finding noted is that more caregivers in the consultation group (21 percent) made 

observable changes on the ITERS than caregivers in the non-consultation group (8 

percent), though this difference did not achieve statistical significance. The authors view 

this finding as promising given the short duration of the training course and consultation 

(three months for a total of 18 hours). However, the overall meager results of the study 

point to the need to examine more intensive workshop and consultation processes that 

have a greater chance of actually changing knowledge and practices. 

A study with similar results also focused on improving the environment and interactions 

in infant-toddler classrooms (Fiene 2002). This experimental study analyzed the effects 

of “intensive mentoring” during four months from a seasoned early childhood 

professional compared to the effects of having workshop training available. The 

mentoring used a problem-solving approach in which mentor and mentee formed a 

trusting relationship, and then the mentor gave constructive criticisms. However, few 

details about the mentoring program were described in the study. No impacts on global 

quality or caregiver interaction were found. To further understand these results, it would 

be useful to know more about the qualities of the relationship between the mentor and 

staff. As described below, a collaborative approach to on-site quality improvement may 

be more effective than an expert-novice relationship in which the mentor takes on the role 

of the expert who is there to impart information to the staff. 

On-site or Web-Mediated Consultation without Workshops or Training. In contrast to the 

Fiene (2002) study, Wesley (1994) and Palsha and Wesley (1998) found that on-site 

consultation with the goal of improving the quality of the environment can be successful. 

These studies are compromised by their lack of comparison groups and small sample 

sizes. Nevertheless, the consultation model that is tested shows promise in increasing 

global quality in center-based infant-toddler and preschool classrooms (no significant 

quality changes were found for the small sample of family child care programs included 
78

in the 1998 study) and sustaining increases after the consultation ends. The model 

described in the 1994 and 1998 studies uses the environmental rating scales as the basis 

for the consultation relationship. The model was initially developed to help promote 

quality in classrooms that include children with special needs, though the observation 

was made that improvement of global quality affects all of the children in the classroom, 

not just the child with special needs. The steps of the model are articulated, and 

consultants receive a two-day training to learn the components and strategies of the 

model.12 After a period of relationship-building, consultees are taught how to use the 

rating scales to assess the quality of their own programs. Then, together with the 

consultant (who has also assessed the quality), they discuss the findings and create an 

action plan for quality improvement. This focus on collaborative assessment and change 

empowers the consultees to think through problems and come up with solutions 

independently (Palsha and Wesley 1998). 

Another key feature discussed in Wesley (1994) and Palsha and Wesley (1998) that 

should be noted is the inclusion of all staff in a classroom (and center administrators, if 

possible) in the consultation process to increase the shared knowledge base and prevent a 

reversion to previous practice. This inclusion also helps increase the buy-in of staff to the 

change process and helps ensure that results are sustained over time.

Pianta and colleagues (2008) describe the results of a different approach to 

consultation—embedded within a larger study of professional development—that directly 

targets teachers’ interactions with children. This study of My Teaching Partner (MTP) 

used an experimental design (with teachers randomized at the level of school district) to 

examine the effectiveness of different professional development resources (including 

online video exemplars and individualized consultation) on teachers’ interactions with 

children. In one condition, teachers had on-demand access to only the online video 

exemplars. In the second condition, teachers had access to the exemplars as well as MTP 

consultation support. In this condition, teachers submitted videos every two weeks of 

themselves engaged in an activity with their students. The MTP consultant reviewed the 

video and provided direct and specific feedback to the teacher. The consultants posed 

questions and teachers responded to the questions using the MTP Web site. Teachers 

also met with the MTP consultants in an online chat to further discuss the feedback and 

additional questions. Videos from the Web-only teachers and the consultancy teachers 

were coded using the Classroom Assessment Scoring System (Pianta, La Paro, and 

Hamre 2008), and scores were analyzed. Teachers in the consultancy condition had 

significantly higher rates of growth than teachers in the Web-only condition on three of 

the seven dimensions examined (Teacher Sensitivity, Instructional Learning Formats, and 

Language Modeling) and showed more positive growth on all of the dimensions.

Collaborative Training of Parents and Teachers. One pair of studies (Fantuzzo 1996; 

Fantuzzo et al. 1997) focused on parent involvement in Head Start programs. The model 

used a collaborative training approach through which parents and teachers were trained 

together, viewed videotapes of exemplary practices provided by other teams of staff and 

 12 Because the consultant rather than the early educator receives this training, we do not include this 

approach in the category of consultation plus training.
79

parents, and reflected on their own performance using videotapes of their own 

classrooms. Compared to parent-staff teams that attended a more traditional set of 

workshops, the collaboratively trained parents and teachers reported higher levels of 

satisfaction and involvement in the training. Collaboratively trained parents reported 

more affirmation and support by the teacher but their perceived role in the classroom did 

not differ from workshop-trained parents. Similarly, they did not engage in more positive 

interactions with children than workshop-trained parents. In a revision of the model and 

a second experimental evaluation, Fantuzzo and colleagues (1997) added two 

components to the model—parent exemplars in the training curriculum and opportunities 

to view both teacher and parent exemplars in the classroom environment—to expand on 

the role of parents in the classroom. The components were successful in promoting more 

verbal exchanges and responses to child initiations among parents in the classroom. 

Teachers in the collaboratively trained group showed the highest levels of positive 

instruction and praise. 

D. 2d. Implementation of Professional Development. This section focuses on what can be 

learned about the implementation of professional development approaches in this set of 

studies focusing broadly on improving overall quality. 

Provision of Incentives. Though most articles did not address the issue of incentives for 

professional development, one strategy that was effective for improving practice was the 

provision of a scholarship for taking community college course work and a bonus or 

salary increase after completion of a degree (Cassidy et al. 1995). In other studies, 

modest financial support was provided to purchase materials or classroom resources 

(Campbell and Milbourne 2005; Palsha and Wesley 1998), but the evidence on quality 

improvements in these studies is mixed. It is difficult to isolate the effectiveness of 

incentives from the other features of professional development that were evaluated (e.g., 

on-site consultation). 

Dosage. Another feature that varied across the studies reviewed was the intensity and 

duration of the intervention. A common theme running through the literature on best 

practices is that professional development must be “intensive and continuous” (National 

Research Council 2001, p. 276). The section of the National Research Council Report 

How People Learn on teacher preparation is also clear on this issue: “Teachers need 

opportunities to be involved in sustained learning, through teaching that models the 

methods that they are being urged to adopt....[T]ime must be scheduled for teachers to 

engage in ongoing opportunities to learn” (Donovan, Bransford, and Pellegrino 1999, p. 

27).

Yet guidelines for intensity and duration are difficult to find in the literature. Indeed, the 

appropriate levels of intensity and duration appear to depend on the goals of the 

professional development. To change and sustain the quality of environments, the 

literature suggests that on-site consultation may not be effective at low levels of intensity, 

even when combined with training (Campbell and Milbourne 2005; Fiene 2002) but may 

be more successful at higher levels of intensity (longer and more frequent on-site visits 

over a longer period of time) (Palsha and Wesley 1998).
80

Direct Focus on Practice. The bulk of studies and best practices reviewed highlighted the 

importance of at least a portion of the professional development occurring on site (or via 

the Web) with opportunities for applying knowledge directly. Active learning, in 

combination with observation and individualized feedback, are critical components in 

adult learning (Epstein 1993; National Research Council 2001; Birman et al. 2000). 

It is noteworthy that research and best practice statements on adult learning and K–12 

teacher preparation concur with the emphasis on individualization, sufficient intensity, 

and the need for opportunities for observation and practice that we have identified in the 

early childhood literature reviewed. For example, the National Research Council report 

on principles of adult and child learning and their implications for practice How People 

Learn (Donovan, Bransford, and Pellegrino 1999) notes that teacher preparation often 

violates what is understood about adult learning. In particular, this report concludes that 

teacher education often:

• fails to use as a starting point the areas in which the teacher identifies a need for 

help;

• introduces a new technique without sufficient explanation especially of how and 

why it might be valuable to implement; 

• does not involve opportunities for practice with feedback within the classroom; 

• fails to provide teachers with the skills to assess for themselves how well new 

practices are being implemented;

• is provided to the teacher without providing opportunities for ongoing contact and 

support as he or she seeks to implement new practices.

The work of Joyce and Showers (2002) also underscores that teacher preparation includes 

multiple components and requires both sustained engagement and opportunity for 

observation and practice. Their research on K–12 teacher preparation suggests that four 

components are needed in order to bring about sustained change in practice: (1) building 

knowledge by exploring theory to understand the new concepts underlying a new skill; 

(2) observing the new skill being modeled in a setting similar to the educator’s 

workplace; (3) opportunities to practice the new skill, with the amount of practice 

required varying by the complexity of the new skill (and between 8–12 weeks of practice 

and 25 trials estimated as necessary for a skill of medium complexity); and (4) ongoing 

support through working with peers on the development of lessons and curricular 

materials.

Sheridan and colleagues (2009) emphasize that there is a need to shift the focus in the 

research on early childhood professional development from specification of formats (such 

as education or training) to a direct focus on processes. We need direct examinations of 

the relative importance of such strategies built into professional development of 

observation of positive practices, provision of feedback on practice, and discussion and 

planning with others regarding practice. Zaslow (under review) also notes that we need a 

common vocabulary for describing the processes that are of importance in professional 

development and requirements for more detailed descriptions of these in evaluation 
81

reports. It is only through common definitions and terminology and systematic reporting 

of underlying processes that we will be able to aggregate findings across studies.

Professional Development for Multiple Staff Members Together. Finally, the literature 

suggests that engaging larger “systems” for professional development, for example all of 

the teachers in a classroom rather than one teacher, is important for improving and 

sustaining new practices (Palsha and Wesley 1998; Birman et al. 2000): “Greater change 

is possible when individuals in a social organization (1) are prepared together in order to 

develop a shared knowledge base, (2) are involved in assessing their own needs, (3) 

receive ongoing staff development over an extended period of time, and (4) have 

opportunities to apply their new knowledge and skills in the work setting” (Palsha and 

Wesley 1998, p. 76). Two recent publications (Vu, Jeon, and Howes 2008; Fulgini et al. 

2009) present findings indicating that the context of the early childhood setting may be 

important to the implementation of professional development approaches and to their 

effectiveness. These studies provide evidence that different types of early childhood 

settings differ in terms of degree of isolation of the early educator and ongoing 

supervision and support by administrators. Findings suggest that response to professional 

development differs in settings with greater and less ongoing supervision and monitoring. 

The work in early childhood professional development also points to the importance of 

support from program administrators. This is in accord with research on adult learning 

and K–12 teacher preparation. For example, Donovan and colleagues (1999) conclude 

that program administrators need professional development to help assure that teacher 

preparation is supported and sustained. Administrative involvement is also noted as an 

important component of systems change in schools (Fullan 2007) and of the development 

of professional learning communities in K–12 settings (DuFour, Eaker, and DuFour 

2008).

Aligning Professional Development with Standards. Increasingly, the systems that early 

childhood professional development must be aligned with go beyond the school, center or 

program to include state early learning standards for what young children are expected to 

know and be able to do. Strickland and Riley-Ayers (2006) note that such standards can 

provide a common vision for the skills that early childhood professionals in a range of 

different programs should be prepared to support in their professional development. This 

can help to unify the professional development across types of early care and education. 

Yet Strickland and Riley-Ayers note that it is important to guard against unintended 

consequences of such standards, for example assessments of programs or of children’s 

development that focus on whether children have mastery of specific words or numbers 

rather than on whether early educators are focusing on the underlying processes of 

building comprehension or concepts related to literacy or numeracy. 

Need for Intentionally Differentiated Approaches to On-site or Individualized 

Professional Development. As noted, the research reviewed in this section indicates that 

early childhood professional development is evolving to include a focus on on-site or 

individualized strategies. An important next step in the evolution of research and practice 

will be the evaluation of intentionally differentiated approaches to on-site work. Research 
82

is needed focusing on such key dimensions as whether there are preexisting goals for the 

on-site work or whether goals are set by the early educator participating in the 

professional development, the nature of the on-site working relationship, whether 

feedback is provided, and how long the on-site work continues. Differentiation is also 

needed in the terminology (coaching, mentoring, provision of technical assistance) used 

to describe on-site work. Evidence on which individualized approaches are effective, 

when, and with whom, will help plan for the efficient use of resources to advance early 

childhood practice and improve child outcomes. When measures of quality are used to 

guide improvements in overall quality, the specific measure should be selected with 

attention to its content and how this aligns with the specific goals of professional 

development (Zaslow et al. April, 2009, under review) For example, some broad 

measures of quality, while including multiple constructs, have a stronger emphasis on 

particular constructs such as health or instructional quality.

D. 2e. Sustainability of Effects. Few studies address the sustainability of effects in 

professional development approaches aimed broadly at improving overall quality. One 

new study (QUINCE Research Team 2009) has reported preliminary findings on 

sustainability of effects of the Partners for Inclusion approach to professional 

development developed by Wesley and colleagues (Palsha and Wesley 1998; Wesley 

1994) as part of the Quality Interventions for Early Care and Education (QUINCE) 

Evaluation. This random assignment evaluation involved observation in the classroom 

environment both at the time the intervention concluded and six months later. 

Improvements that occurred from baseline to the conclusion of the intervention were 

generally sustained through the delayed post-test observation.
83

VI: Conclusions

Though it may be early to draw definitive conclusions, the literature on early childhood 

professional development does point to an initial set of strategies that can serve as a 

starting point toward the identification of effective practices in the preparation of early 

educators. These initial conclusions are in accord with the conclusions of the Committee 

on Early Childhood Pedagogy (National Research Council 2001) and the findings from 

other evaluations of professional development programs (Epstein 1993; Garet et al. 

1999). Acknowledging that these are initial conclusions, the evidence to date suggests 

that professional development for early childhood educators may be more effective when: 

• There are specific and articulated objectives for professional development. A 

meta-analysis of studies in which there was “specialized caregiver training 

with a focus on interaction skills with children” found a statistically 

significant effect of specialized training on caregiver competence overall, with 

a medium effect size (d=.45) (Fukkink and Lont 2007, p. 297). When the 

content of the training was more specific, rather than open in content, effects 

on early educator practice were larger (Fukkink and Lont 2007). Use of an 

observational measure of quality can help to provide specific and articulated 

goals for quality improvement (QUINCE Research Team 2009). The content 

of the measure of quality chosen to guide efforts needs to be aligned with the 

areas of practice in which improvement is sought and the child outcomes 

considered of importance (Zaslow et al. April, 2009, under review). 

Consensus documents that summarize research about what is appropriate and 

important for young children to know in the areas of language and literacy and 

early mathematics provide a strong research basis for developing appropriate 

curricula and approaches for preparing early educators to implement the 

curricula (National Reading Panel 2000; Snow, Burns, and Griffin 1998; 

National Early Literacy Panel 2008; Clements and Sarama 2008; Ginsburg et 

al. 2006; Starkey, Klein, and Wakeley 2004) 

• Practice is an explicit focus of the professional development, and attention is 

given to linking the focus on early educator knowledge and practice. This 

review provides summaries of multiple studies in which the professional 

development focused not only on strengthening early educator knowledge but 

also directly and explicitly on strengthening practice. This emphasis is in 

keeping with the principles of adult learning summarized by the National 

Research Council (2001). Such approaches often involved combining course

work or training with individualized modeling and feedback on interactions 

with children in the early educator’s classroom or home-based care setting; in 

some instances, the focus involved individualized professional development 

without course work (and may have been provided through the Internet rather 

than on-site) (Pianta et al. 2008) or practice in applying new techniques 

incorporated directly into course work or training without on-site application

(Assel et al. 2007; Campbell and Milbourne 2005; Clements and Sarama 

2008; Dickinson and Brady 2006; Dickinson and Caswell 2007; Fantuzzo 
84

1996; Fantuzzo et al. 1997; Gettinger and Stoiber 2007; Landry 2002; 

Neuman and Cunningham 2009; Palsha and Wesley 1998; Raver et al. 2008). 

While we caution that not all evaluation studies involving individualized 

professional development showed positive effects on practice or child 

outcomes, there is promising evidence for these approaches. We are at a point 

at which it is important to go beyond broad descriptions of such approaches to 

identifying the specific processes underlying positive effects and 

distinguishing between practice-focused on-site individualized approaches 

that are and are not effective (Zaslow 2009; Sheridan et al. 2009). More 

thought is being given to the issue of whether the presentation of information 

through course work or training alone is effective in changing early educator 

practice and child outcomes (Burchinal, Hyson, and Zaslow 2008; Early et al. 

2007), or whether professional development aimed at strengthening 

knowledge needs to be more closely tied to practice, for example through 

interspersing training on instructional approaches with opportunities to apply 

them shortly afterward in the early childhood setting (see for example, the 

discussion of timing of training and practice opportunities and intentional 

interspersing of group training and opportunities for application in Dickinson 

and Brady 2006).

• There is collective participation of teachers from the same classrooms or 

schools in professional development. Joint participation can help to support a 

professional culture and ensure the sustainability of new techniques and skills. 

Professional development that includes administrators helps to assure that 

early educators do not receive contradictory messages about what practices to 

implement or emphasize. Likewise, including teachers of different age groups 

or grades can foster continuity in the children’s experiences as they move 

through classrooms in the future (Baker and Smith 1999; Assel et al. 2007; 

Burchinal, Hyson, and Zaslow 2008; Donovan, Bransford, and Pellegrino 

1999; Birman et al. 2000; Bierman et al. 2008).

• The intensity and duration of the professional development is matched to the 

content being conveyed. The appropriateness of the length of time spent in 

professional development activities depends on the goals of the activities 

themselves. For instance, a one-time seminar might be appropriate for 

imparting skills for one strategy to support literacy development (e.g., 

interactive book reading) but would not be appropriate or adequate if the goal 

is to convey theory and practice to improve multiple aspects of literacy 

development (e.g., oral language development, phonological awareness, 

alphabetic principle, awareness of print) through the use of multiple 

strategies. That being said, it appears that a one-time workshop is not as 

effective in training educators in new skills, even if they are narrowly 

targeted, as are more lengthy or extensive professional development models

(Whitehurst, Arnold et al. 1994; Donovan, Bransford, and Pellegrino 1999;

Raikes et al. 2006). 
85

• Educators are prepared to conduct child assessments and interpret their 

results as a tool for ongoing monitoring of the effects of professional 

development. Assessments can help early childhood educators view their 

knowledge and skills as contributing to improvement in children’s outcomes 

and can serve as a source of feedback for where to target instruction overall 

and for individual children (Foorman and Moats 2004; Garet et al. 2008; 

Gettinger and Stoiber 2007; O'Connor et al. 2005).

• It is appropriate for the organizational context and aligned with standards for 

practice including guidance provided by expert research panels and 

professional organizations as well as national and state standards. There is 

evidence that the effectiveness of professional development approaches will 

differ according to such features of organizational context as the extent to 

which are articulated standards for practice with ongoing monitoring and 

supervision (Vu, Jeon, and Howes 2008; Fulgini et al. 2009). Increasingly, 

approaches to professional development also need to take into account state 

standards regarding pedagogy (for example in early language and literacy, 

Roskos et al., 2006; and early learning guidelines, Strickland and Riley-Ayers, 

2006).

Throughout this review, a number of gaps were identified in the research on early 

childhood professional development that will need to be addressed to extend and deepen 

the knowledge base in this area. 

• There is a need for careful examination of the features and overall quality of 

higher education programs involving professional development for early 

childhood educators. Coordinated secondary analyses carried out with the 

data from seven major studies of early care and education provide little 

indication of stronger observed classroom quality or larger gain scores on 

children’s academic achievement when early educators had completed a 

higher education degree, according to the highest education level among those 

with an early childhood major, or according to whether those with a 

bachelor’s degree had an early childhood major (Early et al. 2007). The 

quality of the educators’ degree-granting higher education programs could not 

be examined in these analyses, and may be an important underlying factor 

(Hyson, Tomlinson, and Morris 2008; Burchinal, Hyson, and Zaslow 2008). 

We are only beginning to see evaluations of planned variations in higher 

education approaches for early childhood educators. We need to ask if higher 

education programs that incorporate specific course content and approaches 

are associated with stronger outcomes.

• The literature base needs to be expanded to include more process-focused 

research that can inform effective professional development. The literature 

on early childhood professional development tends to focus on the content of 

professional development rather than the processes and strategies that can be 

used most effectively. Several articles discuss this problem of a focus on the 

content rather than the process of professional development. Pang and Kamil 
86

(2006), for example, in their update and extension of the review by the 

National Reading Panel, note that much of the research on the teaching of 

reading in the K–12 grades focuses on noninstructional issues, making it 

difficult to discern the link between professional development and student 

achievement. Taylor and Pearson (2004) note, “Further research is needed to 

learn more about how to help schools and teachers succeed at the complex 

task of translating research-based knowledge into practice [to help all children 

reach high levels of reading achievement].” Anders, Hoffman, and Duffy

(2000) found, “Relatively few researchers have asked questions about the 

processes that teachers go through as they learn and continue to learn to teach 

reading” (p. 719). Indeed, they found in their review of the 19,457 studies of 

reading published between 1965 and 1996, only 140 focused on teacher 

preservice (education before beginning teaching) or in-service training 

(ongoing professional development for teachers) on reading. However, after 

reviewing these 140 studies, the authors conclude that this research on 

preservice and in-service teacher education “neither explains how teachers of 

reading are created, how they teach, nor how they change” (p. 732). 

• Evaluations are needed of professional development approaches aimed at 

increasing the cultural and linguistic competence of early educators. The 

literature does not adequately address the issue of cultural and linguistic 

competence for early childhood educators. This review did not reveal any 

peer-reviewed articles that examined or evaluated professional development 

strategies to improve cultural and linguistic competence despite the growing 

diversity of the early childhood population. Early childhood educators are 

calling for improvements in their preparation on these topics and are looking 

for strategies to improve their abilities to address the needs of diverse children 

and families (Daniel and Friedman 2005). Strategies to improve teacher 

preparation in cultural and linguistic competence cited by Daniel and 

Friedman (2005) include increasing faculty knowledge and willingness to 

adapt and respond to the diversity in early childhood education, requiring 

practicum and internships in diverse settings, integrating issues of diversity 

into course content, and requiring English as a second language (ESL) courses 

for teachers.

• Further focus is needed on the language and literacy skills that early 

educators bring to their work, and possible approaches to strengthening 

these. Although low literacy is not universal among early care and education 

providers, and may vary by the requirements for those working in different 

types of early care and education settings (such as child care, Head Start and 

prekindergarten), the 1992 National Adult Literacy Survey found that between 

44 percent and 57 percent of child care workers perform at the lowest levels of 

proficiency on standardized literacy assessments (Kaestle et al. 2001). A 

more recent study of child care providers in Alameda County, Calif., indicated 

that almost one-third (31 percent) of the providers in that county had “limited 

proficiency” in English, based on their scores on the Test of Applied Literacy 
87

Skills (TALS) (Phillips et al. 2003). Research is needed focusing on the 

potential of professional development to strengthen the spoken language and 

literacy skills of early childhood educators. For children who are dual 

language learners, consideration should be given to the language and literacy 

skills of educators in both the child’s home language and English. 

• There is a need to expand understanding of the strategies that are most 

effective for educators working in the full range of settings in which children, 

especially low-income children are cared for, and for children in the full age 

range from birth through school entry. The literature is heavily focused 

toward professional development for educators working in center-based 

settings including Head Start and prekindergarten programs. Yet, this group 

of educators constitutes only 24 percent of the workforce. The majority of 

paid educators in early childhood care and education work in licensed (28 

percent) and unregulated (48 percent) home-based settings (Burton et al. 

2002). Likewise, the literature emphasizes professional development for 

educators working with preschool-age children. There is limited research 

focusing specifically on professional development for those working with 

infants and toddlers.

• Further research is needed on how best to target professional development 

approaches, both in terms of timing (whether the professional development is 

offered preservice or in-service) and in terms of the settings the early 

educators work in (prekindergarten within public schools, prekindergarten in 

community-based settings, Head Start, center-based child care, and homebased child care). Different professional development approaches may be 

more effective when included as part of early educators’ preservice 

preparation or alternatively once they are already working in early childhood 

settings. Yet studies do not consistently report on which time period they 

focus on, and we lack studies focusing on the effects of the same professional 

development when offered as part of pre- or in-service preparation. In order to 

target professional development efforts, we also need information on whether 

specific approaches are effective for early educators working across the full 

range of early childhood settings, or if specific approaches are effective 

especially for early educators working in particular settings. 

• Continuing to increase the rigor with which studies of early childhood 

professional development and their data analyses are conducted should be a 

priority. The methods and analytical strategies used in evaluations of 

professional development need more rigor. Though the number of 

experimental evaluations focusing on early childhood professional 

development is growing, there is a need for the use of this research design 

whenever appropriate. Effect sizes are rarely reported in the literature, and 

provisions are not made to account for the “nested” nature of studies that 

include children within classrooms within programs. Studies do not 
88

consistently report on all three outcomes that research has identified to be 

important: educator knowledge, educator practice, and educator outcome. 

• We need to work toward a differentiated and consistently used vocabulary to 

describe on-site work as part of early childhood professional development.

Further, we need evaluation studies that help to distinguish which specific onsite approaches are effective in which contexts. While on-site work has 

become a clear focus of the research on early childhood professional 

development, we are lacking agreement on terminology. Further, it is clear 

that not all on-site approaches have been effective. 

• Research is needed aimed at helping to determine effective approaches to 

improving practice across the multiple domains of early childhood 

development simultaneously. A final gap to note in the literature is the lack of 

focus on integrating content across topical areas. For example, how should 

early childhood educators blend early literacy, math and social behavior 

strategies to achieve the best results for children? What professional 

development strategies are most effective at helping teachers balance the 

content to create learning environments that promote development across 

domains? This is a challenge for the next generation of studies on 

professional development for early childhood educators. 
89

References

 Ackerman, Deborah J. 2004. States efforts in improving the qualifications of early care 

and education teachers. Educational Policy 18 (2):311–337.

Adger, Carolyn Temple, Susan M. Hoyle, and David K. Dickinson. 2004. Locating 

learning in in–service education for preschool teachers. American Educational 

Research Journal 41 (4):867–900.

Anders, Patricia L., James V. Hoffman, and Gerald G. Duffy. 2000. Teaching teachers to 

teach reading: Paradigm shifts, persistent problems, and challenges. In Handbook 

of Reading Research, edited by M. L. Kamil, P. Mosenthal, P. D. Pearson and R. 

Barr. Mahwah, N.J.: Erlbaum Associates.

Arnett, Jeffrey. 1989. Caregivers in day–care centers: Does training matter? Journal of 

Applied Developmental Psychology 10 (4):541–552.

Arnold, David H., Paige H. Fisher, Greta L. Doctoroff, and Jennifer Dobbs. 2002. 

Accelerating math development in Head Start classrooms. Journal of Educational 

Psychology 94:762–770.

Askov, Eunice. N. 1991. Literacy: Impact on the workplace, family, and school. 

Education Statistics Quarterly 111 (4):542–547.

Assel, Michael A., Susan H. Landry, Paul R. Swank, and Susan Gunnewig. 2007. An 

evaluation of curriculum, setting, and mentoring on the performance of children 

enrolled in pre–kindergarten. Reading and Writing 20:463–494.

August, Diane, and Timothy Shanahan, eds. 2006. National Literacy in Second–

Language Learners: Report of the National Literacy Panel on Language–

Minority Children and Youth. Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Baker, Linda, JoBeth Allen, Betty Shockley, Anthony D. Pellegrini, Lee Galda, and 

Steven Stahl. 1996. Connecting school and home: Constructing partnerships to 

foster reading development. In Developing engaged readers in school and home 

communities edited by L. Baker, P. Afflerback and D. Reinking. Mahwah, N.J.: 

Erlbaum.

Baker, Scott, and Sylvia Smith. 1999. Starting off on the right foot: The influence of four 

principles of professional development in improving literacy instruction in two 

kindergarten programs. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice 14 (4):239–

253.

Barnett, W. Steven. 2003. Better teachers, better preschools: Student achievement linked 

with teacher qualifications. In Preschool Policy Matters (2). New Brunswick, 

N.J.: National Institute for Early Education Research.

———. 2003. Low wages = low quality: Solving the real preschool teacher crisis. In 

Preschool Policy Matters (3). New Brunswick, N.J.: National Institute for Early 

Education Research.

Barnett, W. Steven., Kwanghee Jung, Donald J. Yarosz, Jessica Thomas, Amy Hornbeck, 

Robert Stechuk, and Susan Burns. 2008. Education effects of the Tools of the 

Mind curriculum: A randomized trial. Early Childhood Research Quarterly

23:299–313.
90

Beder, Hal. 1999. The outcomes and impacts of adult literacy education in the United 

States. Cambridge, Mass.: The National Center for the Study of Adult Learning 

and Literacy.

Bierman, Karen L., Celene E. Domitrovich, Robert L. Nix, Scott D. Gest, Janet A. 

Welsh, Mark T. Greenberg, Clancy Blair, Keith Nelson, and Sukhdeep Gill. under 

review. Promoting academic and social–emotional school readiness: The Head 

Start REDI program.

Bierman, Karen L., Robert L. Nix, Mark T. Greenberg, Clancy Blair, and Celene E. 

Domitrovich. 2008. Executive function and school readiness intervention: Impact, 

moderation, and mediation in the Head Start REDI program. Development and 

Psychopathology 20:821–843.

Birman, Beatrice F., Laura Desimone, Andrew C. Porter, and Michael S. Garet. 2000. 

Designing professional development that works. Educational Leadership 57 

(8):28–32.

Blau, David M. 2000. The production of quality in child–care centers: Another look. 

Applied Developmental Science 4 (3):136–148.

Bodrova, Elena, and Deborah J. Leong. 2006. Self–regulation as a key to school 

readiness: How early childhood teachers can promote this critical competency. In 

Critical Issues in Early Childhood Professional Development, edited by M. 

Zaslow and I. Martinez–Beck. Baltimore, Md.: Brookes.

Bourdieu, Pierre. 1972. Outline of a theory of practice. Cambridge: Cambridge 

University Press.

Brigman, Greg, David Lane, Deborah Switzer, Donna Lane, and Robert Lawrence. 1999. 

Teaching children school success skills. Journal of Educational Research 92 

(6):323–330.

Bryant, Donna, Lila H. Vizzard, Michael Willoughby, and Janis Kupersmidt. 1999. A 

review of interventions for preschoolers with aggressive and disruptive behavior. 

Early Education and Development 10:47–68.

Burchinal, Margaret, Carollee Howes, and Susan Kontos. 2002. Structural predictors of 

child care quality in child care homes. Early Childhood Research Quarterly

17:87–105.

Burchinal, Margaret, Marilou Hyson, and Martha Zaslow. 2008. Competencies and 

credentials for early childhood educators: What do we know and what do we need 

to know? National Head Start Association Dialog Briefs 11 (1).

Burchinal, Margaret R , Debby Cryer, Richard M. Clifford, and Carollee Howes. 2002. 

Caregiver training and classroom quality in child care centers. Applied 

Developmental Science 6 (1):2–11.

Burton, Alice, Marcy Whitebook, Marci Young, Dan Bellm, Claudia Wayne, Richard N. 

Brandon, and Erin J. Maher. 2002. Estimating the size and components of the 

U.S. child care workforce and caregiving population: Key findings from the Child 

Care Workforce Estimate. Washington, D.C.: Center for the Child Care 

Workforce.

Byrne, Brian, and Ruth Fielding–Barnsley. 1995. Evaluation of a program to teach 

phonemic awareness to young children: A 2– and 3–year follow–up and a new 

preschool trial. Journal of Educational Psychology 87 (3):488–503.
91

Campbell, Philippa H., and Suzanne A. Milbourne. 2005. Improving the quality of 

infant–toddler care through professional development. Topics in Early Childhood 

Special Education 25 (1):3–14.

Casey, Beth, Sumru Erkut, Ineke Ceder, and Jessica M. Young. 2008. Use of a 

storytelling context to improve girls' and boys' geometry skills in kindergarten. 

Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology 29:29–48.

Cassidy, Deborah J., Martha Buell, Stephanie Pugh–Hoese, and Sue Russell. 1995. The 

effect of education on child care teachers' beliefs and classroom quality: Year One 

Evaluation of the TEACH early childhood associate degree scholarship program. 

Early Childhood Research Quarterly 10 (2):171–183.

Center for the Child Care Workforce: A Project of the American Federation of Teachers 

Educational Foundation. 2004. Current data on salaries and benefits of the U.S. 

early childhood education workforce. Washington, D.C.: Center for the Child 

Care Workforce and A Project of the American Federation of Teachers 

Educational Foundation. (CCW/AFTEF) 

www.ccw.org/pubs/2004Compendium.pdf.

Chambers, Barbara, and Richard Slavin. 2008. Curiosity Corner: Success for All 

Foundation (SFA sites: Florida, Kansas, and New Jersey). In Effects of preschool 

curriculum programs on school readiness. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of 

Education.

Clarke-Stewart, K. Allison, Deborah. L Vandell, Margaret R. Burchinal, Marion O'Brien, 

and Kathleen McCartney. 2002. Do features of child care homes affect children's 

development? Early Childhood Research Quarterly 17:52-86.

Clements, Douglas. H., and Julie Sarama. 2008. Experimental evaluation of the effects of 

a research–based preschool mathematics curriculum. American Educational 

Research Journal 45:443–494.

Daniel, Jerlean, and Susan Friedman. 2005. Taking the next step: Preparing teachers to 

work with culturally and linguistically diverse children. Beyond the Journal. 

Young Children on the Web:National Association for the Education of Young 

Children. Online: 

http://www.journal.naeyc.org/btj/200511/DanielFriedmanBTJ1105.pdf.

Davidson, Mark L., Nohoon Kwak, Young A. Seo, and Jiyoung Choi. 2002. Using 

hierarchical linear models to examine moderator effects: Pearson–by–

organization interactions. Organizational Research Methods 5:231–254.

de Kruif, Renee E. L., R. A. McWilliam, Stephanie M. Ridley, and Melissa B. Wakely. 

2000. Classification of teachers' interaction behaviors in early childhood 

classrooms. Early Childhood Research Quarterly 15 (247–268).

Denham, Susanne A., and Rosemary Burton. 1996. A social–emotional intervention for 

at–risk 4–year–olds. Journal of School Psychology 34:225–245.

DeTemple, Jeanne, and Catherine E. Snow. 2003. Learning words from books. In On 

Reading Books to Children: Parents and Teachers, edited by E. B. Bauer, S. A. 

Stahl and A. Van Kleeck. Mahwah, N.J.: Erlbaum.

Diamond, Adele, W. Steven Barnett, Jessica Thomas, and Sarah Munro. 2007. Preschool 

program improves cognitive control. Science 318:1387–1388.

Dickinson, David K., and Joanne P. Brady. 2006. Toward effective support for language 

and literacy through professional development. In Critical Issues in Early 
92

Childhood Professional Development, edited by M. Zaslow and I. Martinez–

Beck. Baltimore, Md.: Brookes.

Dickinson, David K., and Linda Caswell. 2007. Building support for language and early 

literacy in preschool classrooms through in–service professional development: 

Effects of the Literacy Environment Enrichment Program (LEEP). Early 

Childhood Research Quarterly 22:243–260.

Dickinson, David K., Allyssa McCabe, Louisa Anastopoulos, Ellen A. Peisner–Feinberg, 

and Michele D. Poe. 2003. The comprehensive language approach to early 

literacy: The interrelationships among vocabulary, phonological sensitivity, and 

print knowledge among preschool–aged children. Journal of Educational 

Psychology 95:465–481.

Dickinson, David K., and Patton O. Tabors. 1991. Early literacy: Linkages between 

home, school and literacy achievement at age five. Journal of Research and 

Childhood Education 6:30–46.

Domitrovich, Celene E., Rebecca C. Cortes, and Mark T. Greenberg. 2007. Improving 

young children's social and emotional competence: A randomized trial of the 

preschool "PATHS" curriculum. The Journal of Primary Prevention 28:67–91.

Donovan, M. Suzanne, John D. Bransford, and James W. Pellegrino, eds. 1999. How 

people learn: Bridging research and practice. Washington, D.C.: National 

Academy Press.

DuFour, Richard, Robert Eaker, and Rebecca DuFour. 2008. Revisiting professional 

learning communities at work: New insights for improving schools. Bloomington, 

Ind.: Solution Tree.

Early, Diane M., Donna M. Bryant, Robert C. Pianta, Richard M. Clifford, Margaret R. 

Burchinal, Sharon Ritchie, Carollee Howes, and Oscar Barbarin. 2006. Are 

teachers' education, major, and credentials related to classroom quality and 

children's academic gains in pre–kindergarten? Early Childhood Research 

Quarterly 21 (2):174–195.

Early, Diane, Kelly Maxwell, Margaret Burchinal, Soumya Alva, Randall H. Bender, 

Donna Bryant, Karen Cai, Richard M. Clifford, Caroline Ebanks, James A. 

Griffin, Gary T. Henry, Carollee Howes, Jeniffer Iriondo–Perez, Hyun–Joo Jeon, 

Andrew J. Mashburn, Ellen Peisner–Feinberg, Robert C. Pianta, Nathan 

Vandergrift, and Nicholas Zill. 2007. Teachers' education, classroom quality, and 

young children's academic skills: Results from seven studies of preschool 

program. Child Development 78 (2):558–580.

Early, Diane, and Pamela J. Winton. 2001. Preparing the workforce: Early childhood 

teacher preparation at 2– and 4–year institutions of higher education. Early 

Childhood Research Quarterly 16 (3):285–306.

Epstein, Ann S. 1993. Training for quality: Improving early childhood programs through 

systematic inservice training. Ypsilanti, Mich.: High/Scope Press.

Fantuzzo, John. 1996. The head start teaching center: An evaluation of an experiential, 

collaborative training model for head start teachers and parent volunteers. Early 

Childhood Research Quarterly 11 (1):79–99.

Fantuzzo, John, Stephanie Childs, Virginia Hampton, Marika Ginsburg–Block, Kathleen 

C. Coolahan, and Darlena Debnam. 1997. Enhancing the quality of early 
93

childhood education: A follow–up evaluation of an experiential, collaborative 

training model for Head Start. Early Childhood Research Quarterly 12:425–437.

Farran, Dale C., and Mark Lipsey. 2008. Bright Beginnings and Creative Curriculum: 

Vanderbilt University (Tennessee site). In Effects of preschool curriculum 

programs on school readiness Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Education.

Fiene, Richard. 2002. Improving child care quality through an infant caregiver mentoring 

project. Child and Youth Care Forum 31 (2):79–87.

Foorman, Barbara R., and Louisa C. Moats. 2004. Conditions for sustaining research–

based practices in early reading instruction. Remedial and Special Education 25 

(1):51–60.

Fountain, Cheryl, Madelaine Cosgrove, and Janice Wood. 2008. Early Literacy and 

Learning Model (ELLM): University of North Florida (Florida–UNF site). In 

Effects of preschool curriculum programs on school readiness. Washington, D.C.: 

U.S. Department of Education.

Franyo, Georgia A., and Marion C. Hyson. 1999. Temperament training for early 

childhood caregivers: A study of the effectiveness of training. Child and Youth 

Care Forum 28 (5):329–349.

Frede, Ellen C, and A. K. Miller. 1990. Preschool classroom implementation rating 

instrument–high/scope manual. Available from the first author at 

efrede@tcnj.edu.

Fukkink, Ruben G., and Anna Lont. 2007. Does training matter? A meta–analysis and 

review of caregiver training studies. Early Childhood Research Quarterly 22 

(3):294–311.

Fulgini, Allison S., Carollee Howes, Sandraluz Lara–Cinimoso, and Lynn Karoly. 2009. 

Diverse pathways in early childhood development: An exploration of early 

educators in public preschools, private preschools and family child care homes. 

Early Education and Development 20 (3):507–526.

Fullan, Michael. 2007. The new meaning of educational change. 4th ed. New York: 

Teachers College Press.

Garet, Michael S., Beatrice F. Birman, Andrew C. Porter, Laura Desimone, and Rebecca 

Herman. 1999. Designing effective professional development: Lessons from the 

Eisenhower Program. Washington, D.C.: American Institutes for Research.

Garet, Michael S., Stephanie Cronen, Marian Eaton, Anja Kurki, Meredith Ludwig, and 

Wehmah Jones. 2008. Effects of Preschool Program Curriculum Programs and 

School Readiness: Report from the Preschool Curriculum Evaluation Research 

Initiative. Washington, D.C.: Institute for Education Sciences, National Center for 

Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance.

Gettinger, Maribeth, and Karen Stoiber. 2007. Applying a response–to–intervention 

model for early literacy development in low–income children. Topics in Early 

Childhood Special Education 27:198–213.

Gilliam, Walter S. 2005. Prekindergarteners left behind: Expulsion rates in state 

prekindergarten systems. FCD Policy Brief Number 3. New York, N.Y.: 

Foundation for Child Development.

Ginsburg, Harriet P., Rochelle Goldberg Kaplan, Joanna Cannon, Maria I. Cordero, Janet 

G. Eisenband, Michelle Galanter, and Melissa Morgenlander. 2006. Helping early 

childhood educators to teach mathematics. In Critical Issues in Early Childhood 
94

Professional Development, edited by M. Zaslow and I. Martinez–Beck. 

Baltimore, Md.: Brookes.

Girolametto, Luigi, Elaine Weitzman, and Janice Greenberg. 2004. The effects of verbal 

support strategies on small–group peer interactions. Language, Speech, and 

Hearing Services in Schools 35 (3):254–268.

Gowen, Jean W. 1987. Facilitating play skills: Efficacy of a staff development program.

Early Childhood Research Quarterly 2:55–66.

Greenes, Carole, Herbert P. Ginsburg, and Robert Balfanz. 2004. Big math for little kids. 

Early Childhood Research Quarterly 19:159–166.

Gresham, Frank M., and Stephen N. Elliott, eds. 1990. Social Skills Rating System: 

Manual. Circle Pines, Minn.: American Guidance Service.

Griffin, Sharon. 2004. Building number sense with Number Worlds: A mathematics 

program for young children. Early Childhood Research Quarterly 19:173–180.

Halle, Tamara, Julia Calkins, Daniel Berry, and Rosalind Johnson. 2003. Research 

promoting language and literacy development in early childhood care and 

education settings. Literature review and research brief prepared for the Child 

Care and Early Education Research Connections Web site. 

http://www.childcareresearch.org/location/ccrca2796.

Halle, Tamara, Mirjam Nunning, Martha Zaslow, Alyssa Milot, Deborah Weinstein, 

Sharon Vandivere, and Ayonda Dent. 2008. A Review of the Research on Adult 

Literacy: Implications for the Study of Caregiver Literacy Prepared for District of 

Columbia Early Care and Education Administration. Child Trends, Washington, 

D.C.

Hamre, Bridget K., and Robert C. Pianta. 2004. Self–reported depression in nonfamilial 

caregivers: Prevalence and associations with caregiver behaviors in child–care 

settings. Early Chidlhood Research Quarterly 19:297–318.

Harms, Thelma, and Richard M. Clifford. 1989. The family day care rating scale. New 

York: Teachers College Press.

Harms, Thelma, Richard M. Clifford, and Debby Cryer. 1980. Early childhood 

environment rating scale. New York: Teachers College Press.

———. 1998. Early childhood environment rating scale – revised edition. New York: 

Teachers College Press.

Harms, Thelma, Debby Cryer, and Richard M. Clifford. 1990. The infant/toddler 

environment rating scale. New York: Teachers College Press.

———. 2003. The infant/toddler environment rating scale – revised edition. New York: 

Teachers College Press.

Hendrickson, Jo M., Nancy Gardner, Ann Kaiser, and Ann Riley. 1993. Evaluation of a 

social interaction coaching program in an integrated day–care setting. Journal of 

Applied Behavior Analysis 26:213–225.

Honig, Alice S., and Andrea Hirallal. 1998. Which counts more for excellence in 

childcare staff –– years in service, education level or ECE coursework? Early 

Childhood Development and Care 145:31–46.

Howes, Carollee. 1997. Children's experiences in center–based child care as a function of 

teacher background and adult:child ratio. Merrill–Palmer Quarterly 43 (3):404–

425.
95

Howes, Carollee, Marcy Whitebook, and Deborah Phillips. 1992. Teacher characteristics 

and effective teaching in child care: Findings from the National Child Care 

Staffing Study. Child and Youth Care Forum 21 (6):399–414.

Huttenlocher, Janellen, Susan Levine, and Jack Vevea. 1998. Environmental input and 

cognitive growth: A study using time–period comparisons. Child Development 69 

(1012–1029).

Hyson, Marilou , and Heather Biggar. 2006. NAEYC's Standards for Early Childhood 

Professional Preparation: Getting from Here to There. In Critical Issues in Early 

Childhood Professional Development, edited by M. Zaslow and I. Martinez–

Beck. Baltimore, Md.: Paul H. Brookes Publishing.

Hyson, Marilou, Heather B. Tomlinson, and Carol A. S. Morris. 2008. Does quality of 

early childhood teacher preparation moderate the relationship between teacher 

education and children's outcomes? Paper read at Annual Meeting of American 

Education Research Association, at New York City.

Jackson, Barbara, Robert Larzelere, Lisa St. Clair, Marcia Corr, Carol Fichter, and 

Harriet Egertson. 2006. The impact of Heads Up! Reading on early childhood 

educators' literacy practices and preschool children's literacy skills. Early 

Chidlhood Research Quarterly 21:213–226.

Joyce, Bruce, and Beverley Showers. 2002. Student Achievement Through Staff 

Development. 3rd ed. Alexandria, Va.: Association for Supervision and 

Curriculum Development.

Justice, Laura A., Andrew J. Mashburn, Bridget K. Hamre, and Robert C. Pianta. 2008. 

Quality of language and literacy instruction in preschool classrooms serving at–

risk pupils. Early Chidlhood Research Quarterly 23:51–68.

Justice, Laura A., Khara Pence, and Alice Wiggins. 2008. Language–Focused 

Curriculum: University of Virginia (Virginia site). In Effects of preschool 

curriculum programs on school readiness. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of 

Education.

Kaestle, Carl F., Anne Campbell, Jeremy D. Finn, Sylvia T. Johnson, and Larry J. 

Mikulecky. 2001. Adult literacy and education in America: Four studies based on 

the National Adult Literacy Survey. Washington, D.C.: National Center for 

Education Statistics.

Klibanoff, Raquel S., Susan C. Levine, Janellen Huttenlocher, Marina Vasilyeva, and 

Larry V. Hedges. 2006. Preschool children's mathematical knowledge: The effect 

of teacher "math talk". Development Psychology 42:59–69.

Kontos, Susan, Carollee Howes, and Ellen Galinsky. 1996. Does training make a 

difference to quality in family child care? Early Childhood Research Quarterly 11 

(4):427–45.

Kruidenier, John R. 2002. Research–based principles for adult basic education reading 

instruction. Portsmouth, N.H.: RMC Research Corp.

Lambert, Richard G., and Martha Abbott–Shim. 2008. Creative Curriculum: University 

of North Carolina at Charlotte (North Carolina and Georgia sites). In Effects of 

preschool curriculum programs on school readiness. Washington, D.C.: U.S. 

Department of Education.
96

Landry, Susan H. 2002. Supporting cognitive development in early childhood. Paper read 

at A Summit on Early Childhood Cognitive Development: Ready to Read, Ready 

to Learn, at Little Rock, Ark.

Landry, Susan H., Michael A. Assel, Susan Gunnewig, and Paul R. Swank. 2008. Doors 

to Discovery and Let’s Begin with the Letter People: University of Texas Health 

Science Center at Houston (Texas site). In Effects of preschool curriculum 

programs on school readiness. Washington, D.C.: U. S. Department of Education.

Landry, Susan H., Paul R. Swank, Karen E. Smith, Michael A. Assel, and Susan B. 

Gunnewig. 2006. Enhancing early literacy skills for preschool children: Bringing 

a professional development model to scale. Journal of Learning Disabilities 39 

(4):306–324.

LeMoine, Sarah. 2005. Center child care licensing requirements: Minimum early 

childhood education (ECE) preservice qualifications and annual ongoing training 

hours for teachers and master teachers. Vienna, Va.: National Child Care 

Information Center. http://nccic.org/pubs/cclicensingreq/cclr–teachers.html.

Leong, Deborah J., and Elena Bodrova. 1995. Tools of the Mind: A Vygotskian approach 

to early childhood education. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

Lonigan, Christopher J., and Christopher Schatschneider. 2008. Literacy Express and 

DLM Early Childhood Express supplemented with Open Court Reading Pre–K: 

Florida State University (Florida–FSU site). In Effects of preschool curriculum 

programs on school readiness. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Education.

Lonigan, Christopher J., and Grover J. Whitehurst. 1998. Relative efficacy of parent and 

teacher involvement in a shared–reading intervention for preschool children from 

low–income backgrounds. Early Childhood Research Quarterly 13 (2):263–290.

Lynch, Kathleen B., Susan R. Geller, and Melinda G. Schmidt. 2004. Multi–year 

evaluation of the effectiveness of a resilience–based prevention program for 

young children. The Journal of Primary Prevention 24:335–353.

McCutchen, Deborah, Robert D. Abbott, Laura B. Green, S. Natasha Beretvas, Susanne 

Cox, Nina S. Potter, Teresa Quiroga, and Audra L. Gray. 2002. Beginning 

literacy: Links among teacher knowledge, practice, and student learning. Journal 

of Learning Disabilities 35 (1):69–86.

McGill-Franzen, Anne, Richard L Allington, Linda Yokoi, and Gregory Brooks. 1999. 

Putting books in the classroom seems necessary but not sufficient. Journal of 

Educational Research 93 (2):67-75.

National Early Literacy Panel. 2008. Developing early literacy: Report of the National 

Early Literacy Panel. Washington, D.C.: Nation Institute for Literacy.

National Institute of Child Health and Human Development. 2000. Teaching children to 

read: An evidence–based assessment of the scientific research literature on 

reading and its implications for reading instruction. Washington, D.C.: National 

Reading Panel.

National Reading Panel. 2000. Teaching children to read: An evidence–based assessment 

of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading 

instruction. Washington, D.C.: National Institute of Health and Human 

Development.

National Research Council. 2001. Eager to learn: Educating our preschoolers. In 

Commission on Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education, edited by 
97

Committee on Early Childhood Pedagogy, B. T. Bowman, M. S. Donovan and M. 

S. Burns. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.

National Research Council and Institute of Medicine, Jack P. Shonkoff, and Deborah A. 

Phillips, eds. 2000. From neurons to neighborhoods: The science of early 

childhood development. Washington, D.C.: Committee on Integrating the Science 

of Early Childhood Development, Board on Children, Youth, and Families, 

Commission on Behavioral and Social Sciences, National Academy Press.

Neuman, Susan B. 1999. Books make a difference: A study of access to literacy. Reading 

Research Quarterly 34 (3):286–310.

Neuman, Susan B., and Linda Cunningham. 2009. The impact of professional 

development and coaching on early language and literacy instructional practices. 

American Educational Research Journal 46 (2):532–566.

Neuman, Susan B., and David K. Dickinson. 2002. Introduction. In Handbook of Early 

Literacy Research, edited by S. B. Neuman and D. K. Dickinson. New York, 

N.Y.: Guilford Press.

NICHD Early Child Care Research Network. 1996. Characteristics of infant child care: 

Factors contributing to positive caregiving. Early Childhood Research Quarterly

11 (3):269–306.

———. 2000. Characteristics and quality of child care for toddlers and preschoolers. 

Applied Developmental Science 4 (3):116–41.

Norris, Deborah J. 2001. Quality of care offered by providers with differential patterns of 

workshop participation. Child and Youth Care Forum 30 (2):111–121.

O'Connor, Rollanda E., Deborah Fulmer, Kristin R. Harty, and Kathryn M. Bell. 2005. 

Layers of reading intervention in kindergarten through third grade: Changes in 

teaching and student outcomes. Journal of Learning Disabilities 38 (5):440–455.

Palsha, Sharon A., and Patricia W. Wesley. 1998. Improving quality in early childhood 

environments through on–site consultation. Topics in Early Childhood Special 

Education 18 (4):243–253.

Pang, Elisabeth S., and Michael L. Kamil. 2006. Blending Experimental and Descriptive 

Research: The Case of Educating Reading Teachers. In Scientific Basis of 

Educational Productivity, edited by R. F. Subotnik and H. J. Walberg. Greenwich, 

Conn.: Information Age Publishing.

Pence, Khara L., Laura M. Justice, and Alice K. Wiggins. 2008. Preschool teachers' 

fidelity in implementing a comprehensive language–rich curriculum. Language, 

Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools 39:329–341.

Phillips, Deborah, Nancy Crowell, Marcy Whitebook, and Dan Bellm. 2003. English 

literacy levels of the early care and education workforce: A profile and 

associations with quality of care. Berkeley, Calif.: Center for the Study of Child 

Care Employment.

Phillips, Deborah, Debra Mekos, Sandra Scarr, Kathleen McCartney, and Martha 

Abbott–Shim. 2000. Within and beyond the classroom door: Assessing quality in 

child care centers. Early Childhood Research Quarterly 15 (4):475–496.

Phillipsen, Leslie C., Margaret R. Burchinal, Carollee Howes, and Debby Cryer. 1997. 

The prediction of process quality from structural features of child care. Early 

Childhood Research Quarterly 12:281–303.
98

Pianta, Robert C, Carollee Howes, Margaret Burchinal, Donna Bryant, Richard Clifford, 

Diane Early, and Oscar Barbarin. 2005. Features of pre–kindergarten programs, 

classrooms, and teachers: Do they predict observed classroom quality and child–

teacher interactions? Applied Developmental Science 9 (3):144–159.

Pianta, Robert C., Karen M. La Paro, and Bridget K. Hamre. 2008. Classroom 

Assessment Scoring System (CLASS): PreK. Baltimore, Md.: University of 

Virginia 

Pianta, Robert C., Andrew J. Mashburn, Jason T. Downer, Bridget K. Hamre, and Laura 

Justice. 2008. Effects of web–mediated professional development resources on 

teacher–child interactions in pre–kindergarten classrooms. Early Childhood 

Research Quarterly 23:431–451.

Podhajski, Blanche, and Jane Nathan. 2005. Promoting early literacy through 

professional development for childcare providers. Early Education and 

Development 16 (1):23–41.

Poff Roman, Sarah. 2004. Illiteracy and older adults: Individual and societal implications. 

Educational Gerontology 30:79–93.

Powell, Douglas, and Nancy File. 2008. Project Approach: Purdue University and 

University of Wisconsin–Milwaukee (Wisconsin site). In Effects of preschool 

curriculum programs on school readiness. Washington, D.C.: U. S. Department 

of Education.

Priest, Jeffrey S., and Leigh Zoellick. 2008. Creative Curriculum with Ladders to 

Literacy: University of New Hampshire (New Hampshire site). In Effects of 

preschool curriculum programs on school readiness. Washington, D.C.: U.S. 

Department of Education.

QUINCE Research Team. 2009. Delivering and Evaluating On–site Consultation in a 

Five–State Collaborative Study Paper read at National Association for Child Care 

Resource and Referral Agency Meeting, at Washington, D.C.

Raikes, Helen H., Julia C. Torquati, Susan Hegland, H. Abigail Raikes, Jacqueline Scott, 

Lana Messner, Carla Peterson, Kathy Thornburg, Becky Houf, and Sandra Scott. 

2006. Studying the culture of quality early education and care: A cumulative 

approach to measuring characteristics of the workforce and relations to quality in 

four midwestern states. In Critical Issues in Early Childhood Professional 

Development, edited by M. Zaslow and I. Martinez–Beck. Baltimore, Md.: 

Brookes.

Raver, C. Cybele, Stephanie M. Jones, Christine P. Li–Grinning, Molly Metzger, Kina 

M. Champion, and Latriese Sardin. 2008. Improving preschool classroom 

processes: Preliminary findings from a randomized trial implemented in Head 

Start settings. Early Childhood Research Quarterly 23:10–26.

Reynolds, Larissa Kern, and Mary Lou Kelley. 1997. The efficacy of a response cost–

based treatment package for managing aggressive behavior in preschoolers. 

Behavior Modification 21 (2):216–230.

Rhodes, Sinead, and Eilis Hennessy. 2000. The effects of specialized training on 

caregivers and children in early–years settings: An evaluation of the foundation 

course in playgroup practice. Early Childhood Research Quarterly 15 (4):559–

576.
99

Robbins, Claudia, and Linnea C. Ehri. 1994. Reading storybooks to kindergartners helps 

them learn new vocabulary words. Journal of Educational Psychology 86:54–64.

Roskos, Kathleen, Catherine A. Rosemary, and M. Heidi Varner. 2006. Alignment in 

educator preparation for early and beginning literacy instruction: A state–level 

case example. In Critical Issues in Early Childhood Professional Development, 

edited by M. Zaslow and I. Martinez–Beck. Baltimore, Md.: Brookes.

Saluja, Gitanjali, Diane M. Early, and Richard M. Clifford. 2002. Demographic education 

in the United States. Early Childhood Research & Practice [Online] 4 

(1):http://ecrp.uiuc.edu/v4n1/saluja.html.

Schottle, Darlene A., and Gary L. Peltier. 1996. Should schools employ behavior 

management consultants? Journal of Instructional Psychology 23 (2):128–130.

Sheridan, Susan M., Carolyn P. Edwards, Christine A. Marvin, and Lisa L. Knoche. 

2009. Professional development in early childhood programs: Process issues and 

research needs. Early Education and Development 20 (3):377–401.

Smith, Sheila, S. Davidson, G. Weisenfeld, and S. Katsaros. 2001. Supports for Early 

Literacy Assessment (SELA). New York, N.Y.: New York University.

Snow, Catherine E., Wendy S. Barnes, Jean Chandler, Lowry Hemphill, and Irene F. 

Goodman. 1991. Unfulfilled expectations: Home and school influences on 

literacy. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.

Snow, Catherine E., M. Susan Burns, and Peg Griffin. 1998. Preventing reading 

difficulties in young children. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.

Sophian, Catherine. 2004. Mathematics for the future: developing a Head Start 

curriculum to support mathematics learning. Early Childhood Research Quarterly

19:59–81.

Stahl, Steven A. 2003. What do we expect storybook reading to do? How storybook 

reading affects word recognition. In On reading books to children: Parents and 

teachers, edited by E. B. Bauer, S. A. Stahl and A. Van Kleeck. Mahwah, N.J.: 

Erlbaum.

Starkey, Prentice, Alice Klein, Douglas Clements, and Julie Sarama. 2008. Pre–K 

Mathematics supplemented with DLM Early Childhood Express Math software: 

University of California, Berkeley/University at Buffalo, State University of New 

York (California/New York sites). Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of 

Education.

Starkey, Prentice, Alice Klein, and Ann Wakeley. 2004. Enhancing young children's 

mathematical knowledge through a pre–kindergarten mathematics intervention. 

Early Childhood Research Quarterly 19:99–120.

Strickland, Dorothy S., and Shannon Riley–Ayers. 2006. Early literacy: Policy and 

practice in the preschool years: National Institute for Early Education Research 

Brief, Issue 10.

Taylor, Barbara M., and P. David Pearson. 2004. Research on learning to read––at 

school, at home, and in the community. Elementary School Journal 105 (2):167–

181.

Thornburg, Kathy R., Wayne Mayfield, Johnetta Morrison, and Jacqueline Scott. 2008. 

Project Construct: University of Missouri–Columbia (Missouri site). In Effects of 

preschool curriculum programs on school readiness. Washington, D.C.: U.S. 

Department of Education 
100

Tout, Kathryn, Martha Zaslow, and Daniel Berry. 2006. Quality and qualifications: Links 

between professional development and quality in early care and education

settings. In Critical Issues in Early Childhood Professional Development, edited 

by M. Zaslow and I. Martinez–Beck. Baltimore, Md.: Brookes.

U.S. Department of Education. 2007. The impact of two professional development 

interventions on early reading instruction and achievement. Washington, D.C.: 

Institue for education Sciences, National Center for Education Evaluation and 

Regional Assistance.

———. 2008. Effects of preschool program curriculum programs and school readiness: 

Report from the preschool curriculum evaluation research initiative. Washington, 

D.C.: Institute for Education Sciences, National Center for Education Evaluation 

and Regional Assistance 

Vu, Jennifer A., Hyun–Joo Jeon, and Carollee Howes. 2008. Formal Education, 

Credential, or Both: Early Childhood Program Classroom Practices. Early 

Education and Development 19 (3):479–504.

Wasik, Barbara A., and Mary Alice Bond. 2001. Beyond the pages of a book: Interactive 

book reading and language development in preschool classrooms. Journal of 

Educational Psychology 93 (2):243–250.

Wasik, Barbara A., Mary Alice Bond, and Annemarie Hindman. 2006. The effects of a 

language and literacy intervention on Head Start children and teachers. Journal of 

Educational Psychology 98 (1):63–74.

Weaver, Ruth Harding. 2002. Predictors of quality and commitment in family child care: 

Provider education, personal resources, and support. Early Education and 

Development 13 (3):265–282.

Webster-Stratton, Carolyn, and M. Jamila Reid. 2004. Strengthening social and 

emotional competence in young children: The foundation for early school 

readiness and success. Infants and Young Children 17 (2):96-113.

Webster-Stratton, Carolyn, M. Jamila Reid, and Mary Hammond. 2001. Preventing 

conduct problems, promoting social competence: A parent and teacher training 

partnership in Head Start. Journal of Clinical Child Psychology 30:283-302.

———. 2004. Treating children with early-onset conduct problems: Intervention 

outcomes for parent, child, and teacher training. Journal of Clinical Child and

Adolescent Psychology 33 (1):105-124.

Webster–Stratton, Carolyn, M. Jamila Reid, and Mary Hammond. 2004. Treating 

children with early–onset conduct problems: Intervention outcomes for parent, 

child, and teacher training. Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology

33 (1):105–124.

Weigel, Daniel J., Sally S. Martin, and Kimberely K. Bennett. 2005. Ecological 

influences of the home and the child–care center on preschool–age children's 

literacy development. Reading Research Quarterly 40 (2):204–233.

Wesley, Patricia W. 1994. Innovative practices: Providing on–site consultation to 

promote quality in integrated child care programs. Journal of Early Intervention

18 (4):391–402.

Wesley, Patricia W., and Virginia Buysse. 2004. Consultation as a framework for 

productive collaboration in early intervention. Journal of Educational and 

Psychological Consultation 15 (2):127–150.
101

Whitebook, Marcy. 2003. Early education quality: Higher teacher qualifications for better 

learning environments: A review of the literature. Berkeley, Calif.: Institute of 

Industrial Relations, Center for the Study of Child Care Employment.

Whitebook, Marcy, Laura Sakai, Emily Gerber, and Carollee Howes. 2001. Then and 

now: Changes in child care staffing, 1994–2000. Washington, D.C.: Center for the 

Child Care Workforce.

Whitebook, Marcy, Laura Sakai, Fran Kipnis, Mirella Almaraz, Esther Suarez, and Dan 

Bellm. 2008. Learning together: A study of six B.A. completion cohort programs 

in early care and education. Year 1 report. Berkeley, Calif.: Center for the Study 

of Child Care Employment, University of California at Berkeley.

Whitehurst, Grover J., David S. Arnold, Jeffery N. Epstein, Andrea L. Angell, Meagan 

Smith, and Janet E. Fischel. 1994. A picture book reading intervention in day care 

and home for children from low–income families. Developmental Psychology

30:679–689.

Whitehurst, Grover J., Jeffrey N. Epstein, Andrea L. Angell, Adam C. Payne, Deanne A. 

Crone, and Janet E. Fischel. 1994. Outcomes of an emergent literacy intervention 

in Head Start. Journal of Educational Psychology 86:542–555.

Whitehurst, Grover J., Andrea A. Zevenberegen, Deanne A. Crone, Margaret D. Shultz, 

Olivia N. Velting, and Janet E. Fischel. 1999. Outcomes of an emergent literacy 

intervention from Head Start through second grade. Journal of Educational 

Psychology 91 (2):261–272.

Yaden, David B., Anamarie Tam, Patricia Madrigal, Danny Brassell, Joan Massa, Susie 

Altamirano, and Jorge Armendariz. 2000. Early literacy for inner–city children: 

The effects of reading and writing interventions in English and Spanish during the 

preschool years. The Reading Teacher 54 (2):186–189.

Young-Loveridge, Jennifer M. 2004. Effects of early numeracy of a program using 

number books and games. Early Childhood Research Quarterly 19:82-98.

Zaslow, Martha. 2009. Strengthening the conceptualization of early childhood 

professional development initiatives and evaluations. Early Education and 

Development 20:1–10.

Zaslow, Martha, and Ivelisse Martinez–Beck. 2006. Critical issues in early childhood 

professional development. Baltimore, Md.: Brookes Publishing.

Zaslow, Martha, Kathryn Tout, Tamara Halle, and Nicole Forry. April, 2009. Multiple 

purposes for measuring quality in early childhood settings: Implications for 

collecting and communicating information on quality. In Issue Brief: OPRE Issue 

Brief #2. Washington, D.C.: Office of Planning, Research and Evaluation, 

Administration for Children and Families, U.S. Department of Health and Human 

Services and Child Trends.

———. under review. Differing purposes for measuring quality in early childhood 

settings: Aligning purpose with precedures. In Measuring quality in early 

childhood settings., edited by M. Zaslow, I. Martinez–Beck, K. Tout and T. Halle. 

Baltimore, Md.: Brookes Publishing.

Zaslow, Martha, Kathryn Tout, Kelly Maxwell, and Richard M. Clifford. 2004. The role 

of professional development in creating high quality preschool education. 

Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution.
102
103

Appendix A
104
Study Research Questions Research Design Sample General Comments

Adger, 

Hoyle, and 

Dickinson 

(2004)

Does an analysis of discourse 

among participants in the 

Literacy Environment 

Enrichment Program (LEEP) 

professional development 

training program provide 

insight into the processes by 

which teachers develop new 

understandings about literacy, 

begin to question their own 

practice, and come to regard 

their classrooms as amenable 

to modification?

Nine LEEP training sessions were videotaped 

during 2000-2001. The participants sat facing each 

other on three side of a large table configuration, 

with the instructor on the fourth side. Videotapes 

captured the Professional Conversation, the 

lecture/discussion period, and the conversation that 

closed each session. There were three different 

instructors over the course of the 10 sessions. See 

Dickinson and Brandy (2006), Example 2, for more 

information on LEEP intervention. 

There were 11 staff members from four preschool programs (three Head Start 

and one public school program) that participated. The group included seven 

teachers and four supervisors. Three had associate degrees and four had 

masters' degrees. Mean number of months' experience in early childhood 

programs was 128. Mean number of months in current position was 41. 

Mean number of months in teaching 3- to 4-year-olds was 106. 

The authors note several purposes of discourse processes methodology: 1) It helps describe course 

content. 2) It locates evidence of research-based knowledge being linked with practical knowledge. 

3) It may help evaluate the quality of in-service training sessions. 4) It helps to locate evidence of 

teacher communities of practice, a concept not always supported with data. 5) A detailed analysis of 

teachers' talk in a professional development setting may reveal the emergent effects of the course on 

teachers' learning. Engaging in such conversations may enhance professional interaction as well as 

changes in classroom practices (although this further link needs to be supported by further 

research). Although authors claim that these discussions among teachers integrated practical 

knowledge with research-based knowledge, we did not see evidence in any of the examples presented 

in the article of this integration; In all transcriptions, teachers built onto each others' practical 

experiences to generate a common set of propositions about the importance of re-reading books to 

children. 

Assel, 

Landry, 

Swank, and 

Gunnewig 

(2007)

Do two preschool curricula 

(Let's Begin with the Letter 

People and Doors to 

Discovery) result in greater 

gains in child language and 

literacy outcome measures 

when compared to children in 

control classrooms? Are there 

differences, based on 

curriculum, in the impact on 

child outcomes? Does 

curriculum effectiveness differ 

by site (Head Start classroom 

vs. public school)? Do children 

in mentored classrooms 

(intervention + mentoring) 

show greater gains than 

children in non-mentored 

classrooms? 

Researchers randomly assigned school sites to one 

of three conditions: Let's Begin with the Letter 

People, Doors to Discovery, or Control. Then the 

school sites receiving one of the two curricula were 

randomly assigned to receive mentoring v. no 

mentoring. 

The sample included 603 pre-k children enrolled in full-day Title 1 (n=26), 

universal pre-k (n=19), and Head Start classrooms (n=31). There were 

differences based on site in ethnic backgrounds of children. The majority of 

teachers from all sites were female, however ethnicity varied by site. Teacher 

education also varied by site, with teachers in the public school setting having 

more education and certifications that Head Start teachers. 

This study was one of the PCER studies, however, this manuscript did not include the national 

evaluation components, but only the local or "complementary" research questions. Despite the large 

number of ELL children in the study, the researchers did not assess differences in these children's 

outcomes versus non-ELL children. The authors do note that this could not be done due to the 

varying number of ELL children across sites. 

105 Table A-1a. Language and Literacy Studies: Methodology Continues next page
Study Research Questions Research Design Sample General Comments

Baker and 

Smith (1999)

Can changes in two 

kindergarten programs to 

improve literacy instruction be 

linked to improved child 

outcomes? Can these effects 

be sustained a year after 

implementation? 

Researchers worked with two schools within the 

same Northwest school district. Although they 

implemented two different programs in the two 

schools, the researchers used similar PD 

components across the two sites (see column on 

Mode of Delivery). Data were gathered in a 

Baseline year, Implementation year, and 

Sustainability year. Child outcomes were compared 

pre-post and against the performance of comparison 

groups. 

Two schools. Glendale and Lincoln are two elementary schools within a 

Northwest school district. Of the 16 schools in the district, these two have the 

highest percentage of students on free or reduced-price lunches, and the 

highest student mobility rates. Both had identified early reading as an area 

targeted for improvement. The kindergarten teachers within these two schools 

were the main targets of the intervention, although other teachers (Title I and 

English Language Development teachers) were also included, since the child 

targets of the intervention were children at risk for reading/learning 

difficulties. 

This is an excellent example of a study that focused specifically on the implementation of PD to 

improve literacy instruction and literacy development in young children. The study pays particular 

attention to fidelity of implementation, and sustainability of PD one year after implementation. 

However, it is a case study of PD in two particular schools. The authors note that it would not be 

feasible to implement their intervention on a large-scale basis, due to the need to attend to the needs 

and proclivities of individual schools and teachers. However, their framework for approaching 

professional development can, potentially, have widespread use. 

Byrne and 

FieldingBarnsley 

(1995)

What are the effects of the 

phonemic awareness program, 

Sound Foundations, when 

administered by preschool staff 

working from the manual? 

That is, will the program have 

as good outcomes for children 

when administered under "real 

life" conditions, in a full-group 

setting rather than in small 

groups?

This supplementary group was compared to the 

original experimental and control groups in terms of 

children's outcomes. Comparisons of pre-test and 

post-test performance on phoneme identification 

were used. 

The PD sample was three preschool teachers in Australia. However, no 

information was provided about them or their schools. The results of the 

intervention were based on child outcomes, and details were provided about 

the children. The sample was 93 preschoolers in three separate preschools in 

Australia. There were 48 boys and 45 girls. The mean age at pretest was 

53.9 months, which was slightly younger than the mean age for the original 

experimental and control groups at pretest (55.6 and 54.9 months, 

respectively). 

The authors note that there is a confound in the amount of time that elapsed between pre- and posttest for this supplemental sample (5.5 to 7 months) and the original experimental and control group 

samples in the preschool phase of the main study (5 months). However, they note that the 

magnitude of effects suggests that this minor variation in pre- and post-test intervals is not 

explaining the variance. Nevertheless, interpretations and conclusions from the results of the study 

need to be tempered, because the researchers did not control for differences in teacher/researcher 

characteristics, time on task, group size, amount of attention to individual children, amount of 

feedback given to children, etc. In sum, there were differences in the intensity of training that the 

teachers received compared to the researchers who administered the program to the original 

"experimental" sample, and consequently differences in the dosage of intervention that the children 

received across conditions. 

Dickinson 

and Brady 

(2006), 

Example 1: 

TeacherResearcher 

Pilot Project

Will encouraging teachers to 

be researchers in their own 

classrooms improve teacherchild verbal interactions?

In a Head Start center, several teachers were paid to 

participate in a teacher-researcher professional 

development project. Participating teachers and 

researchers held regular meetings to discuss 

observations of teacher conversations with children. 

Teachers were encouraged to keep a log of language 

interactions with children and to bring comments 

and questions to the meetings. The researchers 

discussed observations with teachers and provided 

readings on children's language development. 

Three teaching teams, including a lead teacher and an assistant teacher, from 

a Head Start center participated. 

This project was a pilot project that provided the foundation for Dickinson and colleagues' LEEP 

projects. 

106 Table A-1a. Language and Literacy Studies: Methodology—Continued Continues next page
Study Research Questions Research Design Sample General Comments

Dickinson 

and Brady 

(2006), 

Example 2: 

Literacy 

Environment 

Enrichment 

Program 

(LEEP)

Will an intensive training 

program, with components of 

knowledge acquisition, 

reflection, and application, 

improve teachers' language and 

literacy classroom 

environments?

A four-credit training program on children's 

language and literacy development and applications 

to child care environments was offered in 12 New 

England colleges and universities. The training 

program consisted of two three-day sessions which 

included discussions, demonstrations and lectures, 

and hands-on activities. During the 3 months 

between the sessions, participants applied course 

content in "carefully sequenced" assignments. 

72 preschool teachers participated in the LEEP evaluation. 39 received LEEP 

training, and 33 were members of the control group. A total of 522 children 

were included in the evaluation. The attrition rate for the LEEP teachers was 

10 percent. 

This is the original LEEP program, which was developed after the Pilot Project.

Dickinson 

and Brady 

(2006), 

Example 3: 

TechnologyEnhanced 

Literacy 

Environment 

Enrichment 

Program (TLEEP)

How effective is a training 

session combining face-to-face 

meetings with distance learning 

technologies in affecting 

teachers' language and literacy 

classroom practices? 

A training program on children's language and 

literacy development and applications to child care 

environments was offered using distance education. 

28 teachers participated in the training, and the 

comparison group contained 37 teachers. 

65 preschool teachers were part of the evaluation, 28 of these participated in 

T-LEEP training. A total of 455 children were in evaluation classrooms in 

North Carolina and New England. The attrition rate for the T-LEEP 

participation teachers was 45 percent. 

This is the second version of the LEEP program.

Dickinson 

and Brady 

(2006), 

Example 4: 

Striving to 

Achieve 

Reading 

Success 

(STARSLEEP)

Does a modified version of the 

LEEP program, with fewer 

sessions, and more time 

between each session, help 

facilitate teachers' support for 

children's language and literacy 

development?

Preschool teachers in Connecticut have been 

participating in the STARS-LEEP program. Focus 

groups with participants are used to gauge teachers' 

responses to the program. Additionally, postintervention formal observations were conducted by 

an outside evaluation firm.

The sample size is not noted. The attrition rate for the STARS teachers was 

13.5 percent.

This is the third version of the LEEP program.

107 Table A-1a. Language and Literacy Studies: Methodology—Continued Continues next page
Study Research Questions Research Design Sample General Comments

Dickinson 

and Brady 

(2006), 

Example 5: 

ProgramDelivered 

Literacy InService 

Training (PDLIT)

Will a training model in which 

all staff in a child care center 

participate and the training is 

given by a member of the 

organization, effectively 

improve classroom language 

and literacy practices? 

In participating centers, a member of center staff is 

trained on using the training materials (overhead 

transparencies, videotapes) which focus on 

children's language and literacy development. Then, 

this person trains all other staff members in a child 

care center during internal meetings. The type of 

evaluation is unclear.

The sample is not noted. Method is unclear. It sounds as if this program may still be underway and under evaluation.

Dickinson 

and Caswell 

(2007)

Do teachers who participate in 

Literacy Environment 

Enrichment Program (LEEP) 

have classrooms that receive 

higher scores for support for 

language and literacy after 

taking the course? Does 

participation in LEEP add 

significant explanatory power 

to the prediction of practices 

related to language and literacy 

in the spring, compared to 

comparison group teachers? 

Teachers and supervisors in the intervention group 

participated in a 45-hour LEEP course, delivered in 

two three-day sessions. Teacher and classroom data 

were collected in LEEP and comparison classrooms 

prior to and after the completion of the LEEP 

course. The fall data collection also included the 

completion of a teacher questionnaire. 

Intervention and comparison teachers were recruited from Head Start 

programs across New England over a two-year period. Participating teachers 

all had at least two college level ECE courses. The sample included a total of 

30 intervention (16 - year 1, 14 - year 2) and 40 comparison teachers (12 - 

year 1, 28-year 2). The majority of teachers were white and on average, had 9 

years of teaching experience. No information was provided about the 

supervisors. 

Although fidelity of implementation was not measured, the authors note that in order to receive 

credits, the teachers had to attend the LEEP sessions (doesn't say how many). Not a lot of 

information was given about supervisors. No child outcomes were assessed. 

Foorman and 

Moats 

(2004) 

What are the relationships 

among teacher knowledge, 

teacher effectiveness, and 

student outcomes in light of the 

professional development 

given? 

Professional development activities were 

administered to participating K-4th grade teachers 

in the District of Columbia. It is unclear how 

participants were selected. 

The sample for the data collection appears to be limited to 42 3rd- and 4thgrade participating teachers. 

108 Table A-1a. Language and Literacy Studies: Methodology—Continued Continues next page
Study Research Questions Research Design Sample General Comments

Fountain, 

Cosgrove, 

and Wood 

(2008)

Does implementation of Early 

Literacy and Learning Model 

(ELLM) produce gains in child 

and classroom outcomes 

compared to a control 

curriculum?

This study was part of the PCER report on the 

Effects of Preschool Curriculum Programs on 

School Readiness. The Florida-UNF research team 

recruited 28 preschool classrooms from three 

counties with low-performing schools in the state of 

Florida. These classrooms included Head Start, 

subsidized, faith-based, and early intervention prekindergarten classrooms. They were then randomly 

assigned to treatment (ELLM implementation) or 

control conditions.

Head Start, subsidized, faith-based, and early intervention classrooms were 

recruited. Data were collected on 243 children and 204 parents. Children were 

4.6 years old at the time of baseline data collection and were primarily 

African-American (71 percent), with smaller percentages of White (14 

percent) and Hispanic (8 percent) children. All 28 participating teachers were 

female, with 64 percent identifying themselves as African American and 21 

percent white. The average level of experience in teaching was 11 years and 

26 percent had a Bachelor's degree.

Unlike many of the studies encompassed in the PCER report, ELLM implementation was found to 

positively affect a child outcome--language development at the end of the kindergarten year. 

However, the implementation did not result in improved classroom outcomes.

Gettinger and 

Stoiber 

(2007)

Does the Exemplary Model of 

Early Reading Growth and 

Excellence (EMERGE) 

program produce significantly 

higher performance on 

measures of children's early 

language and literacy than a 

control curriculum. 

An initial evaluation of the EMERGE program was 

conducted after one year of implementation in 15 

classrooms. Evaluators compared children's 

performances on outcome measures with those in 

control classrooms. Control classrooms were 

randomly selected to participate. Children were 

assessed at the beginning (September) and end 

(May) of the year. 

A total of 188 children (30 teachers) were served using the EMERGE model 

within the context of center-based early education programs in Milwaukee, 

WI; 154 children (20 teachers) from SDC Head Start classrooms were in the 

control group. Children ranged in age from 3-5 years. In both groups, 

approximately 90 percent of children were from families living in poverty 

according to the federal poverty threshold. The majority of children and 

teachers in each group were African-American.

This is a mostly descriptive article that describes the design and evaluation of EMERGE, as well as 

preliminary findings from an evaluation of the EMERGE program. This is one of the Early Reading 

First studies. Although there is an extensive description of the PD component of the EMERGE 

program, and the authors report that improving teacher knowledge and practice as the goals of the 

PD, this article does not report any measures or outcomes associated with teacher knowledge or 

practice. Although the control group was randomly assigned, it is unclear whether there was random 

assignment to the intervention group. It appears that this study will continue for two more years. 

109 Table A-1a. Language and Literacy Studies: Methodology—Continued Continues next page
Study Research Questions Research Design Sample General Comments

Jackson, 

Larzelere, St. 

Clair, Corr, 

Fichter, and 

Egertson 

(2006)

Is there an impact of early 

childhood educators' (ECEs) 

participation in HeadsUp! 

Reading (HUR; National Head 

Start Association, 2000) on 

preschool children's language 

and literacy skills? Is there an 

impact of participation on 

classroom practices? Is there a 

relationship between classroom 

practices and children's literacy 

skills, regardless of the 

intervention group? 

Teachers participated in a 15-week HUR course to 

promote early literacy practices for children birth - 

5. The training included 44 hours of live, researchbased professional development. A smaller group of 

HUR participants volunteered to participate in the 

mentoring component of the study. Trained mentors 

worked with teachers to develop and individual plan 

for meeting the teachers' goals. Mentors met with 

participants four to six times for two to four hours 

per session over a two-month period. Pre- and posttraining child assessments and ECE classroom 

observations were conducted. 

The sample included 14 ECEs with HUR-only, 8 ECEs with HUR+ 

mentoring, and 17 ECE controls. The majority of intervention and control 

teachers had some college. A total of 143 children had both pre- and post-test 

scores on at least one literacy measure. Children were between 2.8 - 6.5 years 

old, and Spanish was spoken at home by 25.2percent of children. The sample 

was ethnically diverse and included 35 percent Caucasian children, 22 percent 

African-American, 22 percent Hispanic, 3 percent Multiracial, 4 percent 

Asian, and 14 percent Native American. Participating settings included: Head 

Start centers, child care centers, federal Even Start Family Literacy programs 

and state-funded prekindergarten programs. 

There was a large range in the number of participating children per classroom (2-13). The authors 

report that post-training child assessments were completed after the 15-week HUR broadcasts and 

all ECE participants were provided an opportunity for mentoring (HUR+ mentoring). However, it is 

unclear when the mentoring occurred (e.g., during the 15 week HUR training or afterwards?) and 

when the child assessments occurred for children in the HUR+ mentoring group. There was no 

assessment of fidelity of implementation (e.g., how many training sessions did teachers participate 

in?). There was a large drop-out rate for both intervention ECEs and controls (29 percent), and 

large portion of children who did not have pre- and post-test scores, and were therefore not included 

in analyses (38 percent). 

Justice, 

Mashburn, 

Hamre, and 

Pianta 

(2008)

What is the quality of langauge 

and literacy instruction in 135 

publicly funded preschool 

classrooms serving at-risk 

children? What are the 

predictors of high-quality 

language and literacy 

instruction (e.g., teacher 

characteristics, classroom 

characteristics, and lesson 

characteristics)? Is procedural 

fidelity associated with quality 

instruction? 

Teachers participated in one 2-day professional 

development workshop. Teachers implemented the 

My Teaching Partner-Language & Literacy 

Curriculum over the course of 36 weeks. To 

monitor fidelity, teachers were asked to video 

themselves teaching a language and literacy lesson 

once a month and to submit videotapes to the 

research site. Videos were assess for procedural 

fidelity and quality of language and literacy 

instruction. 

Participants were 135 teachers who volunteered to participatie in a 

professional development study of state-funded preschools in a mid-Atlantic 

state. All of the teachers had a Bachelor's degree, and 36 percent had an 

advanced degree. Teachers were in state-funded classrooms designed to serve 

4-year-old children exhibiting social and/or emotional risks. Forty-six percent 

of children were African-American, 29 percent were Caucasian, and 12 

percent were Hispanic. One out of five children spoke a language other than 

English in their home. The average family income was $26,500. 

All teachers had a bachelors' degree or higher making it difficult to generalize findings. Teachers 

volunteered to participate in the study and there was no information available for teachers who did 

not participate. This study was part of a larger study that involved receiving professional 

development over the course of the year focused on high-quality implementation of a language and 

literacy curriculum. The authors suggest that this study represents business-as-usual practices when 

teachers utilize a scientifically based curriculum without receiving explicit instruction in its quality 

implementation. As part of the larger study, some teachers were randomly selected to receive 

professional development designed to enhance the quality of language and literacy instruction. 

110 Table A-1a. Language and Literacy Studies: Methodology—Continued Continues next page
Study Research Questions Research Design Sample General Comments

Justice, 

Pence, and 

Wiggins 

(2008)

Does implementation of 

Language-Focused Curriculum 

(LFC) produce gains in child 

and classroom outcomes 

compared to a control 

curriculum?

This study was part of the PCER report on the 

Effects of Preschool Curriculum Programs on 

School Readiness. A combination of Head Start and 

public pre-kindergarten classrooms were recruited 

from a convenience sample and randomly assigned 

to a treatment or control condition. The treatment 

group received training in implementing LFC. The 

control group reported using High/Scope 

curriculum materials, but the extent of this 

implementation was not assessed.

The Virginia research team recruited Head Start and public pre-kindergarten 

classrooms. All were full-day programs and teachers received an incentive 

for participating. Data were collected on 195 children (97 treatment, 98 

control). Children were 4.6 years old at the time of baseline data collection. 

Seventy-one percent were white and 21 percent were African-American. All 

14 participating teachers were female and White. They had an average of 11 

years of teaching experience and the majority had a Bachelor's degree (71 

percent).

During the baseline data collection, one observer completed the observational ratings in 8 of the 12 

classrooms at a research site. It was later determined that the ECERS-R and Arnett ratings from 

these classrooms were inflated, and due to data integrity concerns, this data was excluded.

Landry 

(2002)

What is the effect of an 

interactive research-based 

training program regarding 

children's language and literacy 

development on teacher 

practice and child outcomes?

Teachers participated in a four-day workshop on 

children's language and literacy development and 

classroom activities for encouraging it. Weekly 

follow-up visits from researchers assessed teacher 

practice and gave teachers feedback regarding their 

language and literacy activities. Children were 

assessed at the beginning and end of the school 

year. It is somewhat unclear how teachers were 

assigned to intervention and control condition.

3,500 children participated in the evaluation. The project sounds to be still in progress. 

Landry, 

Assel, 

Gunnewig, 

and Swank 

(2008)

Does implementation of Doors 

to Discovery and Let's Begin 

with the Letter People produce 

gains in child and classroom 

outcomes compared to a 

control curriculum?

This study was part of the PCER report on the 

Effects of Preschool Curriculum Programs on 

School Readiness. The Texas researchers randomly 

assigned 76 classrooms to either receive Doors to 

Discovery training, Let's Begin with the Letter 

People training, or serve as a control using a three 

(Type of Curriculum - Doors to Discovery, Let's 

Begin with the Letter People, or Control) x two 

(mentoring vs. non mentoring) design with 

classrooms from three settings--Head Start, Title 1 

pre-kindergarten, and non Title 1 pre-kindergarten. 

45 classrooms were then randomly selected for 

inclusion in the study for the PCER initiative, and 

half were randomly selected to receive mentoring 

along with their implementation of the treatment 

curriculum.

The Texas research team recruited Head Start and public prekindergarten 

programs for participation in the study. Data were collected on 293 children 

and 237 parents. Children were 4.6 years old at the time of baseline data 

collection and were ethnically diverse: 43 percent Hispanic, 30 percent white, 

and 13 percent African-American. Most participating teachers were female, 

and most were white (55 percent) or African-American (32 percent). They 

had an average of 14 years of experience in teaching and 66 percent had a 

bachelor's degree.

Research proved that implementing Doors to Discovery and Let's Begin with the Letter People did 

not significantly improve child outcomes compared to a control group. The classroom outcomes 

that significantly improved after implementing the curricula were language instruction, literacy 

instruction, and classroom quality.

111 Table A-1a. Language and Literacy Studies: Methodology—Continued Continues next page
Study Research Questions Research Design Sample General Comments

Lonigan and 

Schatschneid

er (2008)

Does implementation of the 

Literacy Express Curriculum 

or the DLM Early Childhood 

Express and Open Court 

Reading Pre-K Curriculums 

result in better child outcomes, 

measures of classroom 

environment, or measures of 

classroom instruction than 

implementation of High Scope 

Curriculum? 

This study was part of the PCER report on the 

Effects of Preschool Curriculum Programs on 

School Readiness. Thirty public pre-kindergarten 

teachers from 16 schools were recruited to the study 

using convenience sampling techniques. Schools 

were grouped into triplets depending upon their 

Florida school grading report and the average 

teaching experience of the teachers. Random 

assignment of schools to one of three treatment 

conditions was then applied to these triplets (controlHigh Scope , Literacy Express, and DLM Early 

Childhood Express supplemented with Open Court 

Reading Pre-K ).

Children in this sample (N=282) were an average of 4.6 years old. The 

majority of children were African-American (59 percent) or white (30 

percent). Teachers in this study (N=30) were primarily female and either 

white (83 percent) or African-American (13 percent). They had an average of 

16 years teaching experience with an average of nine years teaching 

preschool. The majority of teachers had either a bachelor's degree (53 percent) 

or graduate degree (27 percent). The majority of teachers had a current 

teaching license/certificate (80 percent) and some had a state-awarded 

preschool certificate (40 percent) or a CDA (23 percent).

Because there were three conditions in this study, there were only approximately five schools 

assigned to each condition. Therefore, sample size may be an issue.

Landry, 

Swank, 

Smith, Assel, 

and 

Gunnewig 

(2006)

Do children of teachers who 

received the professional 

development model show 

greater gains in cognitive 

development than control 

children? Does more teacher 

training (one v. two years) lead 

to greater cognitive gains for 

children?

A quasi-experimental design, teachers were 

assigned to be in either the intervention or control 

group in Year 1. All teachers in the Year 1 control 

group were then in the intervention group in Year 2. 

Coordinators at each site managed all grant-related 

activities, including data collection, monitoring 

assessments and in-classroom mentoring, ongoing 

teacher training, and selecting and ordering 

classroom materials. Mentors were hired to support 

target teachers with the implementation of the 

enhanced language and literacy program activities. 

Mentors coached one hour per week for each 

teacher in their first year of training and twice a 

month for teachers in the second year of training 

(the average caseload for mentors was 15 teachers). 

Training included multi-day summer training for 

coordinators, mentors, and teachers in addition to 

training across the school year. Control classrooms 

were asked to continue a "business as usual 

approach." Fidelity of model implementation, 

observation of classroom teaching, and pre- posttest 

child assessment were collected. 

Across two years, the sample consisted of 20 Head Start sites, from which 

750 teachers (500 target, 250 control) in 370 classrooms were randomly 

selected to conduct pre- and posttest assessments (10 children were randomly 

selected per class). 

Significant moderators of the impact of the intervention effectiveness were the presence of a 

research-based early literacy curriculum, higher levels of teacher education, and a full-day versus 

half-day program.

112 Table A-1a. Language and Literacy Studies: Methodology—Continued Continues next page
Study Research Questions Research Design Sample General Comments

Lonigan and 

Whitehurst 

(1998)

Can adults (caregivers and 

parents) trained in dialogic 

reading via videotape and brief 

role-playing effectively 

encourage children's language 

and vocabulary growth? What 

is the relative effectiveness of 

caregivers using dialogic 

bookreading vs. parents using 

dialogic bookreading? 

Children were randomly assigned to three 

experimental groups or a control group. The three 

experimental groups were "school reading," "home 

reading," and "school plus home reading." The 

interventions lasted for six weeks. Parents and 

teachers were trained via videotape in dialogic 

reading, a technique that encourages caregivers to 

engage children as active participants in joint 

reading sessions. Children in the school condition 

or school plus home condition were read to daily by 

a teacher or aide in a group of five or fewer children 

(in a location separated from other children in the 

classrooms). For the home and school plus home 

conditions, parents were encouraged to read to their 

children daily. A total of six books were used--the 

same books in the classrooms and at home.

The sample consisted of 91 3- and 4-year-olds from low-income families. 

The children attended four child care centers in Nashville, Tenn., which 

mainly served families eligible for subsidized child care. The sample was 

91.2 percent African-American. The children scored significantly below 

average on tests of receptive and expressive vocabulary before the 

intervention.

The authors report that all three intervention types had significant effects on children's language 

development. However, it seems that the results were highly variable; no consistent pattern 

emerged. Some results were found only for high compliance centers, some for both high and low 

compliance centers. Furthermore, in general, it appears that the combined (home plus school) 

intervention was the most effective, but this pattern did not emerge across all of the measures. 

113 Table A-1a. Language and Literacy Studies: Methodology—Continued Continues next page
Study Research Questions Research Design Sample General Comments

McCutchen, 

Abbott, 

Green, 

Beretvas, 

Cox, Potter 

et al. (2002)

1) Can professional 

development of realistic 

duration develop teachers' 

knowledge of the structural 

features of language? 2) Can 

this PD change instructional 

techniques? 3) Can this PD 

help students learn more 

quickly? 

A letter of invitation was sent to over 70 local 

public (primarily) and private schools, and 40 

responded with interest to participate in the study. 

Schools were matched based on the percentage of 

students qualifying for free or reduced-price 

lunches, and one school from each match was 

assigned to the experimental condition. Preference 

for the experimental condition was given to schools 

willing to send a team of teachers (either multiple 

classroom teachers or classroom teachers and 

special education colleagues) to training. Teachers 

participated in a two-week instructional institute the 

summer before classroom implementation. Teachers 

received ongoing observational visits and instruction 

feedback during researchers' regular classroom 

visits throughout the year. Kindergarten child 

assessments were administered at four timepoints 

(Sept.,Nov.,Feb.,May).

Forty-four teachers participated. Twenty-four were assigned to the 

experimental group and 20 were in the control group. Both groups had a mean 

of 13 years teaching experience. Four-hundred and ninety-two kindergarten 

children participated in child outcomes evaluations. [First-grade outcomes 

have not been tabled.] Students are 50 percent white; 20 percent AfricanAmerican; 20 percent Asian-American; 5 percent Hispanic; and 5 percent 

other. 

Teachers received stipends for participation.

McGillFranzen, 

Allington, 

Yokoi, and 

Brooks 

(1999)

Does increasing children's 

access to books improve their 

literacy development? Does 

training teachers improve 

children's literacy 

development? Which is more 

effective?

Out of the six participating elementary schools, two 

schools were given teacher training and additional 

classroom books, two schools were given additional 

classroom books only, and two schools contained 

control classrooms. Because three of the schools 

had more than 50 percent low-income children, and 

three schools had less than 50 percent low-income 

children, a stratified randomization process was 

used to assign schools to conditions, to make sure 

that each condition included one low-income school 

and one other school.

Three-hundred and seventy-seven kindergarten children in 18 classrooms in 

six elementary schools participated in the study. 

National 

Center for 

Education 

Evaluation 

and Regional 

Assistance, 

Institute of 

Education 

Sciences 

(2007)

What is the impact of Early 

Reading First (ERF) on the 

language and literacy skills of 

children enrolled in preschools 

that receive ERF support? 

What is the impact of ERF on 

the quality of language and 

literacy instruction, practice, 

and materials that preschools 

provide? To what extent are 

variations in ERF program 

quality and implementation 

associated with differences in 

the language and literacy skills 

of the children served?

The study uses a regression-discontinuity design to 

assess the impact of ERF funding on children's 

literacy and language outcomes. Trained staff 

assessed the language and literacy skills of children 

in the fall and spring. Observes measured classroom 

practice in a subsample of study classrooms. 

Teachers and administrators completed 

questionnaires, and teachers were asked to rate each 

study child's social-emotional behavior. 

ERF teachers did not participate in uniform professional development. Instead, researchers asked 

teachers what types of activities they participated in, and on what topics. Additionally, researchers 

asked how teachers' pd was funded. The included analyses cannot and do not address the extent to 

which ERF contributed to the number of professional development hours reported by teachers. 

The sample included a treatment group of 4-year-olds in 28 ERF grantee 

sites, and children attending preschool in 37 sites. Sites were not randomly 

selected, but were selected based on grant application scores. About three 

classrooms from each site were selected. About 11 4-year-old students per 

classroom were randomly chosen to participate. The children in this sample 

were more likely than children nationally to come from economically 

disadvantaged homes (monthly income of less than $1,500), come from singleparent families (40 percent compared with 28 percent), and be Hispanic (46 

percent compared with 21 percent). Forty-one percent of children spoke a 

primary language other than English. The largest percentage of teachers were 

white (54 percent) with 23 percent being Hispanic, and 17 percent black. 

Twenty-one percent of teachers were fluent in Spanish and English. 

114 Table A-1a. Language and Literacy Studies: Methodology—Continued Continues next page
Study Research Questions Research Design Sample General Comments

Neuman 

(1999)

What is the effect of the Books 

Aloud program on children's 

outcomes? 

This study documents the effects of a formative 

evaluation of the Books Aloud program, a program 

designed to "flood" child care programs serving lowincome children with high-quality books. 337 nonprofit child care centers were served, 17,675 

children were served, and a total of 88,960 books 

were distributed (5 books for every child. Trainers 

provided 10 hours of training to child care staff on 

bookreading strategies and thematic instruction. To 

evaluate the program, a stratified random sample of 

centers receiving the intervention was taken, and 

these centers were paired with similar centers not 

receiving the intervention. 

The evaluation sample consisted of 400 children in the intervention sample 

and 100 children in the control sample. Children were low-income, with over 

65 percent receiving child care subsidies. Due to attrition, a post-test only 

group of children was added to the sample, with 71 Books Aloud children and 

57 control children.

Neuman and 

Cunningham 

(2009)

What impact does a 

coordinated approach to 

professional development that 

combines coursework and 

ongoing coaching in early 

language and literacy 

development have on teachers' 

knowledge and classroom 

practice, compared to 

coursework alone and 

"business as usual," in both 

center-based and home-based 

settings? 

Participants were stratified by setting (center-based, 

home-based) and then randomly assigned to one of 

three groups. Group 1 received a three-credit 

course in early language and literacy at their local 

community college. Group 2 received the threecredit course plus ongoing coaching. Group 3 

received neither coursework nor coaching (control), 

with the understanding that professional 

development opportunities would be available the 

following year. Pre/post measures of teacher 

knowledge and teacher practice were collected. 

The study started out with 304 sites (168 centers, 136 home-based), but there 

was 4.3 percent attrition, such that the final sample was 291 sites (177 

centers, 114 home-based) across four Michigan cities: Detroit, Flint, Grand 

Rapids and Lansing. The participants were distributed proportionally by city, 

ethnicity, and experience across the three study groups (Group 1, 2, and 3).

This study claims to be the first that examines empirically a coordinated approach to professional 

development (that is, combining coursework with ongoing coaching). This study is also noteworthy 

in that it examines professional development in both center-based and home-based settings. 

Although this study clearly demonstrates that coursework plus coaching obtains greater effects on 

teacher practice than coursework alone or “business as usual,” it does not rule out the possibility 

that equivalent gains in teacher practice could be obtained with coaching alone.

O'Connor, 

Fulmer, 

Harty, and 

Bell (2005)

Can extensive PD to teachers 

and intensive instruction to 

students help to reduce reading 

difficulties for students in the 

early grades (K-3)? 

Longitudinal lagged design. Teachers implemented 

changes in cohorts over four years of the study, and 

control data were collected in the first year from the 

second and third graders in the same schools who 

did not participate in the intervention. Only 

students and teachers in the first cohorts during the 

first year of data collection are reported in this 

paper. During the first year of the study, 

kindergarten and first grade teachers received PD, 

but only the kindergartners received additional 

intervention provided by the research team. 

Children were followed through Grade 3. 

Principals and all general education (n=16), remedial (n=2), special education 

(n=2), and speech teachers (n=2) in two schools. Students included 103 

kindergartners and 103 first graders in the two schools at base year. Attrition 

by the end of Year 4 of the study resulted in 90 experimental students 

longitudinally. The control group was 101 students in Grade 2 and 102 

students in Grade 3 at Base year. School 1 was in the Northeast and served 

primarily low SES. Majority of school was white. School 2 was universityaffiliated laboratory school. 

The authors note a potential confound with test practice: the children in the experimental classrooms 

had more language assessments than did the control group children. The authors acknowledge that 

their design would have been strengthened if they had conducted language measurements of the 

control group on the same schedule as during the treatment years. The authors also note that there 

is no way of knowing whether the teachers will sustain the changes in classroom practice beyond the 

time of the intervention. That is, sustainability was not assessed in this longitudinal study. 

115 Table A-1a. Language and Literacy Studies: Methodology—Continued Continues next page
Study Research Questions Research Design Sample General Comments

Podhajski and Nathan (2005)

Does the Building Blocks for Literacy child care provider training program improve children's literacy skills? 

The Building Blocks for Literacy Training program followed recommendations from the National Research Council, and included training and mentorship components focusing on strategies for vocabulary development through book reading; phonological awareness; and relationships between speech and print (i.e., how sounds link to letters).

67 providers from 44 child care settings (both center-based and family child care) participated in the training. 88 children were in classrooms of participating providers, as well as a sample of 13 control group children. The rate of attrition was 22 percent. Child care providers were given free tuition, overnight accommodations, meals, 15 continuing education units, instructional material, and books and blocks for their practice.

Pence, Justice, and Wiggins (2008)

To what extent do teachers receiving training in a language-focused curriculum differ from teachers who do not receive this training in terms of instructional processes and activity contexts? To what extent do teachers who have obtained training in a language-focused curriculum adhere to the curriculum for the entire academic year? What is the quality of program delivery as measured by treatment teachers' reported quality of program delivery and comfort with implementation?

Classrooms were blocked according to funding source. From these blocks, seven were randomly assigned to the treatment condition (implement an experimental curriculum) and seven to the comparison condition (maintain existing preschool curricula).

Fourteen teachers from public preschool programs serving at-risk children in two counties of a mid-Atlantic state were selected for this study. Of these teachers, six were in Head Start classrooms (70 children age 3-5), six were in Title I preschool classrooms (100 4-year old children), and two were in public prekindergarten classrooms (27 4-year old children).

This article primarily focuses on the fidelity of preschool tecurriculum.

Roskos, Rosemary, and Varner (2006)

How can a case study of one state's early childhood credentialing programs provide

insight into the degree of alignment of professional development with scientifically based reading research and with the goals for child outcomes in reading and writing?

Nine case examples of professional education curricula in CDA, associate's degree, and bachelor's

degree programs within Ohio were examined. The literacy-related course work within and between programs were analyzed for external, horizontal, and vertical alignment. External alignment refers tocongruency or agreement between a course of study for early educators and the scientific knowledge base in language and early literacy. Horizontal alignment is characterized by markers of consistency, balance, integration of knowledge, skills, and dispositions in the scope or range of instruction. Vertical alignment involves lining up essential concepts, skills, and dispositions to be learned and developing learning trajectories for educators. 

A total of 71 higher education institutions in Ohio were identified that offered professional development to early childhood educators. From these, nine early educator preparation programs were randomly sampled for further analysis. Eight of the nine institutions agreed to participate. The final sample included 9 case examples from the eight institutions (three CDA, three associate's degree, and 3 bachelor's degree programs). 

The authors suggest that the "gold standard" for professionapedagogy, although based in scientific knowledge on early reading instruction, may be too demanding, too unrealistic, program in the state to achieve. 

116

Table A-1a. Language and Literacy Studies: Methodology—Continued
Study Research Questions Research Design Sample General Comments

Wasik and Bond (2001)

What are the effects of interactive book reading groups on children's receptive and expressive vocabulary development?

Two teachers were randomly assigned to the intervention condition, and two were randomly assigned to the control condition. The professional development portion lasted for four weeks, while the intervention to the children continued for another 11 weeks (total 15 weeks; not consecutive).The intervention consisted of training teachers in interactive book reading techniques for large groups

(not one-on-one) and book reading extension activities. Books and materials for supporting activities were also provided. The control teachers also received the books, but not the added instruction on how to do interactive book reading in large groups. 

One-hundred and twenty-seven 4-year-olds from low-income families; final participation was 121 children (61 in intervention group; 60 in control group). All children attended a Title I early learning center in Baltimore, MD. 95 percent of the children at the center are eligible for free or reduced lunch, and 94 percent are African-American. Children from eight classrooms participated (four teachers, each with a morning and afternoon class).

The authors do not discuss any limitations to their study. Howas no information provided on the fidelity of implementatclassrooms/teachers. Also, there was no information on the data collection or child assessment. Furthermore, there was assessors and classroom observers were blind to the treatmeall of these issues may have effects on the outcomes of the s

Wasik, Bond, and Hindman (2006)

Does an intensive language and literacy intervention (designed by Wasik & Bond, 2001) have a similar effect in settings comprising Head Start teachers and primarily disadvantaged children? Can training influence how teachers

talk to children? Can the impact of the intervention be generalized when larger samples of teachers are involved? 

Two Head Start centers were randomly assigned to either intervention or control conditions. The control center was given a list of books used in the intervention sites and a stipend to purchase the books as well as additional titles. Order forms indicated that all but 3 of the books used in the intervention were purchased by the control school, and observations confirmed that the books were used at the site by the control teachers. The intervention site received training as well as books, props, and lesson plans. 

Two Head Start centers located in high-poverty neighborhoods. Within these two schools, 16 teachers participated (10 in trhe intervention group, six in the control group). The teachers varied in their educational attainment and years of experience teaching. There were 139 children in the intervention and 68 in the control group (mean age in the fall was three years, 10 months); 99 percent of the children were African-American. 

This is a replication of Wasik & Bond (2001) in a Head Sta

training has been modified for use with teachers with limitelanguage and literacy development. Although it was stated was conducted by an experienced preschool teacher, it is nothis study (it may have been the authors of the study themsestate "training teachers in why they should be doing someththem what they need to do" (p. 72). Unfortunately, the auththe "why" was conveyed in their training. 

117

Table A-1a. Language and Literacy Studies: Methodology—Continued
Study Research Questions Research Design Sample General Comments

Whitehurst, 

Arnold, 

Epstein, 

Angell, 

Smith, and 

Fischel 

(1994), "A 

Picture Book 

Reading 

Intervention 

in Day Care 

and Home 

for Children 

from LowIncome 

Families"

1) Can adults with low to 

moderate levels of education be 

trained to use dialogic reading 

with groups of children? 2) 

Will this practice have effects 

on children? 3) Is training 

parents in dialogic reading, in 

addition to exposure to 

dialogic reading in the 

classroom, more effective than 

exposure to dialogic reading in 

the classroom alone? 

Teachers and parents were instructed (via 

videotape) in the "dialogic reading" technique, a 

way to engage children as active participants in 

joint bookreading. Children were pre-tested on 

standardized language measures, then randomly 

assigned to one of three conditions: school reading, 

school plus home reading, or control. Post-testing 

occurred immediately after the six-week 

intervention. Follow-up testing occurred six months 

after post-testing. 

Seventy-three 3-year-olds from low-income families. About half were black, 

a quarter were Hispanic, and a quarter white. The children attended five daycare centers in Suffolk County, N.Y.

Compliance with the intervention is needed in order to achieve results. Having dialogic reading in 

both home and school does not appear to be beneficial beyond having it in school alone (across 

multiple assessments), perhaps because of variability in the amount of reading occurring at home. 

Results were not robust across multiple assessments; positive effects were found for only two of the 

four assessments. Furthermore, positive effects were not persistent; only one of the four 

assessments showed a continued significant effect of the intervention at six months postintervention. It is important to note that substantial variability was found in the fidelity with which 

teachers followed the reading and activities schedule in the classrooms. Also, there was substantial 

variability in the amount that children who were in the "school plus home" condition were read to at 

home. Nearly 25 percent of the children who were available at posttest had left their centers before 

follow-up testing (six months later). 

Whitehurst, 

Epstein, 

Angell, 

Payne, 

Crone, and 

Fischel 

(1994), 

"Outcomes 

of an 

Emergent 

Literacy 

Intervention 

in Head 

Start"

Will an intervention consisting 

of dialogic reading both in the 

classroom and at home, as well 

as participation in a phonemic 

awareness curriculum, produce 

positive results on measures of 

receptive and expressive 

language, writing, print 

concepts, and linguistic 

awareness?

Fifteen Head Start classrooms were randomly 

assigned to the intervention group or the control 

group. The intervention consisted of two 

components. The first component was training in 

dialogic reading via videotape for both parents and 

teachers at the beginning of the school year. 

Lending libraries were established for the families. 

The second component was a phonemic awareness 

curriculum implemented in the classrooms for the 

second half of the school year. Children were pretested at the beginning of the school year and posttested at the end of the school year by doctoral 

students.

One-hundred and sixy-seven 4-year-olds attending four Head Start centers in 

Suffolk County, N.Y. 46 percent were white, 45 percent were black, 8 percent 

were Hispanic, and 1 percent were Asian.

Results were only found for two of the four factors. While the Writing and Print Concepts factors 

were made up of measures of emergent literacy, the other two factors (Language and Linguistic 

Awareness) are likely also important for literacy development. In addition, the intervention 

consisted of two components; it is not possible to determine from this study if one component 

produced the positive results for Writing and Print Concepts or if both components are necessary.

Whitehurst, 

Zevenberege

n, Crone, 

Schultz, 

Velting, and 

Fischel 

(1999)

Will an intervention consisting 

of dialogic reading (a way to 

engage children as active 

participants in joint 

bookreading) both in the 

classroom and at home, as well 

as participation in a phonemic 

awareness curriculum, produce 

long-term results for children's 

reading development through 

the end of second grade?

For the original study, 15 classrooms were 

randomly assigned to the intervention group or the 

control group. For the replication cohort, 22 

classrooms were randomly assigned to the 

intervention or control group. The intervention 

consisted of training in dialogic reading (a way to 

engage children as active participants in joint 

bookreading) via videotape for both parents and 

teachers, as well as the implementation of a 

phonemic awareness curriculum in the classrooms. 

Children were pre-tested at the beginning of the 

Head Start year and post-tested at the end of the 

year. All children were followed up at the end of 

kindergarten, the end of first grade, and again at the 

end of second grade.

The study included two samples. First, 127 children from the original cohort 

of 167 Head Start children in Suffolk County, N.Y. were followed up. 

Second, a replication cohort was studied; this cohort consisted of 153 Head 

Start children attending different Head Start Centers than the original cohort 

but in the same county. Of the total sample of 280 children, 43 percent were 

black, 33 percent were white, 18 percent were Hispanic, and 6 percent were 

"other." 

The authors note that the reason effects of the intervention were not found for reading scores at the 

end of the first and second grades might be that the intervention focused on interactions with picture 

books and phonological awareness (e.g., finding objects that begin with a certain sound). They 

suggest that for an intervention to have long-term effects on reading skills, it might need to focus on 

pre-reading skills such as letter recognition and letter-sound matching. Also, authors found that 

children's gains in reading skills from year to year were significantly affected by the characteristics 

of the educational settings, suggesting that learning might depend more on the educational 

environment than the skills that each child brings to it.

118 Table A-1a. Language and Literacy Studies: Methodology—Continued Continues next page
Study Research Questions Research Design Sample General Comments

Zevenbergen, 

Whitehurst, 

and 

Zevernbergen 

(2003)

What is the effect of a dialogic 

reading intervention on the 

depth of children's 

understanding of narrative? 

Three full-day and 13 half-day classrooms 

participated in the study and were randomly 

assigned to intervention and control conditions. The 

intervention consisted of a 30-week dialogic reading 

program at school and home and a 16-week 

phonemic awareness program conducted at school. 

One-hundred and twenty-three children who attended preschool at four Head 

Start centers on Long Island, N.Y. during the 1992-1993 school year. 71 

children participated in the intervention condition, and 52 children were 

members of the control group. 

This is a component of the study described in Whitehurst et al. (1994) and Whitehurst et al. (1999).

Yaden, Tam, 

Madrigal, 

Brassell, 

Massa, 

Altamirano, 

and 

Armendariz 

(2000)

What kinds of Englishlanguage and literacy support 

can be provided by parents, 

extended family members, and 

child-care center employees in 

a primarily Spanish-speaking 

community?

This was a quasi-experimental study that followed 

three consecutive cohorts of 4-year-olds as they 

move from child care center into kindergarten and 

elementary school. The focus of this study was on 

the second cohort, which got the full dosage of the 

year-long intervention and is currently in 

kindergarten. The first cohort of 4-year-olds 

received less than six months of the intervention and 

is being used as a comparison group. The 

characteristics of the other comparison groups are 

not reported, except that they attended other 

preschool programs. The intervention consisted of 

three components. The first was providing a two- to 

three-hour morning language and literacy program. 

The second component was providing in-classroom 

support and ongoing inservices regarding emergent 

literacy theory, activities, and developmental growth 

in reading and writing for child-care agency 

teachers and paraprofessionals. The third 

component, available to all families served by the 

center, was establishing a book-lending library for 

the families and offering periodic parent workshops 

on reading at home. 

Fifty-five 4-year-olds attending a comprehensive child care center in 

downtown Los Angeles, Calif. No characteristics of the study participants 

(beyond age) were reported. However, for the center as a whole, over 98.7 

percent of families have incomes below the poverty line, and over 60 percent 

of families consist of single mothers with two to three children. The majority 

of children in the center are Latino, and Spanish is the primary language of 

communication in the classrooms. 

The information on sample and comparison group characteristics, study design, measurement 

characteristics, and outcomes is all very sketchy in this article. No details are provided about the 

timing of testing or statistical analyses conducted; no p-values are provided. It is unclear which 

component(s) of the intervention were responsible for the positive outcomes identified for the 

intervention group. 

Table A-1a. Language and Literacy Studies: Methodology—Continued 119
Study

Adger, 

Hoyle, and 

Dickinson 

(2004)

Assel, 

Landry, 

Swank, and 

Gunnewig 

(2007)

Mode of Professional 

Development Delivery

PD Linkages with 

Infrastructure

Temporal Aspects of 

Professional Development

Participant Outreach Content Area PD Content 

Grounded in Research

Description of Content/Curriculum

Two full-day Saturday sessions 

and eight three-hour late 

afternoon sessions delivered from 

November 2000 to March 2001. 

Providers served lowincome children. All 

participants were 

teachers or 

administrators of Head 

Start programs in the 

New England area. 

Prior research indicates that 

achievement levels in 

kindergarten and first grade are 

highly related to later success, 

and that the achievement gap in 

literacy-related skills precedes 

children's entry into school. 

This is the impetus for early 

literacy instruction in 

preschool. Researchers in the 

sociocognitive tradition (e.g., 

Vygotsky) believe learning 

occurs within dynamic, social 

interactions. This is the basis 

for a discourse analysis of the 

professional conversation 

within the LEEP training 

sessions. 

Sessions focused on the following topics: 

children's construction of literacy, oral language, 

awareness of sound, connecting sound and print, 

emergent writing, book reading (two sessions), 

language learning through curriculum, 

environments for enhancing language and 

literacy, and sustaining teachers' learning. 

The LEEP training was delivered in 10 sessions. Each 

session began with a 45-minute Professional Conversation 

(participants discussed a set of questions in groups of two 

to five), followed by approximately two hours of 

instruction (including demonstrations, discussion, and a 

short break), and a follow-up professional conversation 

and planning period. 

Taught as a fourcredit academic 

course by Head Start 

technical assistance 

providers for the New 

England region.

Literacy 

development, 

especially emergent 

literacy. 

Both curricula focused on building skills in letter 

knowledge, phonological awareness, language, 

and motivation to read. Differences across the 

curricula included a greater focus in Let's Begin 

on letter knowledge and early phonological skills. 

Both contain home components that contain 

materials for parents. The Let's Begin curriculum 

has 25 thematic units divided across seven 

domains: (1) Oral Language and Listening; (2) 

Alphabetic and Story Knowledge and Writing; 

(3) Science and Math; (4) Personal/Social 

Development; (5) Large and Small Motor Skills; 

(6) Art and Music; (7) Reach the Home. The 

Doors to Discovery has a major focus on the 

development of vocabulary and receptive and 

expressive language development. It was 

designed to encourage children's literacy across 5 

areas: (1) oral language; (2) phonological 

awareness; (3) Concepts of Print; (4) Alphabet 

knowledge; (5) Writing and comprehension. 

Teachers participated in four days of training by the 

respective publishing companies, specific to the curricula 

they taught. Training occurred in small groups and 

included instruction in all content areas. Research staff 

also attended the trainings. The training was "learnercentered and knowledge-based", building upon what 

teachers knew and were already practicing in their 

classrooms. Curriculum mentors supported target teachers 

in the selected classrooms. They provided ongoing 

technical assistance to teachers for about 1.5 hours two 

times a month. During visits, mentors assisted with lesson 

planning, room arrangement, demonstrations, curriculum 

fidelity, classroom schedules, and provided assistance 

around behavioral issues and side-by-side coaching. 

Mentors completed Curriculum Fidelity Checklists three 

times during the course of the year. The checklists were 

also administered to non-mentored teachers by research 

staff. All teachers received feedback on how well they were 

implementing the curriculum three times after the 

completion of the fidelity checklist. 

Administrators 

received a 

comprehensive 

summary report 

surrounding the 

language and literacy 

skills of the children 

enrolled in their 

programs. The senior 

research team met 

monthly with the head 

administrators of the 

program. 

Four days of teacher training 

occurred prior to implementing 

the curriculum. Target teachers 

met with mentors two times a 

months for 1.5 hours. Research 

staff met monthly with 

administrators. The curriculum 

was implemented across the 

school year. The Fidelity 

Implementation Checklist was 

completed three times during the 

year, as was the CIRCLE 

measure. Pre-intervention 

assessments occurred at the 

beginning of the school year, and 

post-intervention assessments at 

the end of the year. 

Title I and Head Start 

programs were 

included in the study. 

There were differences 

based on site (Title I, 

Head Start, universal 

pre-K) in ethnic 

diversity. The Head 

Start and Title I sites 

had a large percentage 

of Hispanic children 

(both over 50 percent), 

many of whom were 

English Language 

Learners. 

Language and 

literacy skills. 

The authors report that 

instructional approached used 

in both of the curricula have 

been shown to be effective in 

prior research.

120 Table A-1b. Language and Literacy Studies: Features of Professional 

Development
Study

Baker and 

Smith (1999)

Byrne and 

FieldingBarnsley 

(1995)

Dickinson 

and Brady 

(2006), 

Example 1: 

TeacherResearcher 

Pilot Project

Mode of Professional 

Development Delivery

PD Linkages with 

Infrastructure

Temporal Aspects of 

Professional Development

Participant Outreach Content Area PD Content 

Grounded in Research

Description of Content/Curriculum

The PD aimed to link new instructional practices to 

underlying concepts that support their use. The researchers 

(a) provided a rationale and theoretical basis for proposed 

innovations in literacy instruction, (b) demonstrated 

specific classroom strategies (and provided instructional 

materials), (c) provided practice and feedback on the use of 

new teaching techniques via coaching and meetings with 

teachers, and (d) provided ongoing support as teachers 

work to develop expertise in new teaching behaviors via 

coaching and observations. The researchers met regularly 

with teachers individually and in small and large groups, 

conducted informal and formal interviews with the 

teachers, recorded classroom activities in field notes, and 

provided teachers with a rating scale to indicate the degree 

of satisfaction with various components of the intervention 

and process. Teachers helped decide on and plan 

intervention activities. Non-intervention teachers were 

included in group discussions, to inform them of the 

activities and to promote sustainability as children move

 to older grades. 

The principals of the 

schools were involved 

in the PD 

intervention, as were 

Title I general 

education teachers 

and English Language 

Development 

teachers. 

Formal meetings to plan the 

intervention were held once a 

month during both the 

Implementation and 

Sustainability years at Glendale, 

but were not held on a regular 

basis at Lincoln during the 

Sustainability year. Classroom 

observations to assess fidelity of 

implementation were done twice 

per month from Nov until May. 

Information on the timing of 

informal meetings and small/large 

group meetings was not provided 

in the article.

Children at risk for 

reading difficulties in 

elementary school.

Early reading. Yes. Appendix A of the article lists examples of 

researcher-developed content used at both 

schools. References with asterisks in the 

Reference section of the article note articles 

shared with teachers regarding beginning reading 

instruction and phonological awareness. 

Preschool teachers were given the Sound Foundations 

manual and advised to "work from the program's manual in 

whatever way best fitted the school's regimens, consistent 

with the aim of increasing phonemic awareness in the 

children." They were also given a kit that included large 

color posters depicting scenes with objects beginning or 

ending with the same phoneme. The kit also contained 

games, worksheets, and an audiotape, all designed to teach 

the concept of sound sharing among words to preschoolers. 

 In the main study, investigators 

worked with children in small 

groups of 4 to 6 children for 

approximately half an hour per 

week for 12 weeks. In this 

supplemental study, two of the 

schools used the program for 12 

weeks, while the third used it for 

six weeks. All three teachers 

worked with large groups of 

children (average = 20) and 

individual children may have 

received a smaller dosage, due to 

absences. All three schools used 

the color posters heavily, but two 

teachers did not address final 

sounds at all. The use of the 

games and other kit materials 

varied by school. No information 

was provided on how much time 

per week teachers devoted to 

these lessons. 

Phonemic 

awareness.

Phonemic awareness is 

important for literacy 

development. 

Instructors (or teachers) spend a half hour a week 

training children to classify items on posters, 

worksheets, and games on the basis of shared 

sounds (either sounds shared at the beginning of 

words, or at the end of words). Children were 

taught 12 phonemes in both initial-word position 

and final-word position. In the experimental 

condition, instructors/researchers worked with 

small groups of four to six children that allowed 

for intensive teaching, with close monitoring of 

individual children. 

Teachers participated in group discussions, sharing 

observations of their own language interactions with 

children and discussing them. Researchers participated in 

discussions and provided readings to support providers' 

understanding of children's language development.

It is unclear how long the 

sessions lasted, how often they 

were, or how long the program 

continued. 

Because it was a Head 

Start setting, most 

children were from lowincome families. 

Language 

development. 

Research-based readings were 

provided to participating 

teachers and teachers had 

ongoing contact with 

knowledgeable researchers.

Not didactic, but the project focused on teacherchild language interactions.

121 Table A-1b. Language and Literacy Studies: Features of Professional 

Development—Continued

Continues next page
Study

Dickinson 

and Brady 

(2006), 

Example 2: 

Literacy 

Environment 

Enrichment 

Program 

(LEEP)

Dickinson 

and Brady 

(2006), 

Example 3: 

TechnologyEnhanced 

Literacy 

Environment 

Enrichment 

Program (TLEEP)

Dickinson 

and Brady 

(2006), 

Example 4: 

Striving to 

Achieve 

Reading 

Success 

(STARSLEEP)

Mode of Professional 

Development Delivery

PD Linkages with 

Infrastructure

Temporal Aspects of 

Professional Development

Participant Outreach Content Area PD Content 

Grounded in Research

Description of Content/Curriculum

The two three-day sessions consisted of discussions, 

demonstrations and lectures, and hands-on activities. 

Between sessions, participants applied course content in 

"carefully sequenced" assignments.

Supervisors and 

teachers were 

required to attend 

trainings as a team, 

which facilitated onsite support for 

teachers implementing 

new practices. Some 

assignments were 

completed with 

supervisors. Course is 

also credit-bearing.

Two intensive three-day sessions, 

separated by three months. 

Children's language 

and literacy 

development, 

broadly defined.

Yes. Participants learned about children's language 

and literacy development, book reading 

strategies, selection of books, use of thematic 

approaches to instruction, strategies for 

phonemic awareness, etc. 

T-LEEP began and ended with day-long face-to-face 

sessions. The first session established relationships among 

trainees, oriented them to the interactive television (ITV) 

technology, the Literacy Village (training website with 

literacy resources and discussion area). Eight intermediary 

sessions included Professional Conversations (facilitator 

guided activities to explore topics and discuss homework; 

45 min.); ITV sessions (facilitator guided participants in 

analysis and discussions, and utilized videotaped vignettes, 

work samples, case material, etc.; two hours); and 

Professional Collaborations (face-to-face session of 

supervisor-teacher teams to plan implementation of 

assignments; 45 min.). The final session wove together 

course themes and included discussion of teachers' learning 

and connection with early learning standards. 

As in LEEP, teachersupervisor teams 

participated together. 

Over a six-month span, T-LEEP 

supervisor-teacher teams 

participated in 10 sessions, 

spaced two to three weeks apart. 

The first and last sessions were 

day-long, and the intermediate 

sessions, using distance education 

technology, were half-day 

sessions.

Language & 

Literacy 

Development.

Yes. Explicit discussion of oral language, emergent 

writing, and phonological awareness.

Teachers and supervisors participate in three two-day 

sessions learning about children's language and literacy 

development, and discussing strategies to support it. 

Assignments are given during the five week breaks between 

sessions.

Supervisor 

component of LEEP 

program strengthened, 

with supervisors 

taught to analyze 

teachers' language 

and literacy practices, 

and improve the 

quality of interactions 

with teachers. 

Training integrated 

into professional 

development lattice 

by collaborating with 

Connecticut Charts-ACourse (CCAC). 

Three two-day sessions, most 

often Fridays and Saturdays. 

Each session is spaced five weeks 

apart.

Most children are from 

low-income 

backgrounds.

Children's language 

and literacy 

development, 

broadly defined.

Yes. Not specified. 

122 Table A-1b. Language and Literacy Studies: Features of Professional 

Development—Continued

Continues next page
Study

Dickinson 

and Brady 

(2006), 

Example 5: 

ProgramDelivered 

Literacy InService 

Training (PDLIT)

Dickinson 

and Caswell 

(2007)

Foorman and 

Moats 

(2004) 

Mode of Professional 

Development Delivery

PD Linkages with 

Infrastructure

Temporal Aspects of 

Professional Development

Participant Outreach Content Area PD Content 

Grounded in Research

Description of Content/Curriculum

A single staff member, trained on the training materials 

and who has helped develop them to some extent, provides 

in-center in-service training to all center staff. There are 

eight sessions of four hours each. The center may keep the 

materials for future use.

All members of a 

child care center's 

staff participated, so 

staff members could 

provide ongoing 

support for each 

others' efforts. Also, 

because training 

materials were basic 

(overhead 

transparencies, 

videotapes), and 

because training was 

given by a staff 

member, the training 

and associated 

practices could 

become 

institutionalized.

The training consisted of eight 

four-hour modules. 

Children's language 

and literacy 

development, 

broadly defined.

Yes. Not clearly described.

The intervention was delivered by the regional Head Start 

Training and Technical Assistance system in New 

England. LEEP was given as a 45 hour course and 

participants received four credits for participation. It was 

delivered in two three-day sessions (in late Oct. and early 

Nov. and late Feb) with support for applications provided 

in between sessions. Sessions included lectures, videotapes 

of classroom activity and work samples, as well as 

opportunities for discussion. Participants also read books 

about emergent literacy and teachers completed four 

performance-based assignments. Supervisors also attended 

the training and completed a one-credit practicum that 

focused on issues related to supervision. Instructors made 

site visits to meet with supervisors to analyze the needs of 

teachers, plan feedback, and evaluate the effectiveness of 

supervisors' work with teachers. Supervisors and teachers 

were also supported by telephone and email 

correspondence. 

Programs were 

required to send 

teams to the LEEP 

training that included 

a supervisor and one 

to three teachers. 

Supervisors were 

asked to help teachers 

to adopt the 

strategies, provide onsite support and 

sustain changes after 

the training. 

Researchers recruited participants 

over a two-year period, and both 

groups of teachers (year 1 and 

year 2) are included in the 

analyses. Teachers and 

supervisors participated in two 

three-day trainings lasting 45 

hours (one in late Oct. and early 

Nov., and one in late Feb.). 

During the intervention period, 

instructors made site-visits to 

meet with supervisors. Pre-test 

data was collected in October 

before the LEEP course began, 

and post-test data was collected 

in April and May after the 

completion of the course. 

Children's language 

and literacy 

development

Yes. The goal of the course was to help teachers build 

knowledge about literacy development, to employ 

the knowledge, and to learn to use appropriate 

classroom strategies. Participants read books 

about emergent literacy and teachers completed 

four performance-based assignments. Strands of 

research from which the curriculum emerged 

include emergent reading and writing, greater 

awareness of the sound structure of language, 

oral language skills, and curriculum 

development. 

Training consisted of an introductory summer workshop of 

two to four days; two to three three-credit courses each 

year focusing on foundation concepts in reading; monthly 

in-class visits including demonstration lessons and 

consulting; semi-annual meetings for principals and 

"school-based change facilitators"; and regular, informal 

contact with project staff. Course focused on the interplay 

between knowledge / research and practice. Teachers were 

also taught to use reading, word, and spelling assessments 

to flag children with difficulty.

The intervention was ongoing 

throughout the school year, and 

consisted in multi-day kickoff 

workshops, courses throughout 

the year, and monthly site visits. 

Reading and 

language 

development. 

Yes. The professional development fostered teachers' 

skill at teaching phonological awareness, reading, 

spelling, vocabulary, comprehension, and 

writing. 

123 Table A-1b. Language and Literacy Studies: Features of Professional 

Development—Continued

Continues next page
Study

Fountain, 

Cosgrove, 

and Wood 

(2008)

Gettinger and 

Stoiber 

(2007)

Mode of Professional 

Development Delivery

PD Linkages with 

Infrastructure

Temporal Aspects of 

Professional Development

Participant Outreach Content Area PD Content 

Grounded in Research

Description of Content/Curriculum

The ELLM literacy curriculum was implemented in 

addition to the existing curricula in the classrooms. 

Training included a two day summer training session, 

weekly classroom visits by ELLM literacy coaches, 

monthly site-specific literacy team meetings, and quarterly 

teacher get-togethers. These trainings focused on the 

ELLM curriculum, ELLM learning materials, and 

strategies to help children acquire important emergent 

literacy skills.

None reported ELLM training and support were 

ongoing throughout the school 

year.

Florida-UNF 

researchers 

intentionally recruited 

low-performing 

schools (with scores of 

D or F based on the 

Florida 

Comprehensive 

Assessment Test 

[FCAT])

Early literacy 

development. 

ELLM is a literacy-focused curriculum 

including: curriculum and literacy building 

blocks, assessment for instructional 

improvement, professional development for 

literacy coaches and teachers, family 

involvement, and collaborative partnerships. 

The EMERGE professional development component is 

designed to improve teachers' understanding of language 

and literacy and their application of evidence-based 

practices. EMERGE teachers participate in monthly threehour professional development training sessions to guide 

them in: (1) implementing instructional components, (2) 

conducting monthly progress monitoring, (3) using 

information about children's performance to inform their 

instruction and plan small group instruction, and (4) 

designing high-quality literacy environments. The second 

type of professional development is on-site early literacy 

coaching and mentoring, and collaborative planning with 

the literacy coach for two hours every week. The 

EMERGE literacy coach has an advanced degree in early 

childhood education and certification as an early literacy 

coach. The objectives of the coaching are to work one-onone with teachers and children; monitor implementation 

integrity through observations; and provide scaffolded, 

individualized support for teachers. 

None reported. Teachers participate in monthly 

three-hour professional 

development training sessions. 

They also engage in on-site early 

literacy coaching for two hours 

per week. 

The sample includes 

90 percent children 

from low-income 

families. 

Language and 

literacy. 

This program is based on 

several comprehensive reports 

of children's early literacy 

skills including: Teaching Our 

Youngest (Early ChildhoodHead Start Task Force, 2002), 

Preventing Reading Difficulties 

in Young Children (Snow et 

al., 1998), Teaching Children 

to Read (National Reading 

Panel, 2000), and Put Reading 

First: The Research Building 

Blocks for Teaching Children 

to Read (Ambruster et al., 

2003). 

EMERGE has the following key components: (1) 

scientifically based early literacy curriculum, 

instruction, and activities provided at increasing 

levels of intensity across a three-tiered 

intervention hierarchy; (2) screening, monthly 

progress monitoring, and outcome assessment to 

guide instructional decision making and identify 

children who require a more intensive focus on 

early literacy skills; (3) high-quality, literacy-rich 

classroom environments; and (d) ongoing 

professional development combined with literacy 

coaching and collaborative planning. See Mode 

of Professional Development Delivery column for 

more specific information about PD content. 

124 Table A-1b. Language and Literacy Studies: Features of Professional 

Development—Continued

Continues next page
Study

Jackson, Larzelere, St. Clair, Corr, Fichter, and Egertson (2006)Justice, Mashburn, Hamre, and Pianta (2008)

Mode of Professional 

Development Delivery

PD Linkages with 

Infrastructure

Temporal Aspects of 

Professional Development

Participant Outreach Content Area PD Content 

Grounded in Research

Description 

ECEs participated in a 15-week HUR course to promote early literacy practices for children birth-5. The goals wereto strengthen teachers' practices and improve children's language and literacy skills. The national satellite broadcast of HUR included 44 hours of live, professional development and was available for in-service and college credit. Learning objectives were established for seven content areas and each areas consisted of five hours of training. The broadcast allowed for dial-in questions, reflection on practice, and discussion of content. An interactive website provided further support and collaboration among participants. A smaller group of HUR participants chose to participate in the mentoring component. Mentors participated in a one-day training thatemphasized mentoring practices. Follow-up consultation was also provided to mentors. Each mentor met with their matched participant four to six times for two to four hours per session over two months. Sessions were focused on helping to meet ECEs goals, based on the mentee's classroom ratings on the ECERS-R. 

None reported. Fifteen-week 44 hour training for 

ECEs. For HUR+ mentoring participants, four to six two to four hour sessions over a twomonth period. 

Seven communities with the highest poverty concentration in Nebraska were selected. The sample included 25.2 percent of children who spoke Spanish at home. 

Children's literacy skills.

The HUR curriculum was based on the early literacy research synthesis of the National Reading Council (Snow et al., 1998). 

Course content areaassessment, talkingand learning. 

At the start of the year, teachers completed a two-day professional development workshop that begain with a 1.5 hour discussion of quality professional development. A two-hour session described six key areas of language and literacy development which focused on the areas that would be emphasized in the curriculum they would be implementing. The areas were defined and then research indicating their importance was discussed. At the end of the session, teachers received guidance on how to create a weekly lesson plan that incorporated each area of the curriculum. Additionally topics included child assessment, using the curriculum's website, and building teacher-child relationships. The authors note that discussion of language and literacy instruction was a minor component of the workshop. 

None reported. Teachers participated in one twoday workshop at the beginning of 

the school year. 

All participating classrooms were designed specificially to serve 4-year-olds exhibiting social and/or economic risks. Risk factors include: (1) poverty, (2) homelessness, (3) parents or guardians are school dropouts, have limited education or are chronically ill, (4) family stress, (5) developmental problems, (6) limited English proficiency.

Language and literacy 

Review of research on highquality literacy and langauge instruction and child outcomes

The curriculum impPartner--Language designed to provide langauge and litera

scope and sequence language and literaalphabet knowledgeand linguistic concepragmatics and soclesson plans includiaddressing each of scripts, and (3) suppstorybooks, postersmanipulatives for daccess to the websiquality implementa

125

Table A-1b. Language and Literacy Studies: Features of Professional Development—Continued
Study

Justice, 

Pence, and 

Wiggins 

(2008)

Landry 

(2002)

Landry, 

Assel, 

Gunnewig, 

and Swank 

(2008)

Mode of Professional 

Development Delivery

PD Linkages with 

Infrastructure

Temporal Aspects of 

Professional Development

Participant Outreach Content Area PD Content 

Grounded in Research

Description of Content/Curriculum

Five of the seven teachers assigned to receive LFC training 

completed a three-day training workshop on LFC 

implementation at the start of the school year. This 

included background information on language 

development. The two remaining teachers attended one-onone make-up session. Follow-up training sessions were 

then held throughout the school year. All teachers 

maintained a Professional Development log throughout the 

year to evaluate the extent of PD experienced by treatment 

and control group teachers.

None reported The initial training days took 

place in August, 2003. The 

follow-up sessions were 

conducted in November 2003 and 

January and February 2004.

Head Start sites were 

recruited.

Language 

acquisition

Language-Focused Curriculum was designed for 

use with children with language limitations, 

including children with language impairment, 

children from disadvantaged backgrounds, and 

English-language learners. It emphasizes the 

daily inclusion of high-quality teacher-child 

conversations within teacher-led and child-led 

interactions.

Teachers were trained in four-day, small-group, interactive 

workshops on specific ways to teach early literacy skills 

including language. They were taught information on 

separate literacy and language domains of development, 

and activities such as story extenders, phonological 

awareness games, and interactive bookreading, to help 

children develop language skills. Workshops also included 

time for developing lesson plans with literacy objectives 

and role playing these lesson plans. Teachers also received 

weekly 1-hour in-class coaching and meetings with 

researchers about their progress. 

Four-day training was followed 

by regular weekly one-hour 

classroom visits by researchers. 

Children's early 

language and 

literacy skills 

Yes. The workshops included two-hour sessions on the 

following: 1) the six key essential responsive 

teaching practices; 2) language enrichment; 3) 

doing effective read alouds; 4) print and book 

awareness; 5) motivation to read; 6) phonological 

awareness; 7) letter knowledge and early word 

recognition; 8) written expression.

Teachers learning a new curriculum were given two days 

of training at the beginning of the pilot school year and 

three days of refresher training in the evaluation year. 

There was also one day of follow-up training in the pilot 

year.

None reported Two days of initial training and 

one day of follow-up training in 

2002, three refresher days in 

2003.

Children in Head Start 

and Title I schools 

were primarily low 

income.

Early literacy 

success.

Doors to Discovery is a curriculum based on the 

five areas identified by the International Reading 

Association and the National Association for the 

Education of Young Children as the foundation 

for early literacy success: oral language, 

phonological awareness, concepts of print, 

alphabet knowledge and writing, and 

comprehension. Let's Begin with the Letter 

People is a comprehensive curriculum through 

which literacy is integrated across several topic 

areas such as health and safety, science, art, 

mathematics, spatial concepts, and music, as well 

as development of large and small motor skills. 

The curriculum focuses on specific literacy and 

language skills including oral language, 

phonemic awareness, and letter knowledge.

126 Table A-1b. Language and Literacy Studies: Features of Professional 

Development—Continued

Continues next page
Study

Lonigan and 

Schatschneid

er (2008)

Landry, 

Swank, 

Smith, Assel, 

and 

Gunnewig 

(2006)

Mode of Professional 

Development Delivery

PD Linkages with 

Infrastructure

Temporal Aspects of 

Professional Development

Participant Outreach Content Area PD Content 

Grounded in Research

Description of Content/Curriculum

None mentioned. Each treatment control condition 

was provided training for four 

days in late July or early August. 

The first two days of this training 

were provided in a workshop 

setting and the last two in team 

planning activities. In addition to 

the initial training, all treatment 

group participants attended a 

curriculum-specific two-hour 

professional development meeting 

every other month. Finally, in 

half of the schools in which 

multiple classrooms were 

assigned to a treatment group, 

teachers were supported by a 

coach 8-10 hours per month.

None mentioned. emergent literacy, 

oral language, 

phonological 

sensitivity, print 

awareness, 

phonemic 

awareness, social, 

emotional, 

intellectual, 

aesthetic, and 

physical

The Open Court Reading PreK is research-based. No 

empirical support is specified 

for the other curriculum tested 

in this intervention.

The workshop portion of the initial training 

provided participants with an introduction to the 

curricula materials and opportunities for handson application. Bimonthly professional 

development meetings provided direction on 

curricula implementation and other topics. 

Coaching sessions, for those classrooms that 

received them, used demonstrations, feedback, 

and troubleshooting techniques to support 

curriculum implementation. Literacy Express is 

a literacy-focused curriculum that focuses on 

emergent literacy, oral language, phonological 

sensitivity, and print awareness. The curriculum 

uses theme-based units to facilitate large and 

small group literacy activities. The Open Court 

Reading Pre-K Curriculum focuses on 

phonological, phonemic, and print awareness 

activities presented in eight units. The DLM 

Early Childhood Express Curriculum is a 

comprehensive curriculum focusing on the 

promotion of children's social, emotional, 

intellectual, aesthetic, and physical development. 

It uses hands-on learning activities based on 36 

weekly themes.

Each treatment control condition was provided training for 

four days in late July or early August. The first two days 

of this training were provided in a workshop setting and the 

last two in team planning activities. In addition to the 

initial training, all treatment group participants attended a 

curriculum-specific two-hour professional development 

meeting every other month. Finally, in half of the schools 

in which multiple classrooms were assigned to a treatment 

group, teachers were supported by a coach 8-10 hours per 

month.

The professional development 

lasted for two years, with some 

teachers only participating the 

second year. Mentors and 

coordinators were trained in a 

three-day summer session. 

Teachers in their first year of 

training participated in a four-day 

summer workshop, and teachers 

in their second year received a 

two-day refresher training. The 

coordinators and mentors 

participated one-day meetings 

once a month along with ongoing 

problem solving with intervention 

staff. Teachers participated in 

ongoing small-group training 

throughout the year with the site 

coordinator or mentor. 

Head Start sites 

applied and received 

funding for the stateinitiated project. 

Therefore, as required 

by federal guidelines, 

all participating 

children were from lowincome families. The 

selected program sites 

included urban (60 

percent) and rural (40 

percent) programs.

Children's language 

and literacy 

development

The content areas included in 

the training have been 

supported by prior research as 

means to enhance early literacy 

skills

The following content areas were included in the 

teacher training: (a) professional practices 

(including room organization, daily routines, and 

supportive interactive teaching styles); (b) 

language enrichment and "scaffolding" language 

and learning throughout the day; (c) conducting 

book readings in ways that promote language and 

literacy skills; (d) using effective teaching 

strategies to build language comprehension and 

expression; (e) print and book awareness; (f) 

motivation to read; (g) phonological awareness; 

(h) alphabet knowledge; and (i) written 

expression. 

Training included multi-day summer training for 

coordinators, mentors, and teachers, implemented with the 

use of teaching manuals. Mentors and coordinators were 

trained in a three-day session on topics ranging from "howto" procedures for side-by-side coaching and identifying 

and meeting teacher training needs across the school year. 

Using videotaped excerpts, mentors were taught how to use 

the teacher observation checklist. Teachers participated in 

a four-day, small group workshop their first year of 

training, and a two-day refresher in their second year. The 

training was divided into two-hour "learning pods" and 

each involved the presentation of didactic information, 

discussion, problem solving on implementation issues, and 

role playing of teaching behaviors to use in the classroom. 

The content areas included a range of topics. Coordinators 

and mentors were also asked to participate in one-day 

monthly meetings where they discussed various aspects of 

the intervention including ensuring that their observations 

of teachers were reliable. Target teachers engaged in 

ongoing small-group training with the site coordinator or 

mentor with the content being determined by the needs of 

the target teachers. 

127 Table A-1b. Language and Literacy Studies: Features of Professional 

Development—Continued

Continues next page
Study

Lonigan and 

Whitehurst 

(1998)

Mode of Professional 

Development Delivery

PD Linkages with 

Infrastructure

Temporal Aspects of 

Professional Development

Participant Outreach Content Area PD Content 

Grounded in Research

Description of Content/Curriculum

Readers (both teachers and parents) were trained on 

dialogic reading primarily through a video-tape training. 

Part 1 presented a set of rules for bookreading, followed by 

vignettes of adult-child bookreading that exemplified the 

rules. Then, vignettes of inappropriate bookreading were 

shown, and the trainer asked readers for criticism. After 

the videotape, the trainer engaged the readers in roleplaying, presenting various examples of child behavior and 

giving the reader feedback on using the dialogic reading 

rules. 

Part 1 took 30 minutes, and Part 

2 took 20 minutes to complete. 

Part 1 and Part 2 were separated 

by three weeks. 

Children were from 

low-income families, 

and many were 

receiving child care 

subsidies. The sample 

was 91.2 percent 

African-American. 

Strategies for 

bookreading, to 

promote language 

and literacy 

development. 

Yes. Dialogic reading encourages bookreading to 

become a dialogue between the reader, and the 

child, encouraging the adult to ask questions, add 

information, and prompt child to respond to the 

book. 

128 Table A-1b. Language and Literacy Studies: Features of Professional 

Development—Continued

Continues next page
Study

McCutchen, 

Abbott, 

Green, 

Beretvas, 

Cox, Potter 

et al. (2002)

McGillFranzen, 

Allington, 

Yokoi, and 

Brooks 

(1999)

National 

Center for 

Education 

Evaluation 

and Regional 

Assistance, 

Institute of 

Education 

Sciences 

(2007)

Mode of Professional 

Development Delivery

PD Linkages with 

Infrastructure

Temporal Aspects of 

Professional Development

Participant Outreach Content Area PD Content 

Grounded in Research

Description of Content/Curriculum

Teachers in the experimental group participated in a twoweek summer instructional institute that involved day-long 

interactions between teachers and researchers. A major 

component of the institute was reviewing the research on 

phonology and phonological awareness and its 

development in children and relationship to other forms of 

language and literacy development. Then, teachers were 

encouraged to develop lessons on phonological awareness, 

orthographic awareness, comprehension, and readingwriting connections. These lessons and instructional 

suggestions from researchers were provided to teachers in 

a portfolio to take back to their classrooms. After the 

institute, the research team regularly visited the classroom 

to observe the teaching, to assess student outcomes and 

discuss these with teachers, and to provide teachers 

feedback on their teaching strategies. 

An intensive two-week summer 

institute kicked off the project. 

Throughout the following schoolyear, teachers were visited in 

classrooms on an ongoing basis. 

(Unclear how often.)

Phonological 

awareness, and its 

role in balanced 

reading and 

language 

instruction. 

Yes. The two-week training taught information on 1) 

phonology, phonological awareness, and its role 

in balanced reading instruction; 2) the typical 

sequence of development of children's 

phonological awareness; 3) the relationship 

between phonological awareness and children's 

reading and writing skills; 4) the importance of 

letter-learning; and 5) the importance of a broad 

and balanced literacy instruction including 

explicit comprehension instruction.

The mode of delivery is unclear. Thirty hours of training total, 

consisting of three full-day 

sessions and seven two-hour 

sessions. The first sessions were 

followed by the shorter sessions 

at regular intervals.

Children's language 

and literacy 

development, and 

effective 

classrooms 

supports.

Yes. Topics included in training: physical design of 

the classroom; effective book displays; 

importance of reading aloud to children; 

interactive techniques for reading aloud; 

environmental print; author, genre, and content 

themes in the book collection; small-group 

lessons based on books; emergent writing 

activities; literacy activity during play.

ERF grants were provided to support the 

following: (1) A high-quality oral language and 

print-rich classroom environment; (2) Activities 

and materials developed according to 

scientifically-based research that will help 

develop children's oral language, phonological 

awareness, print awareness, and alphabet 

knowledge; (3) Screening and assessments to 

monitor children's acquisition of skills to guide 

instruction; (4) Professional development 

formulated according to scientifically based 

reading research; (5) Integration of the 

instructional materials, activities, tools, and 

measures into the grantee's existing program.

Teachers participated in a variety of professional 

development activities including in-service training, 

mentoring, continuing education classes, or tutoring. The 

in-service training fell under one of eleven categories 

including: phonemic & phonological awareness, literacy -

rich environments, concepts of print writing and 

prewriting, oral language, facilitating emergent literacy, 

alphabetic knowledge, oral comprehension and cognition, 

early childhood growth and development, and classroom 

management. Researchers did not ask teachers how their 

professional development was distributed across training 

areas. 

None reported. Varied by site, but all children 

were assessed and classroom 

observations occurred in the fall 

and spring. 

The authors report that 

ERF participants were 

more disadvantaged 

than the national 

average. The goal of 

ERF was to enhance 

the quality of 

programs serving lowincome families. 

Oral language, 

phonological 

awareness, print 

awareness, and 

alphabet knowledge

The authors report that the 

ERF program is based on the 

research on the skills that 

children need to become 

successful readers including 

oral language, phonological 

awareness, awareness of print 

conventions, and alphabet 

knowledge. Additionally, the 

professional development 

activities were grounded in 

scientifically based reading 

research and knowledge of 

early language and literacy 

development. 

129 Table A-1b. Language and Literacy Studies: Features of Professional 

Development—Continued

Continues next page
Study

Neuman 

(1999)

Neuman and 

Cunningham 

(2009)

O'Connor, 

Fulmer, 

Harty, and 

Bell (2005)

Mode of Professional 

Development Delivery

PD Linkages with 

Infrastructure

Temporal Aspects of 

Professional Development

Participant Outreach Content Area PD Content 

Grounded in Research

Description of Content/Curriculum

The training combined basic theoretical and developmental 

principles with concrete activities teachers might try in 

their classrooms. Training was sometimes provided in local 

libraries, sometimes in one-on-one visits in classrooms. 

The training approach had to be modified throughout the 

program since many providers were not available to come 

for trainings, initial trainings were found to be ineffective, 

and some providers considered more basic elements of care 

(i.e. sanitation, socialization) more important.

Differed from site to site. Children were from 

low-income families, 

and over 65 percent 

were receiving 

subsidies. Many had 

few center resources 

(such as substitutes) to 

facilitate participation 

in training. 

Early literacy 

development. 

Yes. The training was designed to enhance teachers' 

knowledge of early literacy and its development 

through storybook reading. Also addressed was 

the physical environment in book areas, story 

extenders, and book care. 

Course work: A three-credit course in early language and 

literacy development was developed by the study authors 

along with colleagues at area community colleges. 

Lectures were followed by simulation and hands-on 

activities. Two weeks were devoted to each core 

competency. Videotaped examples of best practice were 

used. Teachers had assignments that were carried out in 

their own classrooms. They would report back on the 

assignments. Coaching: 32 weekly, one-on-one and on-site 

coaching sessions occurred for 1-1.5 hours each session. 

Coaching sessions for the first 15 weeks were aligned with 

the professional development course content (but coaching 

started two weeks after the start of the course). Coaches 

engaged teachers in reflective practice and goal setting, 

helped to identify desired outcomes and strategies to 

achieve them, collaboratively developed action plans, and 

assisted teachers with their in-class assignments from the 

course. 

Four community 

colleges collaborated 

in the development of 

the three-credit course 

in early language and 

literacy development. 

Weekly debriefing 

meetings with the 

instructional 

coordinator at each 

community college 

helped to build 

linkages between the 

professional 

development provided 

at the school and in 

the classroom. 

Coursework: 15-week, 3-hour 

course in early language and 

literacy development (45 hours 

total). Coaching: Weekly for 1-

1.5 hours each time with 32 

sessions total (up to 48 hours of 

coaching). 

Teachers in licensed 

child care centers and 

homes in four 

economically 

disadvantaged areas of 

Michigan: Detroit, 

Flint, Grand Rapids, 

and Lansing.

Early language and 

literacy 

development

Yes. Core competencies 

addressed in the coursework 

were based on accreditation 

standards from NAEYC, the 

International Reading 

Association (IRA), and the 

state licensing requirements. 

They were also aligned with 

measures of quality in early 

care settings (the ECERS and 

ELLCO). Coaching was based 

on a model outlined in a 

literature review by Koh & 

Nueman (2006): on-site, 

balanced and sustained, 

facilitative of reflection, highly 

interactive, corrective 

feedback, and prioritizes. 

The content of the course work focused on 

developing providers' knowledge in the following 

areas: oral langauge comprehension, 

phonological awareness, letter knowledge and the 

alphabetic principle, print convention, strategies 

for working with second language learners, 

literacy assessments, parental role in early 

language and literacy development, and linkages 

between literacy and other aspects of the 

curriculum. About two weeks was spent on each 

of these topics over the 15-week course. The 

first 15 weeks of coaching focused on the same 

topics (aligning with the coursework), and the 

remaining 17 weeks of coaching also drew upon 

the course material and engaged providers in 

instructional efforts to implement best practices. 

A research team provided PD in two areas: (1) 

scientifically based reading instruction (findings of 

effective reading instruction from the NRC and the 

National Reading Panel) and (2) interpretation of 

assessment results for students in the teachers' classrooms. 

The researchers suggested benchmarks for average 

performance, and the teachers linked instructional activities 

to the benchmarks. Children identified as having reading 

difficulties were given additional, intensive instruction by 

Special Ed. teachers in each grade, as needed. Researchers 

demonstrated activities, and teachers discussed and 

rehearsed activities in small groups. The afternoons were 

devoted to discussions among grade-level teachers across 

schools and the research team, timelines for 

implementation, and schedules for coaching, data 

collection, and data sharing. 

The principals of the 

two schools, all 

general education, 

remedial, special ed, 

and speech teachers 

agreed to participate. 

Student participants 

were all children in 

kindergarten and first 

grade in the schools. 

Children in grades 2 

and 3 in the first year 

of the study served as 

the control group. 

Three full-day and four two-hour 

professional development 

sessions annually during the first 

three years of the study. 

Children at risk for 

reading difficulties in 

elementary school.

Reading. Yes. The researchers based the 

PD on recommendations for 

effective reading instruction 

from the National Research 

Council and the National 

Reading Panel. 

The content of the PD sessions shifted across 

years as teachers of higher grades were added to 

the intervention. Each session began with the 

research evidence for emphasizing particular 

components of reading (e.g., phonemic 

awareness, phonics, and vocabulary in K-1; the 

alphabetic principle, vocabulary, word study, and 

fluency in Grades 1-2; multi-syllabic word 

reading approaches and comprehension strategies 

such as retelling and summarizing in Grades 2-

3). The sessions also included activities to 

support these components. 

130 Table A-1b. Language and Literacy Studies: Features of Professional 

Development—Continued

Continues next page
Study

Podhajski and Nathan (2005)Pence, Justice, and Wiggins (2008)Roskos, Rosemary, and Varner (2006)

Mode of Professional 

Development Delivery

PD Linkages with 

Infrastructure

Temporal Aspects of 

Professional Development

Participant Outreach Content Area PD Content 

Grounded in Research

Description 

Providers participated in a two-day immersion on the Building Blocks for Literacy program, which provided information about child language and literacy development, and translated these findings to practice. Trained mentors visited child care centers multiple times over six months, and modeled how to incorporate concepts and activities into daily routines. The mentor also encouraged the provider to try the activities, and provided constructive feedback for improving implementation.

Training occurred over six months. A two-day immersion training began the program. Over the full six-month period, each provider was visited by a trained mentor once a months for 45 min to one hour. 

Children's language and literacy development, broadly defined.

Yes. The training focuse

through book readinand relationships behow sounds link to 

Treatment: Professional development was provided for 15 hours over the course of three days shortly before school began. The content of this professional development was as follows: Day 1-- background information on child language development, Day 2--theoretical overview of language-focused curriculum (LFC), guidelines for developing a language focused classroom, features of a model classroom, and an outline of curriculum objectives/sample activities (didactic, video, and discussion modalities used). Day 3--teachers practiced designing LFC activity contexts and implementing language stimulating techniques within these contexts. A refresher half-day training was offered in the middle of the academic year that focused on language stimulating techniques through the use of self-evaluation and videotaped observations.Comparison: Teachers in the comparison group received 15 hours of professional development on the same three days as treatment teachers, though the content for the comparison group was limited to neutral topics, such as behavior management.

None mentioned. Professional development was 

offered to both the treatment and comparison groups (content varied) five hours over the course of three days shortly before school began. Teachers in the treatment group also received a half-day mid-year refresher course.

All programs in this study (Head Start, Title I, and public PreK) were designed to primarily serve children at-risk for academic problems. Eligibility for inclusion

in these programs include household income, parent education, family stress, health/developmental concerns, limited understanding of English.

Use of a languagefocused curriculum.

The authors mention empirical support for the effectiveness of the language-focused curriculum. However, there is no mention of an empirical basis for the professional development offered to teachers.

The language-focus

this study focuses oteachers structure fmaterials, props, an(Roskos & Neumanprocesses (teacher-interactions). The pcontent focused on child language deveoverview of languaguidelines for deveclassroom, features outline of curriculuactivities.

CDA, associate's degree, and bachelor's degree programs in the state of Ohio. 

External validity: evidence was sought for a correspondence to external, researchbased standards, and to standards to statesponsored professional education curricula in reading pedagogy, as outlined in Teaching Early Language and Literacy: A Core Curriculum for Educators (Preschool) (2003) and Teaching Reading and Writing: A Core Curriculum for Educators (Grades K-3), 2nd Edition (2003). 

The three types of programs (CDA, associate's degree, and bachelor's degree) have different lengths of time/dosage of literacy instruction. The amount of time spent on literacy methods is mandated at 12 semester hours (a minimum of 180 hours of instruction) in Ohio for the bachelor's degree. All three associate's degree programs had one course on early literacy pedagogy; the authors note that this amount of time might not be sufficient. Only two of the three CDA programs allocated a specific course or set of sessions on early literacy. The authors felt this did not afford enough practice with early literacy techniques (e.g., interactive book reading). 

Early literacy. State early learning guidelines 

and standards were used as the "gold standard" in this study. They are based on research in language and literacy development. The goal is to align professional development curriculum with research-based

practices and specific child outcomes related to literacy. 

Each of the nine cathat was categorizeassessing, planning(knowledge and skithe article on specif

131

Table A-1b. Language and Literacy Studies: Features of Professional  Development—Continued
Study

Wasik and Bond (2001)Wasik, Bond, and Hindman (2006)

Mode of Professional 

Development Delivery

PD Linkages with 

Infrastructure

Temporal Aspects of 

Professional Development

Participant Outreach Content Area PD Content 

Grounded in Research

Description 

Outside-of-class instruction in vocabulary strategies and interactive book reading. Then, an experienced teacher modeled shared book reading in the classroom, and assisted with other extension activities. 

The training component of the program occurred over four weeks (not necessarily consecutive due to scheduling problems). 

Low-income children. Intervention was conducted at Title I early learning center, where 95 percent were eligible for free or reduced-price lunches and 94 percent were African- American. 

Language development, specifically vocabulary. 

Prior work has shown the effectiveness of shared book reading, but little research has demonstrated an effect in classroom settings. 

The approach to endevelopment focuseincluding 1) defininand during storybochildren's use of voquestions. Teachers reinforce vocabularactivities. Intervention teacheboxes which each ctrade books on a paconcrete objects repbooks, as well as leand center activitieTraining and coachreading and oral lan

training focused on vocabulary, and mawere instructed to rwhile they were woThey were also instthe props prior to ththe children the labbook readings. Teadiscussions with thprops are used and Teachers were also vocabulary words dThe training in oral 

practicing and prommodeling rich languTeachers were trainthey speak, to patiespeaking, and to resTeachers also taugheach other and the ttaught to expand thelaborated explanatchildren's speech. Fto use open-ended qelaborated speech. 

Training modules include direct instruction of specific language and literacy strategies, modeling of these strategies, and providing feedback to teachers. Monthly two-hour trainings were provided for a total of nine months. Within one week of the monthly training, a researcher modeled the strategy that was the focus of that month's training in each teacher's classroom. Teachers were then given two weeks to practice the strategy in their classrooms, and then the teachers were observed demonstrating the strategy in their classrooms. After observations, teachers were given written and oral feedback on their demonstrations. If necessary, the strategy was modeled again, and the teacher was given additional time to practice before being observed a second time. 

None mentioned. The intervention lasted 9 months, 

from end of September to beginning of June. The training of the intervention group lasted two hours each month. In addition, Head Start teachers in the intervention group received a minimum of two hours of direct coaching per month. 

Low-income children and teachers with limited background knowledge in langauge and literacy development. 

Book reading, oral language, vocabulary development

The book reading training module was based on the work of Whitehurst, Arnold, et al. (1994) and Wasik & Bond (2001). Teachers were trained in three components of book reading: asking (open-ended) questions, building vocabulary, and making connections. The oral language training was bsed on the research of Dickinson and Smith (1994) and Snow (1983), instructing teachers how to use conversational strategies to promote multiple opportunities for children to speak, actively listen, and use varying vocabulary. 

132

Table A-1b. Language and Literacy Studies: Features of Professional  Development—Continued
Study

Whitehurst, 

Arnold, 

Epstein, 

Angell, 

Smith, and 

Fischel 

(1994), "A 

Picture Book 

Reading 

Intervention 

in Day Care 

and Home 

for Children 

from LowIncome 

Families"

Whitehurst, 

Epstein, 

Angell, 

Payne, 

Crone, and 

Fischel 

(1994), 

"Outcomes 

of an 

Emergent 

Literacy 

Intervention 

in Head 

Start"

Whitehurst, 

Zevenberege

n, Crone, 

Schultz, 

Velting, and 

Fischel 

(1999)

Mode of Professional 

Development Delivery

PD Linkages with 

Infrastructure

Temporal Aspects of 

Professional Development

Participant Outreach Content Area PD Content 

Grounded in Research

Description of Content/Curriculum

Readers (both teachers and parents) were trained on 

dialogic reading primarily through a video-tape training. 

Part 1 presented a set of rules for bookreading, followed by 

vignettes of adult-child bookreading that exemplified the 

rules. Then, vignettes of inappropriate bookreading were 

shown, and the trainer asked readers for criticism. After 

the videotape, the trainer engaged the readers in roleplaying, presenting various examples of child behavior and 

giving the reader feedback on using the dialogic reading 

rules. 

Part 1 took 30 minutes, and Part 

2 took 20 minutes to complete. 

Part 1 and Part 2 were separated 

by three weeks.

Low-income children. 

Most children were 

from working poor 

families eligible for 

child care subsidies. 

Language and 

literacy 

development 

through effective 

bookreading. 

Yes. Dialogic reading encourages bookreading to 

become a dialogue between the reader, and the 

child, encouraging the adult to ask questions, add 

information, and prompt child to respond to the 

book. 

The training session for dialogic reading consisted of 

teachers and parents watching a 20-minute training video, 

followed by role-playing of dialogic reading with a trainer 

and discussion of techniques following the video. In total, 

this one-time training lasted approx. 30 minutes. 

One-time training session of 30 

minutes. 

Children attended 

Head Start centers, 

and were primarily 

low-income.

Dialogic 

bookreading and 

phonological 

awareness, to 

promote children's 

language and 

literacy skills.

Yes. Dialogic reading encourages bookreading to 

become a dialogue between the reader, and the 

child, encouraging the adult to ask questions, add 

information, and prompt child to respond to the 

book. The phonological awareness intervention 

was an adaptation of Sound Foundations (Byrne 

& Fielding-Barnsley, 1992), that introduced 

children to consonant and vowel sounds. 

[Training on this was not described.]

The training session for dialogic reading consisted of 

teachers and parents watching a 20-minute training video, 

followed by role-playing of dialogic reading with a trainer 

and discussion of techniques following the video. In total, 

this one-time training lasted approx. 30 minutes. 

One-time training session of 30 

minutes. 

Children attended 

Head Start centers, 

and were primarily 

low-income.

Dialogic 

bookreading and 

phonological 

awareness, to 

promote children's 

language and 

literacy skills.

Yes. Dialogic reading encourages bookreading to 

become a dialogue between the reader, and the 

child, encouraging the adult to ask questions, add 

information, and prompt child to respond to the 

book. The phonological awareness intervention 

was an adaptation of Sound Foundations (Byrne 

& Fielding-Barnsley, 1992), that introduced 

children to consonant and vowel sounds. 

[Training on this was not described.]

133 Table A-1b. Language and Literacy Studies: Features of Professional 

Development—Continued

Continues next page
Study

Zevenbergen, Whitehurst, and Zevernbergen(2003)Yaden, Tam, Madrigal, Brassell, Massa, Altamirano, and Armendariz (2000)

Mode of Professional 

Development Delivery

PD Linkages with 

Infrastructure

Temporal Aspects of 

Professional Development

Participant Outreach Content Area PD Content 

Grounded in Research

Description 

The training session for dialogic reading consisted of teachers and parents watching a 20-minute training video, followed by role-playing of dialogic reading with a trainer and discussion of techniques following the video. In total, this one-time training lasted approx. 30 minutes. 

One-time training session of 30 minutes. 

Children attended Head Start centers, and were primarily low-income.

Dialogic bookreading and phonological awareness, to promote children's language and literacy skills.

Yes. Dialogic reading en

become a dialogue child, encouraging 

information, and prbook. The phonologwas an adaptation o& Fielding-Barnslechildren to consona[Training on this w

No information provided. Spanish-speaking 

preschoolers, mostly low-income. Spanishspeaking child care "teachers and paraprofessionals"

Early literacy, reading and writing.

Yes. In-classroom suppo

regarding emergent 

developmental grow

In-classroom support and ongoing in-service training. 

134

Table A-1b. Language and Literacy Studies: Features of Professional  Development—Continued
Study

Adger, 

Hoyle, and 

Dickinson 

(2004)

Assel, 

Landry, 

Swank, and 

Gunnewig 

(2007)

Rigor of PD 

Evaluation

Outcome Measures Outcomes in

 Educator Knowledge

Outcomes in 

Educator Practice

Child Outcomes

Descriptive Extended discussions among 

participants and instructors promote 

joint knowledge building. Meaning is 

produced interactively, with speakers 

aligning their contributions to the 

hearers' needs, and hearers providing 

signs of attention and understanding 

(e.g., body orientation, head nods, 

laughter, repeating each other's words, 

paraphrase, and overlapping their talk). 

These are the interactional processes 

through which learning occurs. An 

example is used to show how this group 

of 11 early childhood educators comes 

up with a multipart statement about the 

value of re-reading stories to children 

that weaves together their practical 

knowledge and research findings. Joint 

authorship of propositions was a crucial 

way in which learning was 

accomplished in the LEEP course. 

Twenty-nine hours of videotaped data across the nine LEEP sessions 

were submitted to discourse analysis. In addition, a quantitative coding 

of the tapes indicated how much time was devoted to Professional 

Conversation at the beginning and end of each session, and to lecture, 

video watching, and whole-group discussion during the lecture period. 

Six of the nine tapes were selected for intensive analysis (representing 

two sessions per instructor--one early session and one later session 

each). 

Not assessed. Not assessed.

Experimental 

(Random 

Assignment to 

Treatment & 

Control 

Groups)

Teacher practice : (1) Curriculum Fidelity Checklist was used to assess 

curriculum fidelity for all intervention teachers. (2) A random sample of 

classrooms were observed using the CIRCLE-Teacher Behavior Rating 

Scale (Landry et al., 2002) to understand potential variance across 

classroom environments and conditions for control and target 

classrooms. The observations were conducted in the fall, winter, and 

spring. Child outcomes: (1) Pre-school language scale-IV edition - 

auditory comprehension subscale (PLS) was used to assess complex 

language understanding; (2) Expressive vocabulary test (EVT) was used 

to assess expressive vocabulary and word retrieval skills; (3) 

Developing skills checklist (DSC) assessed a, "full range of child skills 

and behavior that children typically develop". (4) Woodcock-Johnson 

test of academic III tests of achievement (WJ-3) - The Letter Word 

Identification and Sound Awareness/Rhyming subtests were used. 

Not assessed. Curriculum fidelity scores improved over the course of 

the year, and there was generally a high degree of 

fidelity. Curriculum fidelity for Doors to Discovery was 

not as strong as Let's Begin. Control classrooms showed 

higher overall scores on the CIRCLE measure compared 

to targets. HS classrooms showed lower scores than 

Title I classrooms, or universal pre-K. It is unclear 

whether these differences were true at all three 

observations. 

Language comprehension findings: For the PLS-IV Auditory 

Comprehension subscale there were significantly greater gains for children 

utilizing a language-literacy curriculum than for those in the control group. 

This effect was moderated by program site with groups using the curricula 

increasing at a faster rate than controls, but this was more true in HS classes 

than Title 1 or pre-k classrooms. Gains on the subscale were only 

significantly different than controls in the Head Start classes. There was also 

a significant curriculum by mentoring interactions between HS and Title 1 

classes. Vocabulary Findings: There were significant differences between 

classrooms using language and literacy curricula versus controls on overall 

growth rates of expressive vocabulary was moderated by program site. 

Children in classrooms receiving the curricula grew at faster rates, but this 

was particularly true in Head Start and Title 1 classrooms versus universal 

pre-k. The effect size for HS was .68 compared to .04 for Title I classrooms 

and -.52 for universal pre-k. There was a significant effect of mentoring v. 

non-mentoring. 

Title I classrooms receiving the Doors condition showed greater growth 

irrespective of mentoring v. non-mentoring while for Let's Begin the growth 

was greatest in the mentored condition. Print Knowledge: On the WJ-3 there 

was a significant treatment v. control effect which was great in HS than Title 

I or universal pre-k. There was a curriculum effect of Let's Begin over Doors, 

varying by mentor status and moderated by program site. Phonological 

awareness: For 

Rhyming there was a significant difference in slopes for intervention v. 

control classrooms, with differences between the two conditions that were 

moderated by program site. For the Auditory Subscale of the DSC there was 

also a significant slope effect for intervention versus control classrooms, 

moderated by program site. There was also a significant effect of curriculum 

with Let's Begin outperforming Doors. There was a mentoring effect 

moderated by program site. 

135 Table A-1c. Language and Literacy Studies: Outcomes
Study

Baker and 

Smith (1999)

Byrne and 

FieldingBarnsley 

(1995)

Dickinson 

and Brady 

(2006), 

Example 1: 

TeacherResearcher 

Pilot Project

Rigor of PD 

Evaluation

Outcome Measures Outcomes in

 Educator Knowledge

Outcomes in 

Educator Practice

Child Outcomes

Pre-Post w/ 

Comparison 

Group (Not 

Randomly 

Assigned)

Measures of literacy knowledge of the students were used to track 

progress. Measures of phonemic awareness included the Yopp-Singer 

Test of Phoneme Segmentation (Yopp, 1995), Phonemic Segmentation 

(Kaminski & Good, 1996), and Onset Recognition and Production 

(Kaminski & Good, 1996). Measures of alphabetic understanding were 

Letter Naming Fluency (Kaminski & Good, 1996), Letter-Sound 

Knowledge (adapted from Engelmann & Brunner, 1995), and Subtests 

from Concepts About Print (Clay, 1985). 

Not assessed. Not assessed. Glendale's two whole class intervention groups performed significantly better 

than Glendale's control group on phoneme segmentation (effect sizes were 

large). Glendale's kindergarten group in the Sustainability year did 

significantly better than Glendale's kindergarten group during the 

Implementation year and Lincoln's control group (effect sizes small but 

improving over time). This suggests that not only were changes being 

sustained, but the overall program was improving with growing teacher 

expertise. Growth in concepts about print was considerably higher in the 

Sustainability year than in the Implementation year. This was likely due to an 

increased attention on alphabetic understanding in the curriculum. Lincoln's 

K Plus program was compared to Lincoln's general kindergarten classrooms. 

Children in the K Plus program showed significant growth in phonemic 

awareness and alphabetic understanding over the course of both years, but did 

not reach the level of performance of their peers. 

Pre-Post w/ 

Comparison 

Group (Not 

Randomly 

Assigned)

A measure of phoneme identity used by Burne & Fielding-Barnsley 

(1991) was used here for both pre- and post-test data. A total of 24 

items were used to test children's grasp of phoneme identity in initialword position (e.g., the "s" sound in "sand"). A second set of 24 items 

tested for final-word position phonemes (e.g., the "s" in "house"). Preand post-test measures included word identification, spelling, alphabet, 

and phoneme identity. 

Not assessed. Not assessed. The improvement in phonemic awareness (from pre- to post-test) made by the 

children in the classroom condition exceeded that made by children in the 

control condition (for initial-position only), but fell below the improvement 

level shown by the children in the experimental condition. In addition, a 

similar proportion of children in all three conditions "passed" the criterion for 

identifying 32 out of 48 phonemes at pre-test (20 percent, 20 percent, and 22 

percent for classroom, experimental, and control groups, respectively). But at 

post-test, the respective percentages of children passing the criterion was 51 

percent, 95 percent, and 31 percent. 

Descriptive Researcher observation. Not assessed. There were moderate improvements in teacher-child 

language interactions. Teachers realized the importance 

of verbal interactions with children.

Not assessed.

Table A-1c. Language and Literacy Studies: Outcomes—Continued 136 Continues next page
Study

Dickinson 

and Brady 

(2006), 

Example 2: 

Literacy 

Environment 

Enrichment 

Program 

(LEEP)

Dickinson 

and Brady 

(2006), 

Example 3: 

TechnologyEnhanced 

Literacy 

Environment 

Enrichment 

Program (TLEEP)

Dickinson 

and Brady 

(2006), 

Example 4: 

Striving to 

Achieve 

Reading 

Success 

(STARSLEEP)

Rigor of PD 

Evaluation

Outcome Measures Outcomes in

 Educator Knowledge

Outcomes in 

Educator Practice

Child Outcomes

Pre-Post w/ 

Comparison 

Group (Not 

Randomly 

Assigned)

Pre-test (fall) and post-test (spring) classroom observations were 

conducted using the Early Language and Literacy Classroom 

Observation (ELLCO; Smith & Dickinson, 2002). Children were also 

assessed in the fall and the spring, using measures of receptive 

vocabulary and phonemic awareness (measures not specified). An 

additional descriptive component of the study followed 10 supervisorteacher teams two to three years after LEEP training, and observations 

are used to report on findings.

Assessment not discussed. The LEEP training was found to enhance classroom 

practices that foster children's language and literacy 

development. LEEP participation predicted higher 

scores on all sections of the ELLCO when compared 

with the comparison group. When participation in LEEP 

was added to regression models predicting scores on the 

classroom Language, Literacy, and Curriculum 

subscale, power of the model nearly doubled from .37 to 

.73. For literacy activities, large to moderate effects 

were also found. Informal observations of 10 supervisorteacher teams two to three years after the training 

indicated that there were enduring changes in how and 

how often books were read, the types of books read, and 

teachers' use of thematic instruction. Supervisors were 

also found to provide positive feedback, listen more to 

teachers, and encourage teachers' efforts.

Children in classrooms where teachers had received LEEP training scored 

higher on spring measures of receptive vocabulary and phonemic awareness, 

compared to their peers in comparison classrooms.

QuasiExperimental 

(No Random 

Assignment; 

Controls for 

Baseline Group 

Differences)

Pre- and post-test classroom observations were conducted using the 

Early Language and Literacy Classroom Observation (ELLCO; Smith 

& Dickinson, 2002).

Not assessed. T-LEEP participation predicted higher ELLCO scores 

on all sections, controlling for teacher background 

factors and post-intervention scores, compared with the 

comparison group.

Not assessed.

QuasiExperimental 

(No Random 

Assignment; 

Controls for 

Baseline Group 

Differences)

Teachers' description of program and reactions are collected in 

participant focus groups. Researchers have also collected post-test Early 

Language and Literacy Classroom Observation scores (ELLCO). 

Not assessed. Caregivers report seeing immediate applications of the 

training in their classrooms. Participants reported 

making environmental changes (e.g. displaying writing 

around the room) and interactive changes (e.g. extending 

rich conversations with children). The formal evaluation 

also demonstrated that STARS-LEEP teachers had 

significantly higher post-intervention scores than controlgroup teachers on the ELLCO.

Not assessed.

Table A-1c. Language and Literacy Studies: Outcomes—Continued 137 Continues next page
Study

Dickinson 

and Brady 

(2006), 

Example 5: 

ProgramDelivered 

Literacy InService 

Training (PDLIT)

Dickinson 

and Caswell 

(2007)

Foorman and 

Moats 

(2004) 

Rigor of PD 

Evaluation

Outcome Measures Outcomes in

 Educator Knowledge

Outcomes in 

Educator Practice

Child Outcomes

Unclear Formal observations used the Early Language and Literacy Classroom 

Evaluation (ELLCO). 

Not assessed. PD-LIT classrooms were found to have higher scores on 

the ELLCO than comparison classrooms. (The effect 

sizes were smaller than for LEEP; however the 

implementation was only partial when ELLCO scores 

were collected.)

Not assessed.

QuasiExperimental 

(No Random 

Assignment; 

Controls for 

Baseline Group 

Differences)

Observers used the Early Language and Literacy Classroom 

Observation (ELLCO) Toolkit including three components: (1) the 

Classroom Observation and Teacher Interview; (2) the Literacy 

Environment Checklist; and (3) the Literacy Activities Rating Scale. 

Two subscales of the Assessment Profile (Abbott-Shim & Sibley, 

1998), Learning Environment and Interacting, were used to measure 

classroom quality not specific to literacy. However, the Interacting 

subscale was dropped due to lack of variability. 

Not assessed. LEEP teachers made significant gains from fall to 

spring on all outcome measures. Comparison teachers 

made significant gains for all measures except the 

overall and the Writing subscale of the Literacy 

Activities Rating Scale. There were statistically 

significant differences between LEEP and control 

teachers at pre-test, with LEEP teachers scoring higher 

on the Writing subscale of the Literacy Environment 

Checklist. At post-test there were statistically significant 

differences between LEEP and comparison teachers on 

all overall and subscale scores except for the Writing 

subscale of the Literacy Activities Rating Scale. Effect 

sizes on the three overall components of the ELLCO 

toolkit indicate moderate to large effects of LEEP 

participation on these outcomes. There was also a 

moderate effect (r=.32) on the Learning Environment 

Subscale of the Assessment Profile. 

Not assessed.

Pre-Post w/o 

Comparison 

Group

Teacher knowledge was measured by a 19-question multiple-choice 

Teacher Knowledge Survey (TKS). Teachers' general effectiveness in 

essential teaching routines and classroom management was assessed 

using a structured classroom observation entitled the Texas Teacher 

Appraisal System (TTAS; Texas Education Agency, 1984). Student 

outcomes at the end of the year only were assessed using the WoodcockJohnson Basic Reading and Broad Reading Clusters (WJ-R; Woodcock 

& Johnson, 1989). 

Teachers with higher attendance in 

courses and training sessions had higher 

knowledge scores on the TKS. 

Teachers with higher attendance in courses and training 

sessions did not show higher scores on classroom 

effectiveness as measured by the TTAS. 

Assessed only in relationship with caregiver skills. Classrooms in which 

teachers were rated as more highly effective by the TTAS had students with 

somewhat higher reading scores. 

Table A-1c. Language and Literacy Studies: Outcomes—Continued 138 Continues next page
Study

Fountain, 

Cosgrove, 

and Wood 

(2008)

Gettinger and 

Stoiber 

(2007)

Rigor of PD 

Evaluation

Outcome Measures Outcomes in

 Educator Knowledge

Outcomes in 

Educator Practice

Child Outcomes

Experimental 

(Random 

Assignment to 

Treatment & 

Control 

Groups)

The following child outcomes were assessed: mathematics (Woodcock 

Johnson [WJ] Applied Problems, Child Math Assessment-Abbreviated 

[CMA-A], Composite Score, and Shape Composition); reading (Test of 

Early Reading Ability [TERA], WJ Letter Word Identification, and WJ 

Spelling); phonological awareness (the Pre School Comprehensive Test 

of Phonological and Print Processing [Pre-CTOPPP], Elision subtest, 

Comprehensive Test of Phonological Processing [CTOPP], Elision 

subtest); language assessments (Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test 

[PPVT] and Test of Language Development [TOLD]); and behavioral 

outcomes (Social Skills Rating system [SSRS] and Pre School Learning 

Behavior Scale [PLBS]). Classroom outcomes assessed were overall 

classroom environment (Early Childhood Environmental Rating Scale 

Revised [ECERS-R]), teacher-child relationships (Arnett Detachment, 

Harshness, Permissiveness, and Positive Interactions scales) and 

classroom instruction (Teacher Behavioral Rating Scale [TBRS], TBRS 

Written Expression scale, TBRS Phonological Awareness scale, TBRS 

Book Reading and Oral Language scales, and TBRS Math Concepts 

scale)

Not assessed No impact on educator practice was found Analyses showed significant improvements in language development at the 

end of kindergarten in those classrooms who received ELLM implementation 

training. 

Pre-Post w/ 

Comparison 

Group (Not 

Randomly 

Assigned)

Child outcomes: (1) IGDI Rhyming, Alliteration, and Picture Naming 

(2) Story re-telling task; (3) PPVT-III; (4) Uppercase letter knowledge, 

print and word awareness, and name writing from the PALS-PreK. The 

is the extent of the information provided about these measures. 

Not assessed. Not assessed. On every measures, EMERGE Children outperformed children in control 

classrooms with effect sizes ranging from .13 (Rhyming) to .45 (PPVT-III). 

Table A-1c. Language and Literacy Studies: Outcomes—Continued 139 Continues next page
Study

Jackson, 

Larzelere, St. 

Clair, Corr, 

Fichter, and 

Egertson 

(2006)

Justice, 

Mashburn, 

Hamre, and 

Pianta 

(2008)

Rigor of PD 

Evaluation

Outcome Measures Outcomes in

 Educator Knowledge

Outcomes in 

Educator Practice

Child Outcomes

QuasiExperimental 

(No Random 

Assignment; 

Controls for 

Baseline Group 

Differences)

Classroom Observation Measures: The Early Language and Literacy 

Classroom Observation (ELLCO) and Early Childhood Environment 

Rating Scale - Revised (ECERS-R) were used to assess classroom 

quality. Child Literacy Measures: The Individual Growth and 

Development Indicators (IGDIS) was used to measure vocabulary in 

children's primary language. The Woodcock-Munoz Language Survey 

(WMLS) was used to children's picture naming, verbal analogies, letterword identification and writing skills. The Test of Early Reading Ability 

(TERA-3) was used to assess children's early reading including letter 

identification, awareness of print conventions and using print for 

reading. The Teacher Rating of Oral Language (TROLL) was used to 

assess children's oral language use, reading, and writing. 

Not assessed. ECEs in the HUR only group improved their classroom 

practices significantly more than control ECEs on the 

total ECERS-R score, and three subscales (personal 

care, activities, parents staff). The HUR+ mentoring 

group did not improve significantly more than the 

control ECEs on any ECERS-R score. Both of the HUR 

groups improved significantly more than control ECEs 

on some ELLCO measures. The HUR-only group 

improved significantly more on the literacy environment 

checklist. The HUR+ mentoring group improved 

significantly more than the controls on the literacy 

environment checklist and on two scores on the literacy 

activities rating scale.

The HUR-only group had significantly greater gains than the control group on 

total scores on the TROLL and the TERA, and marginally larger gains on the 

broad ability score on the Woodcock-Munoz. Overall, mentoring did not add 

any major benefit above the HUR-only training. Significantly greater gains 

than the control group were made by the HUR+ mentoring children on only 

the TROLL writing subscale, and the TERA meaning subscale. HLM was 

also used to determine whether there was a relationship between classroom 

practices and children's literacy skills, regardless of intervention group. Most 

of the ECE's classroom practice scores predicted significantly greater child 

gains on the student-completed measures, but not the ECE-completed 

measures. 

Descriptive Procedural Fidelity: The MTP-LL Implementation Checklist with nine 

items (e.g., all students can see the teacher, teacher langauge is in 

general accordance to the script in the lesson plan) was developed for 

this study to assess the degree to which teachers adhered to step-by-step 

procedures for implementing the language and literacy lesson plans as 

written. The checklist was completed by a coder while viewing the 

submitted DVDs. Scores were differentiated into Fidelity to Routine and 

Fidelity to Teaching. A total score was also calculated. Quality of 

Language and Literacy Instruction: Each of the recorded lessons was 

scored using two new scaled developed for the Classroom Assessment 

Scoring System (CLASS): Language Modeling and Literacy Focus. 

Not assessed. Instruction was of low quality. The average Language 

Modeling rating was 2.59 out of seven, and 59 percent 

received at one or two. The average Literacy Focus 

rating was 2.61 and 44 percent of teachers received a 1 

or 2. Quality of language modeling and literacy focus 

were not significantly correlated. Predictors associated 

with quality: Quality of language instruction was 

negatively associated with teachers' level of education 

(effect size = .06). Attending more langauge and literacy 

workshops was positively related to language modeling 

(es = .05). Twenty percent of the variance in quality of 

language instruction was explained by teacher, 

classroom, and lesson characteristics. Quality of literacy 

instruction was associated with teachers' higher selfefficacy ratings (es = .06), more adult-centered beliefs 

(es = .06), classrooms with a higher percentage of 

children with IEPs (es = .03), and procedural fidelity 

ratings, specifically those items focused on teaching (es 

= .04). Twenty-five percent of the variance in quality of 

teachers' literacy instruction was explained by these 

predictors. 

Not assessed. 

Table A-1c. Language and Literacy Studies: Outcomes—Continued 140 Continues next page
Study

Justice, 

Pence, and 

Wiggins 

(2008)

Landry 

(2002)

Landry, 

Assel, 

Gunnewig, 

and Swank 

(2008)

Rigor of PD 

Evaluation

Outcome Measures Outcomes in

 Educator Knowledge

Outcomes in 

Educator Practice

Child Outcomes

Experimental 

(Random 

Assignment to 

Treatment & 

Control 

Groups)

The following child outcomes were assessed: mathematics (Woodcock 

Johnson [WJ] Applied Problems, Child Math Assessment-Abbreviated 

[CMA-A], Composite Score, and Shape Composition); reading (Test of 

Early Reading Ability [TERA], WJ Letter Word Identification, and WJ 

Spelling); phonological awareness (the Pre School Comprehensive Test 

of Phonological and Print Processing [Pre-CTOPPP], Elision subtest, 

Comprehensive Test of Phonological Processing [CTOPP], Elision 

subtest); language assessments (Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test 

[PPVT] and Test of Language Development [TOLD]); and behavioral 

outcomes (Social Skills Rating system [SSRS] and Pre School Learning 

Behavior Scale [PLBS]). Classroom outcomes assessed were overall 

classroom environment (Early Childhood Environmental Rating Scale 

Revised [ECERS-R]), teacher-child relationships (Arnett Detachment, 

Harshness, Permissiveness, and Positive Interactions scales) and 

classroom instruction (Teacher Behavioral Rating Scale [TBRS], TBRS 

Written Expression scale, TBRS Phonological Awareness scale, TBRS 

Book Reading and Oral Language scales, and TBRS Math Concepts 

scale)

Not assessed No impacts were found on classroom instruction 

outcomes. Impacts on classroom quality and teacherchild interaction outcomes could not be determined 

because of unreliable (inflated) data from 8 classrooms 

on the relevant measures

No impacts on child outcomes were found.

Pre-Post w/ 

Comparison 

Group (Not 

Randomly 

Assigned)

The teacher behavior checklist, used for both assessment of intervention 

effects, and in discussions between teachers and researchers to develop 

self-reflective practice, included: use of literacy related activities; 

environment and portfolios of literacy skills; responsive teaching 

practices; team teaching; effective book reading; oral language use. This 

was collected on a monthly basis. Children were administered the 

following battery assessments at pre-test in the fall, and again at posttest in the late spring: Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test, Expressive 

Vocabulary Test, Preschool Language Scale, Developing Skills 

Checklist subtests for print concepts, letter knowledge, and phonological 

awareness. 

Not assessed. Teachers in the intervention made significantly greater 

gains than comparison teachers in all areas, with 

average gains of about .75 on a five-point scale on oral 

language, literacy activities, team teaching, and best 

practice subscales. Conducting effective book reads 

showed the most dramatic change of about 1.5 points. 

Results are somewhat unclear, but do indicate that children in intervention 

classrooms outperformed children in control classrooms on the language and 

literacy assessments. 

Experimental 

(Random 

Assignment to 

Treatment & 

Control 

Groups)

The following child outcomes were assessed: mathematics (Woodcock 

Johnson [WJ] Applied Problems, Child Math Assessment-Abbreviated 

[CMA-A], Composite Score, and Shape Composition); reading (Test of 

Early Reading Ability [TERA], WJ Letter Word Identification, and WJ 

Spelling); phonological awareness (the Pre School Comprehensive Test 

of Phonological and Print Processing [Pre-CTOPPP], Elision subtest, 

Comprehensive Test of Phonological Processing [CTOPP], Elision 

subtest); language assessments (Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test 

[PPVT] and Test of Language Development [TOLD]); and behavioral 

outcomes (Social Skills Rating system [SSRS] and Pre School Learning 

Behavior Scale [PLBS]). Classroom outcomes assessed were overall 

classroom environment (Early Childhood Environmental Rating Scale 

Revised [ECERS-R]), teacher-child relationships (Arnett Detachment, 

Harshness, Permissiveness, and Positive Interactions scales) and 

classroom instruction (Teacher Behavioral Rating Scale [TBRS], TBRS 

Written Expression scale, TBRS Phonological Awareness scale, TBRS 

Book Reading and Oral Language scales, and TBRS Math Concepts 

scale)

Not assessed In Doors to Discovery classrooms, a positive impact 

was found on early literacy instruction and early 

language instruction. In Let's Begin with the Letter 

People classrooms, a positive impact was found on 

classroom quality and early literacy instruction.

No impacts on child outcomes were found.

Table A-1c. Language and Literacy Studies: Outcomes—Continued 141 Continues next page
Study

Lonigan and 

Schatschneid

er (2008)

Landry, 

Swank, 

Smith, Assel, 

and 

Gunnewig 

(2006)

Rigor of PD 

Evaluation

Outcome Measures Outcomes in

 Educator Knowledge

Outcomes in 

Educator Practice

Child Outcomes

Experimental 

(Random 

Assignment to 

Two Treatment 

Groups & A 

Control Group)

Mathematics: Woodcock Johnson Applied Problems, Child Math 

Assessment Abbreviated Composite Score and Shape Composition

Reading: Test of Early Reading Ability (TERA), Woodcock Johnson 

Letter Word Identification, Woodcock Johnson Spelling. 

Phonological awareness: Preschool Comprehensive Phonological and 

Print Processing (Pre-CTOPPP), Elision subtest, Comprehensive Test 

of Phonological Processing Kindergarten (CTOPP), Elision subtest.

Language Assessments: Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test (PPVT), Test 

of Language Development (TOLD)- Grammatic Understanding Subtest.

Behavioral Assessments: Social Skills Rating System (SSRS)- Social 

Skills and Problem Behaviors scales, Preschool Learning Behaviors 

(PLBS)

Overall Classroom Environment: Early Childhood Rating Scale-Revised 

(ECERS-R).

Teacher-Child Relationships: Arnett Detachment, Harshness, 

Permissiveness, Positive Interactions

Classroom Instruction: Teacher Behavior Rating Scale (TBRS) Print 

and Letter Knowledge, Written Expression, Phonological Awareness, 

Book Reading and Oral Language, and Math Concepts scales

Not assessed. Literacy Express- A statistically significant difference 

between the control and treatment group was found on 

the ECERS-R during the spring pre-kindergarten followup with the treatment group scoring higher than the 

control group (d=1.29). There was also a statistically 

significant difference on the Phonological Awareness 

subscale of the TBRS with the treatment group 

providing more instruction in phonological awareness 

compared to the control group (d=1.26).

LM Early Childhood Express supplemented with Open 

Court Reading Pre-K - A statistically significant 

difference between the control and treatment group was 

found on the Phonological Awareness subscale of the 

TBRS with the treatment group providing more 

instruction in phonological awareness compared to the 

control group (d=1.41).

Literacy Express- A statistically significant difference between the control 

and treatment group in behavioral outcomes was found during the 

kindergarten follow-up with Literacy Express classrooms exhibiting weaker 

learning behaviors than the control group (d=-.38).

LM Early Childhood Express supplemented with Open Court Reading PreK - Statistically significant differences favoring the treatment group were 

detected between the control and treatment group scores on: the Woodcock 

Johnson Applied Problems assessment for the spring of pre-kindergarten 

(d=.36) and the spring of kindergarten (d=.48); the fall assessment of the 

Woodcock Johnson Letter Word Identification Test (d=.41); the prekindergarten spring assessments of the TERA (d=.68), Woodcock Johnson 

Letter Word Identification Test (d=.51), and Woodcock Johnson Spelling Test 

(d=.46); the spring kindergarten assessments of the TERA (d=.76) and 

Woodcock Johnson Letter Word Identification Test (d=.50); the spring prekindergarten (d=.32) and spring kindergarten (d=.38) assessment of the PreCTOPPP/CTOPP; and the fall pre-kindergarten TOLD Grammatic 

Understanding assessment (d=.38); and spring pre-kindergarten and spring 

kindergarten TOLD

 Grammatic Understanding assessment (d=.40 and d=.46, respectively) and

 PPVT (d=.40 and .48, respectively). 

A teacher behavior rating scale was developed to assess changes in 

language and literacy instruction. The scale included the following 

content areas which were linked to the pd content areas: (a) general 

types of activities and materials, including responsive teaching 

behaviors; (b) lesson plans/dynamic assessments; (c) centers; (d) book 

reading behaviors; (e) print and alphabet knowledge; (f) phonological 

awareness; (g) written expression; (h) oral language use with students; 

and (i) team teaching. Target teachers in year 1 were rated six times, 

and the control teachers three times. In year 2, newly trained teachers 

were rated monthly, and second-year trained teachers were rated four 

times a year. Teachers also completed the Teacher Orientation Scale 

(adapted from Payne, 1996)at the beginning of year 1, which assessed 

whether they placed more emphasis on social-emotional or cognitive 

development. About 35 percent of the total number of classrooms across 

the target and control conditions was randomly selected for assessment, 

and 10 children from each classroom were randomly selected. Children 

were assessed at pre-and post-test (fall and spring) using the Memory 

and Auditory Analysis subscales of the 

Developing Skills Checklist (DSC; CTB/McGraw Hill, 1990); the 

Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test-III (PPVT-3; Dunn, Dunn, & Dunn, 

1997); the Expressive Vocabulary Test (EVT; Williams, 1997); and the 

Preschool Language Scale, third edition (PLS-3; Zimmerman, Steiner, 

& Pond, 1992). Teachers also completed a survey at the end of year 1, 

developed for the use of this study, to assess their 

perception of the impact of the early literacy skills focus on children's 

social-emotional development. 

Teachers showed "less" growth in 

phonological awareness. 

Across target teachers (based on effect sizes, small = 

.20-.49; moderate = .50-.79; large > .80), 60 percent 

showed strong growth and 30 percent showed moderate 

growth in most areas on the rating scale. At the end of 

year 1, teachers placed a stronger emphasis on academic 

versus social-emotional orientation compared to control 

teachers. 

A multilevel, mixed model was used, and the classroom (instead of child) was 

used as the unit of analysis. More than 85 percent of teachers perceived 

increases in social-emotional behavior. The intervention in year 1 had positive 

effects on children alphabet knowledge (large and moderate effect sizes at 40 

percent of sites) and phonological awareness (large and moderate effect sizes 

at 35 percent of sites). Children in target classrooms made greater gains in 

following two-part commands (PLS Auditory Comprehension subscale) and 

in their ability to use language (PLS Expressive Comprehension subscale). 

About one-third of sites demonstrated large and moderate effect sizes in 

auditory comprehension, and 26 percent demonstrated large effect sizes for 

gains in expressive language skills. More sites showed small to large gains in 

vocabulary development than in syntactic and semantic language skills. Fiftyfive percent of sites showed small to large effect sizes for gains in children's 

vocabulary knowledge (PPVT-3) and 40 percent in children's ability to label 

objects and actions (EVT). In year 2, comparing children's skill gains on the 

PLS-AC after the intervention v. when they were in a control classroom, 73 

percent of the sites showed small to large effect sizes, representing greater 

gains in children's language understanding. Sixty-nine percent of sites showed 

similar effect sizes on the PLS-EC showing greater gains in children's use of 

language, 45 percent of sites had teachers assist children in making greater 

gains in receptive and expressive vocabulary, 50 percent of sites showed gains 

in children's alphabet knowledge, and 45 percent in phonological awareness. 

Children of target teachers in their second year of training compared to 

controls, and showed gains across all skills. There were few differences in 

child outcomes based on teachers being in their first vs. second year of 

training. Additional professional development resulted in only a small number 

of sites showing significantly greater gains in vocabulary and phonological 

awareness. 

QuasiExperimental 

(No Random 

Assignment; 

Controls for 

Baseline Group 

Differences)

Table A-1c. Language and Literacy Studies: Outcomes—Continued 142 Continues next page
Study

Lonigan and 

Whitehurst 

(1998)

Rigor of PD 

Evaluation

Outcome Measures Outcomes in

 Educator Knowledge

Outcomes in 

Educator Practice

Child Outcomes

Experimental 

(Random 

Assignment to 

Treatment & 

Control 

Groups)

Children were assessed at pre-and post-test using the Peabody Picture 

Vocabulary Test-Revised (PPVT-R; Form L at pre-test, Form M at posttest; Dunn & Dunn, 1981); the Expressive One-Word Picture 

Vocabulary Test (EOWPVT at pre-test; Gardner, 1979; EOWPVT-R at 

post-test; Gardner, 1990); the Verbal Expression subtest of the Illinois 

Test of Psycholinguistic Abilities (ITPA-VE; Kirk, McCarthy, & Kirk, 

1968). In addition, 66 children at post-test were shown two books and 

asked open-ended questions. The interactions were audiotaped and then 

coded. Validity: "At pretest, scores on each of the three tests were only 

moderately correlated (ranging from r = .27 to r = .66), suggesting that 

these tests assessed somewhat different dimensions of oral language." 

Reliability: "Indices of internal consistency for each test are high (e.g., 

split-half reliabilities: PPVT-R = .80, EOWPVT = .94, ITPA-VE = 

.86)." The authors also reported on the correlations between pre- and 

post-test for the measures; correlations ranged from .57 to .73, 

indicating "moderately high reliability across time and form."

Not assessed. Not assessed. In the high compliance centers, the combined intervention group (home plus 

school) significantly outperformed the control group on the EOWPVT, but 

none of the three experimental groups were significantly different from each 

other, and the differences between the two other experimental groups and the 

control group were not significant. In the low compliance centers, the school 

group performed significantly lower than all three of the other groups. On the 

ITPA-VE, all three intervention groups scored significantly higher than the 

control group (regardless of compliance). Scores for the home group were 

significantly higher than scores for either the school group or the combined 

group. No significant effects were found for the PPVT. Regarding recorded 

interactions with books, the three experimental groups scored significantly 

higher on a majority of the variables (e.g., mean length of utterance, diversity 

of words) than the control group (there were few significant differences 

between the three experimental groups) in high compliance centers only. 

Table A-1c. Language and Literacy Studies: Outcomes—Continued 143 Continues next page
Study

McCutchen, 

Abbott, 

Green, 

Beretvas, 

Cox, Potter 

et al. (2002)

McGillFranzen, 

Allington, 

Yokoi, and 

Brooks 

(1999)

National 

Center for 

Education 

Evaluation 

and Regional 

Assistance, 

Institute of 

Education 

Sciences 

(2007)

Rigor of PD 

Evaluation

Outcome Measures Outcomes in

 Educator Knowledge

Outcomes in 

Educator Practice

Child Outcomes

QuasiExperimental 

(No Random 

Assignment; 

Controls for 

Baseline Group 

Differences)

Teachers were given an assessment of their knowledge of language 

structure, the Informal Survey of Linguistic Knowledge (Moats, 1994; 

Moats & Lyon, 1996). Teachers' general knowledge was also assessed 

using the Cultural Literacy Test (Riverside Publishing, 1989). Teachers' 

practice was also observed on multiple occasions throughout the school 

year, and extensive field notes were coded into for major categories: 

knowledge affordance; literary activity; textual context; and group 

context. In addition, kindergarten children were given a battery of five 

assessments at four timepoints (Sept.,Nov.,Feb.,May). The Test of 

Phonological Awareness (TOPA; Torgesen & Bryant, 1994) was used 

to test their phonological awareness. The listening comprehension from 

the Metropolitan Readiness Tests (MTR6; Nurss & McGauvran, 1995) 

was used to test their listening comprehension. A timed alphabet writing 

task validated by Berninger & Rutberg, 1992 was used to test 

orthographic fluency. Lastly, word reading was assessed using the GatesGacGintie Reading Tests (MacGintie & MacGintie, 1989). 

The teachers who participated in the 

intervention deepened their phonological 

knowledge after participation in the 

workshop.

After participation in the workshop, experimental group 

teachers spent significantly more time on activities 

directed toward phonological awareness than controlgroup teachers (mean 7.8 minutes as compared to mean 

3.3 minutes), with an effect size of .82. Experimental 

group teachers were also found to spend more time on 

explicit comprehension instruction (mean = 1.82 

minutes) than control group teachers (mean = .02 

minutes). There was no difference in the amount of time 

spent on orthographic activities between experimental 

and control group teachers. 

The experimental condition was not related to kindergarteners' growth in 

phonological awareness or listening comprehension, but was associated with 

growth of orthographic fluency. The children in the experimental condition 

gained, on average, about 50 percent more in letter production than children 

in control classrooms. Performance on word reading, measured only at a 

single timepoint, was the same for children in the experimental and control 

groups. Growth of phonological awareness was significantly related to 

teachers' use of phonological awareness strategies. 

Experimental 

(Random 

Assignment to 

Treatment & 

Control 

Groups)

Students in all 18 classrooms were pre- and post-tested using the 

following measures: Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test - Revised (PPVTR); Concepts about Print and Diagnostic Survey (CAP; Clay, 1993). In 

addition to child assessments, observations of instruction were taken 

using the Classroom Literacy Environment Profile (CLEP). Interrater 

reliability on this instrument has been found to be consistently in the 80-

90 percent range. Teachers were also interviewed, and analyzed 

teachers' weekly read-aloud logs, which indicated how many books were 

read per week in each classroom. 

Not assessed. Children whose teachers had attended training had 

almost twice as many books read aloud to them each 

week as their peers whose teachers did not participated 

in training. Furthermore, in classrooms where teachers 

received training, CLEP observations showed that book 

displays were found to be attractive, the classrooms had 

richer print environments, and teachers were more likely 

to link reading and writing activities together. 

Post-test and gains scores analyses indicate that the training intervention had 

positive effects on children's achievement, particularly on measures focusing 

on literacy growth. Effects were present, but more modest on measures of 

children's vocabulary (PPVT) and letter knowledge.

QuasiExperimental 

(No Random 

Assignment; 

Controls for 

Baseline Group 

Differences)

Children's language and literacy skills: (1) The Pre-LAS (Duncan & 

DeAvila, 1998) assessed English proficiency; (2) The Preschool 

Comprehensive Test of Phonological and Print Processing (PreCTOPPP; Lonigan et al., 2007) assessed print and letter knowledge; (3) 

The Expressive One-Word Picture Vocabulary Test (EOWPVT; 

Brownell, 2000) assessed expressive vocabulary; (4) The Preschool 

Language Scale (PLS-4; Zimmerman et al., 2002) assessed auditory 

comprehension; and (5) The Social Competence & Behavior Evaluation 

(30-item) - Teacher Rating (La Freniere & Dumas, 1996) assessed 

social competence, anger-aggression, and anxiety-withdrawal. 

Classroom observations and surveys: (1) The Teacher Behavior 

Rating Scale (TBRS; Landry, 2004) and 11 items from the Early 

Childhood Environment Rating Scale - Revised (ECERS-R; Harms et 

al., 1998) were used to assess classroom practice and overall quality. 

Researchers report that teacher 

knowledge and skills were measured 

indirectly though teaching experience 

and professional development, which 

contribute to knowledge and skills. ERF 

did not impact years of teaching 

experience. ERF significantly increased 

the number of hours of professional 

development that focused on language 

and literacy topics. ERF had a positive 

impact on the mode of training with a 

higher proportion of ERF teachers 

getting professional development on 

language and literacy topics through 

mentoring or tutoring. A larger 

proportion of ERF teachers also 

reported receiving workshop training on 

language and literacy topics. 

 ERF had statistically significant positive impacts on 

language environment of the classroom, book-reading 

practices, the variety of phonological-awareness 

activities and children's engagement in them, materials 

and teaching practices to support print and letter 

knowledge and writing, and the extensiveness and 

recency of child assessment practices. Additionally, 

ERF had positive impacts on more general aspects of 

classroom quality including the quality of teacher-child 

interactions, the organization of the classroom, and the 

planning of activities for children. 

ERF had significant positive impact on children's print and letter knowledge 

(d = 0.34) but not on phonological or oral language. ERF did not impact 

children's social-emotional skills. 

Table A-1c. Language and Literacy Studies: Outcomes—Continued 144 Continues next page
Study

Neuman 

(1999)

Neuman and 

Cunningham 

(2009)

O'Connor, 

Fulmer, 

Harty, and 

Bell (2005)

Rigor of PD 

Evaluation

Outcome Measures Outcomes in

 Educator Knowledge

Outcomes in 

Educator Practice

Child Outcomes

Pre-Post w/ 

Comparison 

Group (Not 

Randomly 

Assigned)

A battery of children's assessments was conducted in September, and 

again in May. The Test of Early Reading Abilities (TERA; 1981; 

reliability: .89) was used to evaluate whether children could identify 

signs in their environment. Children were given a letter-naming test 

(Clay, 1979: reliability: .97), a test to measure their understanding of 

print concepts (Clay's Concepts of Print, 1979: reliability: .95), a test to 

measure their understanding of writing (Purcell-Gates, 1996; reliability: 

.90), and one to evaluate their understanding of narrative (Purcell-Gates, 

1996: reliability: 1.0) Researchers assessed children's receptive 

vocabulary using the Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test (PPVT). 

Researchers also made coded observations of the book area in each 

classroom, child-teacher interactions, and collected daily schedules and 

teacher interviews. A follow-up battery of children's assessments was 

administered 6 months after the intervention. (Assessments were 

modified slightly--e.g., testing letter knowledge of all 26 letters instead 

of a sample--to avoid a ceiling effect.

Not assessed. Following the intervention, 56 classrooms had a book 

reading area, as compared to 21 before the intervention. 

83 in total out of 100 made clear efforts to enhance 

children's print environment. Observations indicate that 

teacher-child literacy interactions almost doubled over 

the seven-month intervention period. Teachers selfreport of reading activities reveal that teachers who 

received the intervention were more likely to read more 

often, for more minutes, and in more subject areas, both 

to groups and to individual children, than the control 

group. 

Comparisons of children in the Books Aloud intervention classrooms and 

comparison children revealed that Books Aloud children showed statistically 

significant greater scores at post-test compared to their counterparts on 

measures of concepts of print, letter name knowledge, concepts of writing, 

and concepts of narrative. There were no differences found on receptive 

language scores or environmental print. A follow-up assessment 6 months 

after the end of the project indicated that effects on children's outcomes 

endured. Children exposed to Books Aloud scored about comparison children 

on five out of six measures of early language and literacy development.

Experimental 

(Random 

Assignment to 

Treatment & 

Control 

Groups)

Teacher Knowledge was measured by the Teacher Knowledge 

Assessment of Early Language and Literacy Development. This was a 

multiple choice, true/false assessment to determine growth in knowledge 

between pre/post assessments. Two forms were created (one for pretest, one for post-test). Each assessment had 45 items that addressed the 

eight core competencies of language and literacy, and 22 items that 

addressed foundational knowledge in child development (based on 

NAEYC standards). Teacher Practice was assessed using the Early 

Langauge and Literacy Classroom Observation (ELLCO; Smith & 

Dickinson, 2002) in center-based settings, and the Child/Home Early 

Language and Literacy Observation (CHELLO; Nueman, Dwyer & 

Koh, 2007) in home-based settings. 

No significant differences were found in 

teacher knowledge between teachers 

who received coursework plus coaching, 

coursework alone, or the control group. 

Specifically, neither treatment group 

outperformed the control group on posttest knowledge scores (accounting for 

pre-test scores as a covariate). The two 

control groups had equivalent post-test 

scores, indicating that coaching did not 

provide additional benefit for teacher 

knowledge. There were no significant 

differences between center-based and 

home-based settings on teacher 

knowledge. 

Significant improvements in language and literacy 

practices were found for teachers who received both the 

three-credit course on language and literacy and the 

ongoing coaching. The effect size was large and 

considered to be educationally meangingful for both 

center-based and home based settings (Cohen's d = .77 

for center-based and .82 for home-based settings). 

Improvements were seen in the Book Area, Writing 

Area, Physical Environment, Support for Learning, and 

Teaching Strategies. Cousework alone had little effect 

on improving educator practices in either center-based 

(Cohen's d =.23) or home-based settings (Cohen's d = 

.01). Examination of shared items across the ELLCO 

and CHELLO showed that although scores were lower 

at pre-test for home-based providers compared to centerbased providers, by post-test, providers who had 

received both coursework and coaching were virtually at 

the same level of quality as center-based providers who 

had received both coursework and coaching. 

Not assessed.

Pre-Post w/ 

Comparison 

Group (Not 

Randomly 

Assigned)

Phonemic segmentation and letter naming (O'Connor & Jenkins, 1999) 

were given in kindergarten in Oct, Jan, and May and were given in first 

grade in Oct. Three subtests of the Woodcock Reading Mastery TestsRevised (WRMT-R, Woodcock, 1998) were given in grades 1 to 3 in 

Oct., Jan., and May. The Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test, third 

edition (PPVT-III; Dunn, Dunn, & Dunn, 1997) in March in the first 

and fourth year, and to the control groups in March. Teachers were 

also surveyed about their instructional practices for teaching reading. 

Observations of 40 to 80 minutes in each classroom (twice a year for 

control group, three times a year for intervention groups). In the last 

year of the study, videotaped 60 to 80 minutes of instruction in each of 

the intervention classrooms (except for two teachers). Because of a lack 

of a control group in kindergarten, outcomes in kindergarten were not 

assessed.

Not assessed. General education teachers agreed to teach reading by 

grouping children by ability level. In kindergarten, 

grouping was easy because teachers used learning 

centers regularly. In the older grades, teachers kept 

their instructional group times short (10 to 15 minutes 

per group at the beginning of the year, and 20 to 30 

minutes near the end of the year). Whole group 

instruction was also used in grades 1-3. Special ed 

teachers were already conducting instruction closely in 

line with the intervention model (i.e., small group 

instruction). However, the researchers note that two 

teachers made no changes to their instructional practice, 

despite attending all meetings and contributing to 

discussions. These two teachers did not differ from the 

other teachers on years of experience (10+ years) and 

were well regarded by others. 

Professional Development alone (layer 1) improved reading outcomes 

significantly over the control group for all reading measures except Word 

Identification at the end of Grade 2, and all reading measures by the end of 

Grade 3. Children in layer 2 classes (PD plus additional, intensive 

instruction) outscored controls on all of the reading measures at both Grade 2 

and Grade 3. Scores of all groups of students (varying reading ability and 

SES) improved over time. SES did not influence response to treatment 

significantly. Although higher SES students performed better at beginning 

and end of year, learning gains across schools were similar, and students 

without disabilities in the low SES school were above the national average by 

the end of third grade. In addition, fewer students were being identified with 

learning disabilities (LD) by third grade. However, the authors were not 

confident that this was due to the intervention, nor whether rates might rise 

again in fourth grade dude to the more difficult reading material in the later 

grades of elementary school. 

Table A-1c. Language and Literacy Studies: Outcomes—Continued 145 Continues next page
Study

Podhajski and Nathan (2005)Pence, Justice, and Wiggins (2008)Roskos, Rosemary, and Varner (2006)

Rigor of PD 

Evaluation

Outcome Measures Outcomes in

 Educator Knowledge

Outcomes in 

Educator Practice

Child 

Pre-Post w/ Comparison Group (Not Randomly Assigned)

Providers completed a demographic survey. Providers who participated in training were also administered at pre- and post-test an assessment of pre-literacy development and general language structure using Knowledge of Language Structure Questionnaire (KLSQ), consisting of

30 multiple-choice items that sampled content from the training course. Internal consistency was high (.87). At the end of the study, providers also completed a course and mentorship evaluation, to evaluate their opinion of the efficacy of the program. Children in both intervention ancontrol classrooms were evaluated using the Preliteracy Skills Screening Test (PLSS), which measures rhyming, sentence repetition, naming, blending, sentence segmentation, letter naming, syllable segmentation, deletion, and multi-syllabic word repetition. Internal consistency was high (.85). 

Child caregivers who received training were found to have statistically significant increases on KLSQ scores of language knowledge, using paired ttests. Before the training, they scored 82

percent correct on average; afterward, it jumped to 91 percent. 

Not assessed. Children in classrooms in which teac

program showed significantly greate6-month time period, as measured by proportion of children in interventiopreliteracy level as compared to con

Experimental (Random Assignment to Treatment & Control Groups)

Forty-five-item curriculum fidelity checklist administered fall, winter, spring and based on core curriculum features, subscales: instructional processes- focused contrast, modeling, event cast, open question, expansion, recast, redirect; and implementation during activity contexts

daily structure, dramatic play, art, story, group, music.Chronbach alphas of instructional process ranged from .67 to .80 depending on the wave of data collection; observers had 93 percent agreement in scoring. Chronbach alphas of implementation activity context ranged from .88 to .98, observers had 97 percent agreement in scoring.A teacher self-administered questionnaire was used to measure teachers' assessment of the quality of program delivery and comfort of implementation.

Not assessed. Teachers in the treatment group were rated higher on 

each of the instructional process fidelity items (except open questions) when compared to comparison teachersEffect sizes were as follows: focused contrast (.67), modeling (.35), event cast (.89), expansion (.50), recast (.98), redirect (.82). Teachers in the treatment group also scored higher to a statistically significant degree on indices of some of the activity context categories. Effect sizes of significant differences were as follows: daily structure (2.12), dramatic play (2.82), music (1.24), and art (marginally significant, 1.55). Treatment teachers were found to increase their use of language-stimulation techniques from fall to spring, with mostly medium to large effect sizes (focused contrast, d=.52; modeling, d=.45; event cast, d=.94, open question, d=2.05; expansion, d=.90, recast, d=.83; redirect, d=.12). Treatment teachers' fidelity to the activity contexts items

transitioned from high scores in the fall to low scores in the winter and a rebound to high scores (matching those in the fall) in the spring.

Not assessed.

Descriptive Three sources of data were used: 1) course descriptions; 2) syllabi and 

related documents for all early literacy-related course work; and 3) telephone interviews with program coordinators lasting about 30 minutes. Information was compared to a "gold standard" for literacy pedagogy, as defined by the state of Ohio. Information from these three sources was also used to categorize curriculum components by domain (knowing, assessing, planning, teaching), and by content goal (knowledge and skill). 

The degree of external alignment was strong among all three bachelor's degree programs, minimal to moderate among the associate's degree programs, and weak to minimal among the CDA programs. The degree of horizontal alignment was moderate among the bachelor's degree programs, minimal among the associate's degree programs, and weak to minimal among the CDA programs. The degree of vertical alignment was strong among the three bachelor's degree programs, but minimal/moderate among the associate's degree programs, and weak to minimal among the CDA programs. No curricula by program type fully met the "gold standard" of state-sponsored professional education curriculum in preschool and primary grade literacy pedagogy. 

Not assessed. Not assessed.

146

Table A-1c. Language and Literacy Studies: Outcomes—Continued
Study

Wasik and 

Bond (2001)

Wasik, Bond, 

and Hindman 

(2006)

Rigor of PD 

Evaluation

Outcome Measures Outcomes in

 Educator Knowledge

Outcomes in 

Educator Practice

Child Outcomes

Experimental 

(Random 

Assignment to 

Treatment & 

Control 

Groups)

Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test - III (PPVT-III; Dunn & Dunn, 1998) 

was used as both a pre-test and post-test. A second receptive vocabulary 

test, modeled after the PPVT-III, as well as an expressive vocabulary 

test, were made for randomly-selected vocabulary words (out of the 100 

introduced as part of the intervention). These two latter tests were only 

administered post-intervention. In addition, classroom observations 

were conducted in each classroom during the 9th and 11th week of the 

intervention; all teachers were observed while they read the same two 

stories. A frequency count was tallied for the number of times teachers 

used 10 target vocabulary words from the stories.

Not assessed. A significant main effect of group and word, as well as 

a significant group X word interaction, were found for 

the frequency count of vocabulary words used during 

observed book reading sessions. Intervention teachers 

used some target words more often than the control 

group teachers. 

A treatment by trial interaction was found for the PPVT-III, indicating that 

the intervention and control groups did not differ from each other at pretest on 

the PPVT-III, but that the intervention group performed better than the 

control group on the PPVT-III at posttest. Both the AM and PM intervention 

children outperformed their control group counterparts on the receptive and 

expressive vocabulary posttests. 

Experimental 

(Random 

Assignment to 

Treatment & 

Control 

Groups)

Child outcomes: (1) PPVT-III (Dunn & Dunn, 1997), (2) EOWPVTIII (Brownell, 2000), and (3) alphabet knowledge (naming all 26 

letters). Teacher outcomes: (1) observed book readings (pre/post) were 

coded for (a) informational questions related ot the book, (b) 

informational talk related to the book, (c) managerial questions 

unrelated to the book, and (d) managerial talk unrelated to the book. (2) 

teachers were observed for 30-40 minutes during activities other than 

book reading and a checklist of observed behaviors coded for four 

components of active listening, four components of providing feedback, 

and four components of modeling rich language. Observations 

occurred 6 times. Behaviors specific to each training were included in 

each observational protocol which followed that set of training sessions. 

Fidelity of implementation : Teachers were scored by the authors on 

how well they engaged in three dimensions: (a) utilzation of trained 

strategies, (b) material use as part of the lesson, and (c) integration of 

the theme throughout activities to facilitate the consistent use of 

vocabulary. Each item was scored on a 3-point scale (0=not observed 

and not implemented, 1=observed inconsistently, 2=observed 

consistently). 

Not assessed. Teachers were similar at pretest with regard to the 

amount of informational open questions, closed 

questions, or teacher talk that occurred before, during or 

after a book was read. However, at posttest, teachers in 

the intervention group talked more in general during 

book reading compared to teachers in the control group. 

Intervention teachers asked more open-ended questions 

at posttest, and also showed a significant increase in the 

use of open-ended questions during book reading from 

pre- to posttest. Control teachers did not show a 

significant change in the use of open-ended questions 

during book reading from pre- to posttest. Nevertheless, 

there was variability among intervention teachers in the 

amount of open-ended questions used at posttest. 

Observations indicated that 90 percent of all 

intervention teachers used strategies to elicit child 

speech in activities other than book reading. Only 60 

percent of these teachers encouraged children to use the 

theme-related vocabulary outside of book reading. Only 

40 percent offered explicit prais to children 

demonstrating active listening. Partial correlations 

revealed that teacher behaviors during book reading and 

outside of book reading were correlates to children's 

posttest receptive vocabulary, but only teachers' 

behaviors during reading were correlated with children's 

expressive vocabulary. In addition, there were more 

significant associations between teacher behaviors and 

receptive vocabulary than between teacher behaviors 

and expressive vocabulary. The strongest correlations 

were for predictive, reactive, and recalling-reinforcing 

questions before reading. There were no assocations 

between the use of props and children's language skills. 

ANCOVAs (controlling for pretest) revealed that children in the intervention 

condition had significantly larger expressive and receptive vocabularies at 

posttest than children in the control condition. There was a moderately strong 

effect size for expressive (d = .44) and a large effect for receptive (d = .73). 

Alternative explanations of these findings were explored and eliminated. 

Using classroom as the unit of analysis rather than the child, significant 

differences were still found, suggesting that the significant differences in the 

initial analyses were not due to Type I error. Partial correlation analyses 

revealed that higher posttest scores on the PPVT-III (receptive vocabulary) 

were associated with higher levels of implementation of the intervention on the 

part of the teacher. An ANCOVA on posttest alphabet scores revealed that 

the control children did better than the intervention children, suggesting that 

the intervention teachers were not more skilled than the control teachers. 

Pretest scores were not different, suggesting that children in the two groups 

were initially equivalent in skills prior to the intervention. Finally, 

hierarchical regression analyses indicated that both pretest and condition were 

significant predictors of posttest scores for vocabulary, but child age was not. 

 

 

Table A-1c. Language 

 and Literacy Studies: Outcomes—Continued 147 Continues next page
Study

Whitehurst, 

Arnold, 

Epstein, 

Angell, 

Smith, and 

Fischel 

(1994), "A 

Picture Book 

Reading 

Intervention 

in Day Care 

and Home 

for Children 

from LowIncome 

Families"

Whitehurst, 

Epstein, 

Angell, 

Payne, 

Crone, and 

Fischel 

(1994), 

"Outcomes 

of an 

Emergent 

Literacy 

Intervention 

in Head 

Start"

Whitehurst, 

Zevenberege

n, Crone, 

Schultz, 

Velting, and 

Fischel 

(1999)

Rigor of PD 

Evaluation

Outcome Measures Outcomes in

 Educator Knowledge

Outcomes in 

Educator Practice

Child Outcomes

Experimental 

(Random 

Assignment to 

Treatment & 

Control 

Groups)

The same assessments were used as pre- and post-tests: Peabody Picture 

Vocabulary Test-Revised (PPVT-R; Dunn & Dunn, 1981), Expressive 

One-Word Picture Vocabulary Test-Revised (One Word; Gardner, 

1990), Illinois Test of Psycholinguistic Abilities, expressive subscale 

(ITPA; Kirk, McCarthy, & Kirk, 1968), and Our Word (expressive 

vocabulary test of the researchers' devising). The Family Reading 

Survey (Whitehurst, 1990) was also gathered. Construct validity: Only 

moderate correlations between the four measures at pretest suggest that 

they are capturing slightly different dimensions of language (r's ranged 

from .37 to . 52; M=.46). Each test was reported to have moderately 

high reliability across time and across forms (for PPVT-R and One 

Word), as measured by correlations between pre-and posttest scores for 

the control group (r's ranged from .62 to .80). 

Not assessed. Not assessed. ANCOVAs revealed that children in the reading conditions outperformed 

those in the control condition on the One Word and Our Word posttests. For 

example, children in the reading conditions gained approximately double the 

number of words in the Our Word posttest. Significant effects of condition 

also existed for the One Word at the six-month follow-up. However, those 

children in the least compliant center (i.e., the one with the lowest frequency 

of classroom reading) did not benefit from the intervention as did those 

children in the other centers. There was no effect of the intervention on 

PPVT or ITPA scores at posttest or follow-up. 

Experimental 

(Random 

Assignment to 

Treatment & 

Control 

Groups)

The same assessments were used as pre- and post-tests: Peabody Picture 

Vocabulary Test-Revised Form M (PPVT-R; Dunn & Dunn, 1981), 

Expressive One-Word Picture Vocabulary Test (One Word; Gardner, 

1981), Illinois Test of Psycholinguistic Abilities, expressive subscale 

(ITPA; Kirk, McCarthy, & Kirk, 1968), and Developing Skills 

Checklist (DSC; CTB, 1990). Validity: A principal components 

analysis was conducted using the 21 post-test measures, and four 

factors emerged: Language, Writing, Linguistic Awareness, and Print 

Concepts. Most of the factors had loadings on subtests in a way the 

authors expected; however, the analysis was not quite as clean for Print 

Concepts, which had loadings on a measure of rhyming and a measure 

of sound blending, which would both logically fall with Linguistic 

Awareness. Reliability: "Split-half reliability is high for each measure 

(PPVT-R = .80, One Word = .94, ITPA = .86, and DSC = .84). Other 

measures of reliability and validity are reported in the manual for each 

Not assessed. Not assessed. A principal components analysis was conducted using the 21 post-test 

measures. Four factors emerged: Language (e.g. receptive vocabulary, 

expressive language), Writing (e.g. write first name), Linguistic Awareness 

(e.g. segment words), and Print Concepts (e.g. name letters, distinguish 

words/pictures/numbers). Children in the intervention group performed 

significantly better on Writing and Print Concepts, but not on Language and 

Linguistic Awareness, as compared to the control group. There was a 

significant difference for the Identify Sounds and Letters subtest of Linguistic 

Awareness factor. The authors also considered how children's outcomes 

related to their parents' compliance with the intervention (assessed at post-test 

by testing parents' knowledge of which books they had read to their children 

and their report of the frequency of shared reading). The analysis controlled 

for parent IQ, parent education, and frequency of shared reading at pre-test. 

Parents' compliance with the intervention was a significant predictor of 

children's performance on the Language factor. 

Experimental 

(Random 

Assignment to 

Treatment & 

Control 

Groups)

The pre-test consisted of the Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test-Revised 

(PPVT-R; Dunn & Dunn, 1981) and the Developing Skills Checklist 

(DSC; CTB, 1990). The same assessments were used for post-testing at 

the end of Head Start and the end of kindergarten, with the addition of 

the Expressive One-Word Picture Vocabulary Test (One Word; 

Gardner, 1981). The assessments used at the end of the first and second 

grades were the Word Reading subscale of the Stanford Achievement 

Test-Eighth Edition (Psychological Corporation, 1989) and the Word 

Attack subscale of the Woodcock Reading Mastery Tests-Revised 

(Woodcock, 1987). Reliability: "Each assessment device was 

standardized, was normed on a national sample of children, and had 

internal reliability of .80 or higher as determined from the 

standardization sample."

Not assessed. The authors note that there was variability in the degree 

to which Head Start teachers fully implemented the 

curriculum.

Children in the intervention groups performed significantly better than control 

group children on the PPVT and the DSC (total score, made up of tests of 

Memory [e.g., naming letters, blending sounds into words], Auditory [e.g., 

segmenting sentences, rhyming], Print Concepts [e.g., holding a book 

properly, differentiating print from pictures], and Writing [e.g., printing first 

name, writing from left to right] at the end of the Head Start year, as well as 

at the end of kindergarten (with the addition of the One Word at the end of 

kindergarten). However, there were no significant differences between the 

two groups of children on the two reading scores at the end of the first and 

second grades. 

Table A-1c. Language and Literacy Studies: Outcomes—Continued 148 Continues next page
Study

Zevenbergen, 

Whitehurst, 

and 

Zevernbergen 

(2003)

Yaden, Tam, 

Madrigal, 

Brassell, 

Massa, 

Altamirano, 

and 

Armendariz 

(2000)

Rigor of PD 

Evaluation

Outcome Measures Outcomes in

 Educator Knowledge

Outcomes in 

Educator Practice

Child Outcomes

Experimental 

(Random 

Assignment to 

Treatment & 

Control 

Groups)

At pre-test and post-test, each child was administered an adapted 

version of the Bus Story, a standardized story-retelling task (Renfrew, 

1969). After being read a short story with 12 pictures, a child is asked 

to retell the story to the examiner while looking at the pictures. 

Narratives were scored on reference to internal states; qualifying 

comments (e.g. like, almost); use of dialogue; reference to absent 

characters, objects, or events; causal statements (e.g. because, so that); 

wh- questions; direct questions. This test has been found to have 

adequate test-retest (.70) and interrater (.66) reliability. Children were 

also given the Expressive One-Word Picture Vocabulary Test - Revised 

(EOWPVT-R; Gardner, 1990). 

Not assessed. Not assessed. A MANCOVA model controlling for differences in general expressive 

language abilities (as measured by scores on the EOWPVT-R) found that 

children in the intervention group included significantly more evaluative 

devices in their narratives at Time 2 than the control group.

QuasiExperimental 

(No Random 

Assignment; 

Controls for 

Baseline Group 

Differences)

The Spanish Concepts About Print Test (Escamilla, Andrade, Basurto, 

Ruiz, & Clay, 1996) was used as a pre- and post-test. Piagetian clinical 

interviews were used to capture knowledge of written language concepts 

(Ferreiro & Teberosky, 1982). Home visits were used to capture 

literacy activities. From the classroom the following were gathered: 

children's writing products, field notes, photographs, and video. 

Archival records and test scores were obtained from the elementary 

school. 

Not assessed. Not assessed. During the preschool year, the 55 4-year-olds who had a full year of the 

intervention showed a significant gain in knowledge about print. 

Furthermore, at the beginning of their kindergarten year, these children 

outscored children from other preschool programs on tests of upper- and 

lower-case letter identification, and vowel and consonant recognition in 

English. 

Table A-1c. Language and Literacy Studies: Outcomes—Continued 149
Study Research Questions Research Design Sample General Comments

Arnold, 

Fisher, 

Doctoroff 

and Dobbs 

(2002)

Can the incorporation of mathrelevant activities into 

preschool children's daily 

activities (circle time, 

transitions, mealtime and 

small group activities) affect 

the children's scores on 

standardized math assessments 

and their enjoyment of math 

(measured by self-report and 

teacher report)?

The eight classrooms were matched on full- vs. 

half-day status and morning vs. afternoon hours 

within centers, and one of each matched pair was 

randomly assigned to the intervention condition. 

After teachers were trained, they implemented the 

program for six weeks, during which they tracked 

and rated their use of the various math activities. 

There were pre-test assessments of the children's 

emergent math skills and interest in math activities. 

Teachers completed surveys about children's 

interest in math activities and their own attitudes 

towards teaching math. The assessments were 

repeated after the intervention ended, and 

experimental teachers also completed a 

questionnaire about program satisfaction and 

feasibility. 

One-hundred and twelve children from eight 

classrooms in two Head Start centers participated 

(six half-day and two full-day). Children averaged 

53.18 months at pretest. 45 of the children were 

Puerto Rican, 44 were African American, 11 

Anglo American, six Asian and six biracial. 

Median family income for the sample was 

$13,229. 16 teachers from the classrooms (all 

female) participated. Six were Puerto Rican, 6 

Anglo American, two African American, and two 

of unknown ethnicity. 

150 Table A-2a. Early Mathematics Studies: Methodology
Study Research Questions Research Design Sample General Comments

Casey, Erkut, 

Ceder, amd 

Young 

(2008)

(1) Can a geometry 

intervention for 

kindergarteners improve their 

spatial reasoning skills, skills 

that have been found to relate 

to mathematical achievement 

yet which have received little 

focus for young children? (2) 

Can the narrative context of an 

oral storytelling activity serve 

as an effective strategy for 

teaching spatial concepts to 

young children? and (3) Can 

this approach be appealing to 

a broad spectrum of students 

from diverse racial and ethnic 

backgrounds? (4) Given the 

early differences in spatial 

skills found in research, are 

there sex differences in the 

degree to which children 

benefit from a spatial 

intervention?

Study 1: Teachers were randomly assigned to the 

intervention (story +geometry intervention) and 

control conditions. Random assignment was not at 

the student level however. Control group children 

received regular mathematics curriculum while 

intervention group children received the 

supplementary materials of the story + geometry 

activities in addition to the regular curriculum. 

Study 2: Teachers were randomly assigned to story 

+geometry intervention or to geometry-alone 

intervention. Same activities in both groups but in 

first group information was presented within a 

story context as if told by the dragon puppet. 

Study 1: 155 half-day kindergarten children in 

lower middle class ethnically and racially diverse 

suburban community (80 girls; 75 boys). 60 

percent of students in the school system were of 

minority background and 31 percent qualified for 

free or reduced-price meals. All six teachers in a 

public school volunteered to participate. They 

taught both morning and afternoon classes, so 12 

classes were in the sample. Study 2: 63 students 

in full-day kindergarten taught by four teachers in 

three elementary schools in an urban school 

system. Across the three schools, 81 percent of the 

students were of minority background. 

Communities schools were in low income areas. 

74 percent of students in these schools, on 

average, qualified for free or reduced price lunch. 

Previous evidence suggests that learning material in 

a story context results in greater retention and recall; 

findings are quite robust. Thus, the authors 

hypothesized that making mathematical content 

integral to a story would improve learning and 

retention. Some other studies in low SES samples 

with young children have found greater 

improvement in mathematical achievement when a 

mathematics-literacy approach was used. 

151 Table A-2a. Early Mathematics Studies: Methodology—Continued Continues next page
Study Research Questions Research Design Sample General Comments

Clements and 

Sarama 

(2008)

"Research questions included 

the following: Can Building 

Blocks be implemented with 

high fidelity, and does the 

measure of fidelity predict 

achievement gains? Does 

Building Blocks have 

substantial positive effects on 

the quality of the mathematics 

environment and teaching? 

What are the effects of the 

Building Blocks curriculum, 

as implemented under diverse 

conditions, on the 

mathematics achievement of 

preschoolers? A final, 

secondary, question was, If 

these effects are significant, 

does the increase in the quality 

of the mathematics 

environment and teaching 

mediate the effects on 

mathematics achievement? "

Random assignment of the 24 low income 

classrooms to Building Blocks, the Preschool 

Mathematics Curriculum, or to continue 

mathematics activities as their school usually 

carried them out. Similarly, random assignment of 

the 12 mixed income classrooms to one of the three 

groups. Groups are: Building Blocks, comparison 

and control groups. "Children in all classrooms 

were assessed at the beginning and end of the 

school year using the EMA. Teachers began 

teaching mathematics after the beginning 

assessments were completed. Mentors collected 

fidelity data in the intervention classrooms in three 

time periods: early fall (after mathematics 

instruction had begun), winter, and late spring. 

COEMET observers similarly collected three times 

during the year. "

Sample included preschools serving low income 

children (Head Start and pre-k), and preschools 

serving a more diverse population (mixed low and 

middle income) in New York state. From more 

than 100 volunteers in the first group, 24 teachers 

were randomly selected. From more than 20 

volunteers in the second group, 12 teachers were 

randomly selected. 8 children wererandomly 

selected in each classroom (selected children were 

in appropriate age range to attend kindergarten the 

coming year and had returned informed consents). 

One teacher left the sample because of illness and 

four children moved. Final sample of 35 teachers 

and 276 children. Complete data for 253 children.

Research design involves two research based 

curricula and a control group with mathematics 

activities as usually carried out in the children's 

school. The two research based curricula involved 

similar dosage. They differed in that Building 

Blocks did not have separate units focusing on 

mathematics topics, but interwove topics into 

different activities at different levels. The 

curriculum research framework used to develop 

Building Blocks involved substantial formative 

evaluation. In addition, teachers were to adapt the 

small group activities according to their assessment 

of children's development and understanding while 

in the Preschool Mathematics Curriculum activities 

were closely adhered to. 

152 Table A-2a. Early Mathematics Studies: Methodology—Continued Continues next page
Study Research Questions Research Design Sample General Comments

Sophian 

(2004)

Does a mathematics 

curriculum for Head Start 3- 

and 4-year-olds, focusing 

specifically on the use of 

alternative units and the 

effects of variation in unit size 

on numerical outcomes 

(focusing heavily throughout 

on measurement and 

geometric shapes) improve 

math assessment scores?

Twelve Head Start sites were identified as full-day 

programs in a single city in Hawaii. The 

experimental curriculum was presented in three 

sites in different sections of the city. A further 

three received a beginning literacy curriculum, and 

three received only the pre- and post-testing for the 

study. The sites were selected based on a matching 

procedure rather than a random selection 

procedure, based on attrition statistics for each 

center, child ethnicity, proportion of children with 

special needs and teacher credentials. Two of the 

sites were eliminated because they served highly 

transient populations. Three were identified as 

geographically close and serving a high proporiton 

of families of Hawaiian ethnicity. These were 

distributed across the three conditions (one math, 

one literacy, one control condition). Other sites 

were assigned to the condition to obtain 

approximately equal number of children in each 

condition while keeping similarity as high as 

possible on characteristics noted.

The math curriculum was presented in three sites 

with 46 children ranging from two years, nine 

months to four years, seven months at start of 

study. The beginning literacy curriculum was 

presented in three sites with 48 children ranging in 

age from 2 years, six months to four years, seven 

months. The control condition occurred in three 

sites with 29 children ranging from two years 

eight months to four years seven months. All 

children in sites received the condition, but only 

children with consent were assessed.

Sites were matched based on information from year 

prior to intervention. Children in the math and 

literacy groups during the intervention year were 

similar in background but one of the nonintervention 

sites had no Hawaiian children unlike other sites. 

Teacher years of experience differed somewhat 

across sites, with a somewhat lower range for the 

literacy site and nonintervention site than math site. 

Authors note that including literacy intervention 

group controls for added training and stress, but 

may have unintended consequences of diminished 

focus on math while literacy is focused upon. 

Authors also note that there was a mid-year 

correction to strengthen the implementation of home 

activities in the math intervention group. The author 

notes that the litearcy intervention, that here served 

as a comparison group, did not affect math 

outcomes but did affect literacy outcomes. This 

itself is an important finding, supporting a 

hypothesis that shorter PD interventions that are 

very focused and follow-up may support 

improvements in specific outcomes.

153 Table A-2a. Early Mathematics Studies: Methodology—Continued Continues next page
Study Research Questions Research Design Sample General Comments

Starkey, 

Klein, 

Clements, 

and Sarama 

(2008)

Does implementation of Pre-K 

Mathematics supplemented 

with DLM Early Childhood 

Express Math software 

produce gains in child and 

classroom outcomes compared 

to a control curriculum?

This study was part of the PCER report on the 

Effects of Preschool Curriculum Programs on 

School Readiness. A total of 40 Head Start and 

public preschool classrooms were randomly 

assigned in the fall of the pilot study year using 

block randomization. They were assigned either to 

the treatment condition (Pre-K Mathematics 

supplemented with DLM Early Childhood Express 

Math software) or the control condition. To 

conduct analyses on low-income Asian American 

and Spanish speaking populations, two of each of 

these classrooms were randomly assigned to 

treatment and control conditions.

Forty Head Start and public preschool classrooms 

(20 from New York, 20 from California) were 

recruited to participate. Data were collected on a 

total of 314 children in the fall of the preschool 

year and 283 at the end of the kindergarten year. 

Children were 4.3 years old at baseline data 

collection and were ethnically diverse: 45 percent 

African-American, 23 percent Hispanic, and 18 

percent white. All 40 participating teachers were 

female, and 38 percent were white, 33 percent 

African-American, 13 percent Hispanic, and 10 

percent Asian. The teachers had an average of 19 

years of teaching experience and 40 percent had a 

graduate degree.

The implementation of these two curricula 

components resulted in increased children's 

mathematical knowledge at the end of 

prekindergarten, compared with the control group. 

However, there was no statistically significant 

difference between control and treatment groups at 

the end of the kindergarten year.

154 Table A-2a. Early Mathematics Studies: Methodology—Continued Continues next page
Study Research Questions Research Design Sample General Comments

Starkey, 

Klein and 

Wakeley 

(2004)

Can a conceptually broad 

prekindergarten math 

curriculum be implemented, 

and does it have positive 

consequences for children's 

math knowledge?

Successive-cohort design. Initial cohort of 

comparison children did not receive intervention; a 

subsequent cohort of intervention children did 

receive the intervention. Comparison children were 

enrolled in schools that implemented the 

intervention in the following year. Children in 

intervention group assessed using a pre-test posttest design in fall and spring of pre-K year. 

Comparison group children assessed only in spring 

of pre-K year.

One-hundred and sixty-three typically developing 

pre-k children from preschools serving middle 

income families (41 in intervention and 42 in 

comparison group) and low income families (37 in 

intervention and 43 in comparison group). 

Children were 3 years, 9 months to 4 years, 9 

months at baseline. Race/ethnicity for lowincome/middle-income samples: AfricanAmerican 32 percent, 10 percent; Caucasian: 13 

percent, 63 percent; Latino 41 percent, 7 percent; 

Interracial and other 14 percent, 20 percent. 

Mothers' education: HS or less 38 percent, 1 

percent; some post-secondary 38 percent, 11 

percent; BA+ 16 percent, 83 percent. Teachers' 

mean years of experience: 7.6, 14.8. Teachers' 

education: two of five with BA+, four of five with 

BA+. 

New assessment measure developed for study. Interrater reliability high, but no evidence presented on 

construct validity, factor structure, or validity. As 

authors note, the absence of fall assessment scores 

for comparison group children weakens the design. 

Authors also note that repeated testing in 

intervention group only might mean that increases in 

score reflect familiarity with assessment and 

comfort with assessment situation as well as gains 

in knowledge. An advantage of the design noted by 

the authors is reduced risk of contamination because 

no classrooms received the intervention during the 

initial year.

155 Table A-2a. Early Mathematics Studies: Methodology—Continued Continues next page
Study Research Questions Research Design Sample General Comments

YoungLoveridge 

(2004)

This study examined the 

effectiveness of a program 

aimed at improving numeracy 

among 5-year-old children 

through tutoring provided to 

pairs of children. This tutoring 

incorporated number books 

and games. The study 

examined the immediate and 

long term (up to 15 months 

post-intervention) benefits of 

books and games for children's 

learning. 

Children in intervention contrasted with children 

from same schools and other schools. Children 

were not randomly assigned to group, but pre-test 

scores controlled for in analyses. Analyses 

considered group differences (net of pre-test 

scores) immediately after intervention, and six and 

15 months afterwards. 

One-hundred and fifty-one 5-year-old children 

from six low socioeconomic status schools in New 

Zealand with scores in the lower two-thirds on a 

measure of numeracy. 48 percent were European, 

44 percent Maori, 4 percent Pacific Islander, 4 

percent other. Approx one-sixth of the students at 

two of the schools participated in the school-based 

intervention described here. A similar number of 

children at two other schools participated in a 

home-based intervention using the same books 

and games. The remaining two-thirds of the 

children were in two contrast groups: those in the 

same classes as those in the intervention (within 

school contrast) and those in two different schools 

(across school contrast). Attrition over the period 

of study resulted in final sample of 106 children: 

23 in the intervention and 83 in the contrast 

groups. There were no differences between the 

within school and across school contrast groups so 

these were combined for analyses. 

Author notes that many papers in the research 

literature note the potential of combining 

mathematics and literacy. But that evidence to date 

focuses on increasing participation in mathematics 

activities, and not on differences in achievement. 

Author also notes that increasing focus by Western 

governments on mathematics has emphasized 

numeracy skills. Findings indicate that children's 

rank ordering in terms of mathematics skills tends to 

be stable across the primary and secondary school 

years, though gap between highest and lowest scores 

tends to grow. This suggests that intervening early 

can have lasting effects on children's mathematics 

achievement. Note that this intervention used two 

specialist teachers. They received feedback from the 

project director as they worked with the children. 

However there was no plan to provide professional 

development to classroom teachers to ehance their 

teaching of mathematics, and the large effect size is 

attributed in part to the use of specialists. It is not 

clear if this intervention should be viewed as a 

professional development intervention. 

Table A-2a. Early Mathematics Studies: Methodology—Continued 156
Study

Arnold, 

Fisher, 

Doctoroff 

and Dobbs 

(2002)

Mode of Professional 

Development Delivery

PD Linkages with 

Infrastructure

Temporal Aspects of 

Professional 

Development

Participant 

Outreach

Content 

Area

PD Content 

Grounded in 

Research Description of Content/Curriculum

Teachers volunteered their time to be trained in 

the intervention program. They were paid $15 

per hour for completing the intervention 

questionnaires. Teacher training involved a 2-

hour meeting prior to the start of the 

intervention. The meeting emphasized how to 

implement the activities, following four 

principles: encouraging/praising; keeping it fun; 

following children's lead and adjusting activities 

to the kids; labeling what children do to provide 

feedback and scaffolding. Practical plans for 

implementing with specific examples. "Teachers 

were also taught to help children learn the 

process of problem solving, with examples and 

discussions of specific ways to encourage this, 

in the context of an example activity" (p. 765). 

Member of the research team checked in with 

each teacher once/week to address any aspect of 

program not going smoothly. Usually lasted 1-2 

minutes, but sometimes a longer discussion was 

requested. 

Not addressed. Training involved two 

hours prior to 

implementation of the 

intervention. There was a 

weekly visit by a member 

of the research team to 

check in and make sure 

everything was 

proceeding smoothly. In 

most instances the visit 

lasted one to two minutes.

Low-income 

children. The 

eight 

classrooms were 

all in Head Start 

centers. 

Children and 

teachers were 

mostly of 

minority 

backgrounds.

Mathematic

al skills.

Previous research 

suggests that early 

mathematical skill 

and interest in math 

both predict later 

math achievement. 

But very little work 

has involved an 

evaluation of an 

attempt to increase 

one or both, with 

especially little 

research focusing on 

enhancing interest in 

math. The particular 

skills targeted in the 

activities are derived 

from the research.

"The intervention strove to incorporate 

math into the regular classroom 

routine. The activities were designed 

to be fun for the children and to 

provide choices and flexibility for the 

teachers" (p. 764). Activities for circle 

time, activities for small groups, 

transitions, and meal times were 

discussed. Teachers asked to 

implement one activity per day during 

first unit, and two transition or 

mealtime activities, and one small 

group activity each day during second 

unit. 85 activities to choose from in a 

workbook. The activities targeted 

counting, recognizing and writing 

numbers, one-to-one correspondence, 

comparison, change operations, and 

understanding numbers and quantity. 

Examples: finding objects that are 

bigger and smaller than the children; 

bar graphs of children with different 

color eyes. 

Table A-2b. Early Mathematics Studies: Features of Professional 

Development

157 Continues next page
Study

Casey, Erkut, 

Ceder, amd 

Young 

(2008)

Mode of Professional 

Development Delivery

PD Linkages with 

Infrastructure

Temporal Aspects of 

Professional 

Development

Participant 

Outreach

Content 

Area

PD Content 

Grounded in 

Research Description of Content/Curriculum

Not addressed. Study 1: Brief training 

provided by project 

director. Teachers were 

observed carrying out the 

activities, but there is no 

mention of whether 

feedback was provided. 

Study 2: project director 

gave story + geometry 

group training as for 

intervention group in 

study 1. Geometry alone 

intervention group 

received book containing 

the same instructions and 

content for the activities, 

but without a puppet or 

story context.

Sample for 

study 2 

intentionally in 

low income 

communities.

Mathematic

al skills.

Previous evidence 

shows that 

contextualizing 

learning in a story 

context results in 

greater retention and 

recall. 

Mathematics curriculum used by 

kindergarten teachers in this 

community was Math Advantage 

(Harcour-Brace). In Study 1, in the 

Story + Geometry Intervention, In the 

story context, the mathematical ideas 

develop in tandem with the story over 

eight sessions. Children participate in 

the story. Focus of geometry activities 

is on triangles, moving from 

combining triangles in collages, 

through different activities to puzzles 

and working with 3D shapes. Teachers 

presented the stories and large and 

small group activities in twice a week 

classroom sessions over a four-week 

period. A member of the research team 

observed each activity being 

presented. 

PI of project gave a brief training session to the 

teachers in the intervention group. Teachers 

received Tan and the Shape Changer book, 

poster, and kit with all materials needed for the 

activities. Teachers were told that they could 

choose to use the outline of the story to tell it in 

their own words, or could half tell and half read 

the story from written scripts. Watched 

videotaped clips of how other teachers presented 

the stories and activities to their students. Book 

given to teachers provided rationale, objectives 

and vocabulary for each geometry activity. Book 

provides step by step instructions on how to 

organize and present each activity/lesson. 

158 Table A-2b. Early Mathematics Studies: Features of Professional 

Development—Continued

Continues next page
Study

Clements and Sarama (2008)

Mode of Professional 

Development Delivery

PD Linkages with 

Infrastructure

Temporal Aspects of 

Professional 

Development

Participant 

Outreach

Content 

Area

PD Content 

Grounded in 

Research 

Both intervention groups received training (an initial four day training and two-hour refresher classes once every other month). Both groups addressed the following topics in the context of their assigned curriculum: supporting mathematical development in the classroom, recognizing and supporting mathematics throughout the day, setting up mathematics learning centers, teaching with computers, smallgroup activities, and supporting mathematical development in the home. Only the Building Blocks training focused on learning trajectories. A central tool to support teachers’ understanding of learning trajectories was a Web-based application, Building Blocks Learning Trajectories. This application provides scalable access to the learning trajectories via descriptions, videos, and commentaries of both the developmental progressions of children’s thinking and instruction. Monthly in-class coaching included monitoring, reinforcing, suggesting alternatives, and collaborative problem solving, emphasizing only one or two issues per visit and focusing on implementation of the specific curriculum. 

Not addressed. Four days of training and 

a two hour refresher class once every other month. On-site coaching once per month focusing on implementation of the specific curriculum.

Sample intentionally included classrooms serving lowincome children as well as classrooms serving mixed SES groups. 

Mathematical skills.

"Building Blocks—Foundationfor Mathematical Thinking, PreKindergarten to Grade 2: ResearchBased Materials Development was funded by the National Science Foundation to create and evaluate mathematics curricufor young children based on a theoretically sound research and development framework." Three categories (with phases within each) are involved: (1) General a priori foundation; (2) Learning model; (3) Evaluation

159

Table A-2b. Early Mathematics Studies: Features of Professional 

Development—Continued
Study

Sophian 

(2004)

Mode of Professional 

Development Delivery

PD Linkages with 

Infrastructure

Temporal Aspects of 

Professional 

Development

Participant 

Outreach

Content 

Area

PD Content 

Grounded in 

Research Description of Content/Curriculum

Two-day training workshop in August and a oneday training workshop in January. Meetings 

were also held at each site every three weeks for 

distribution of lesson plans and materials, an 

opportunity to ask questions, and discussion of 

ongoing and recently completed lessons. 

Research coordinator observed implementation 

in each classroom at least once/week and 

consulted with teachers, giving feedback. 

Other Head Start 

staff who worked 

closely with the 

teachers, teacher 

mentors and 

managers attended 

the training 

workshops. 

Two-day workshop prior 

to intervention and one 

day in middle of school 

year. Meetings every 

three weeks and on-site 

observation and 

consultation every week. 

Teachers received weekly 

lesson plans and 

materials. Encouraged to 

engage children in 

making predictions, 

observing, discussing 

patterns. Usually done in 

small groups.

All children 

were in Head 

Start centers. 

Most children 

in sample were 

Asian American 

and Hawaiian.

Mathematic

al skills.

Evidence from shortterm studies that 

preschool age 

children are 

responsive to 

instruction about unit 

size and number. 

Research raises 

possibility that 

difficulties with math 

may often concern 

issue of alternative 

units. Present work 

addresses some issues 

where research is 

unclear.

The mathematical content spanned 

three domains: 1) The possibility and 

consequences of choosing different 

counting units; 2) different dimensions 

along which quantities can be 

compared and the consequences of 

using different units of measurement; 

3) relationships among geometric 

shapes, especially part-whole 

relationships and comparing areas. In 

second half of year, charts and graphs 

were introduced. Core ideas (e.g., the 

possibility of adopting different units) 

revisited in multiple lessons. Teachers 

received weekly materials and lesson 

plans. Home activities distributed on 

weekly basis.

160 Table A-2b. Early Mathematics Studies: Features of Professional 

Development—Continued

Continues next page
Study

Starkey, 

Klein, 

Clements, 

and Sarama 

(2008)

Mode of Professional 

Development Delivery

PD Linkages with 

Infrastructure

Temporal Aspects of 

Professional 

Development

Participant 

Outreach

Content 

Area

PD Content 

Grounded in 

Research Description of Content/Curriculum

During the pilot year of implementation, 

treatment group teachers in California and New 

York participated in two four-day workshops at 

the beginning and middle of the school year. 

Ongoing, on-site training was provided by 

project staff about twice a month. A refresher 

workshop was offered in the second year of 

implementation. Throughout the first year, 

project staff observed each intervention 

classroom and feedback was given at the end.

Not addressed. Training workshops 

during the first year of 

implementation took 

place in September and 

February for California 

teachers, and September 

or October and February 

for New York teachers. 

The refresher workshop 

took place in late summer 

preceding the second year 

of implementation.

Half of all 

children were in 

Head Start 

centers. Also, 

researchers 

targeted lowincome Asian 

Americans and 

classrooms 

instructed in 

Spanish.

Mathematic

al skills.

The Pre-K Mathematics curriculum 

focuses on 29 small-group 

mathematics activities with concrete 

manipulatives for use by teachers and 

children in preschool classrooms, as 

well as 19 home mathematics 

activities and materials for use by 

parents and preschool-age children in 

home settings. The DLM Early 

Childhood Express Math software 

includes 26 numerical, quantitative, 

geometric, and spatial activities.

161 Table A-2b. Early Mathematics Studies: Features of Professional 

Development—Continued

Continues next page
Study

Starkey, 

Klein and 

Wakeley 

(2004)

Mode of Professional 

Development Delivery

PD Linkages with 

Infrastructure

Temporal Aspects of 

Professional 

Development

Participant 

Outreach

Content 

Area

PD Content 

Grounded in 

Research Description of Content/Curriculum

Five-day summer workshop; four-day winter 

workshop. Each covered about half of the smallgroup and computer-based activities. Teachers 

provided with curriculum manual. Workshops: 

Overview of early math development and each 

topic, demonstration and practice of activities, 

practice with computer, assessment and home 

curriculum, discussion. On-site training for each 

unit (once per month); discuss problems; 

observation of fidelity of implementation with 

feedback.

Not addressed. Five-day workshop prior 

to start of school and fourday workshop mid year.

Low-income as 

well as middleincome 

children. See 

sample 

description for 

more specifics.

Mathematic

al skills.

Math content of 

curriculum based on 

development research 

about nature and 

extent of early math 

knowledge. Units 

explicitly linked with 

the National Council 

of Teachers of 

Mathematics 

standards for pre-k 

through grade 2.

Pre-K Mathematics curriculum: 27 

small-group activities (new one each 

week engaged in twice per week) with 

concrete materials, organized into 

units to foster connections among 

related concepts. Enumeration and 

Number Sense; Arithmetic Reasoning, 

Spatial Sense, Geometric Reasoning, 

Pattern Sense and Unit Construction, 

Non-Standard Measurement and 

Logical Relations. Easier and more 

difficult versions of activities; 

suggestions for how to support 

children experiencing difficulty; 

system for recording individual 

children's learning. Coordination with 

computer activities, math activity 

centers, home curriculum. 

162 Table A-2b. Early Mathematics Studies: Features of Professional 

Development—Continued

Continues next page
Study

YoungLoveridge 

(2004)

Mode of Professional 

Development Delivery

PD Linkages with 

Infrastructure

Temporal Aspects of 

Professional 

Development

Participant 

Outreach

Content 

Area

PD Content 

Grounded in 

Research Description of Content/Curriculum

Researcher video-taped sessions and made a 

written summary of what happened during 

sessions. Made suggestions to the specialist 

teacher about possible actions to challenge the 

children beyond existing competencies. This 

helped assure consistency across schools. "The 

purpose of the program was to develop children's 

knowledge of number word sequences, their 

accuracy, reliability and automaticity in using 

the enumeration process, experience with 

forming collections of particular sizes, and 

knowledge of stylized (spatial) number patterns 

and numerals, all skills shown previously to be 

strongly predictive of later success in 

mathematics..." (p. 86). Note: researchers do not 

clearly describe this as a professional 

development intervention. 

Not discussed Feedback during course 

of the intervention 

sessions

The teachers 

were specialists. 

There was not 

outreach to 

classroom 

teachers. The 

children were 

from low SES 

schools.

Mathematic

al skills.

Curriculum approach 

was grounded in 

research noting the 

potential of 

combining literacy 

and mathematics 

activities. However 

the authors note that 

the combination of 

literacy activities and 

games was central to 

the intervention. 

The children attended the intervention 

sessions in pairs for 30 minutes every 

weekday over seven weeks. Sessions 

included number stories, rhymes and 

games. Games with simplified dice 

eventually progressing to conventional 

dice. During number stories, children 

asked to check quantities described by 

counting objects on pictures, predict 

next quantity, naming numerals in the 

story. Familiar board game and then 

new one introduced by teacher. 

Children learned to read numbers on 

dice, used counting process to move 

piece on board, counting sticks 

accumulated as progressed on board. 

Use of playing cards to increase 

knowledge of numeral sequences to 

10. Teacher questioned children and 

gave hints, modeled correct counting 

processes, drew atten-tion to patterns 

on game board. 

163 Table A-2b. Early Mathematics Studies: Features of Professional 

Development—Continued
Study

Arnold, 

Fisher, 

Doctoroff 

and Dobbs 

(2002)

Rigor of PD 

Evaluation Outcome Measures

Outcomes in

 Educator Knowledge

Outcomes in 

Educator Practice Child Outcomes

Experimental 

(Random 

Assignment to 

Treatment & 

Control 

Groups)

The Test of Early Mathematics Ability (TEMA-2) was 

administered at pre- and post-test. Teachers also rated each 

child's interest in mathematics activities using the Level of 

Interest Survey (LIS; rate interest in sorting toys, counting 

activities, number-manipulative activities, and math activities 

overall) and the Relative Interest Survey (RIS; ranks each 

child's preference for 10 common activities). The two interest 

measures were then aggregated into Overall Teacher Interest 

Survey (OTIS). Children also reported on their own 

mathematical interest, using the Children's Math Interest SelfReport (CMIS), and by rating how fun numbers and math toys 

are. Ratings from 1 to 5 were summed across the four items to 

create an index of children's interest in math-related activities. 

Teachers reported on their attitudies about teaching math 

readiness. Teachers in the intervention group charted the 

activities they tried with daily tracking forms and whether they 

found the activities good. After the intervention, experimental 

group teachers rated their overall satisfaction with the program 

and its feasibility.

Teachers in the intervention 

group reported significant 

changes in their feelings of 

liking and competence about 

math at post-test compared to 

pre-test, and compared with 

control teachers. They 

described math as more fun to 

teach and reported that they 

felt they had improved their 

teaching of math.

Not assessed. Significantly greater increase over time on 

TEMA for intervention group; effect size in 

the large range. Boys showed greater change 

than girls. Less improvement for Anglo 

children than Puerto Rican and African 

American. Children in the intervention group 

were reported by their teachers to increase 

more in interest in math (OTIS score). 

Children in the intervention group showed 

greater increase in their interest in the math 

toys. 

164 Table A-2c. Early Mathematics Studies: Outcomes Continues next page
Study

Casey, Erkut, 

Ceder, amd 

Young 

(2008)

Rigor of PD 

Evaluation Outcome Measures

Outcomes in

 Educator Knowledge

Outcomes in 

Educator Practice Child Outcomes

Experimental 

(Random 

Assignment to 

Treatment & 

Control 

Groups)

Study 1: Near and far transfer tasks assessing part whole 

relations. In the near transfer tasks there were close similarities 

between the types of items used in the activities and in the 

testing. The far transfer tasks are designed to assess whether 

learning has transferred to problems less closely related to those 

used in training. Triangles subtest of Kaufman Assessment 

Battery for Children used for near transfer task. Some 

modifications made to procedures. The far transfer test was a 

Tangram test that assessed children's ability to solve a wider 

range of part-whole puzzle problems using a variety of puzzle 

pieces. 

Not assessed. Not assessed. Teachers were 

observed implementing the 

activities but there was no measure 

of educator practice.

Study 1: No difference between children in 

morning vs. afternoon kindergarten so 

combined. Difference at pre-test by 

condition, with the control group scoring 

higher on near transfer task at pre-test than 

intervention group. There was no difference 

at pre-test on far transfer task. On the 

triangle task, there was significant overall 

improvement over time. The intervention 

group improved significantly more (with 

girls driving this finding). For girls only, 

improvement over time varied by condition. 

Boys improved both in the treatment and 

control group, while girls in the treatment 

group improved significantly more. On the 

tangram task (far transfer) there was overall 

improvement over time, but there was no 

indication that the treatment group improved 

more and no interactions with child gender. 

Study 2: no pretest differences. On both the 

triangle and tangram tasks, there was overall 

improvement over time and the geometry + 

story group improved more. On the tangram 

task, girls improved significantly more than 

boys across both intervention conditions. 

165 Table A-2c. Early Mathematics Studies: Outcomes—Continued Continues next page
Study

Clements and Sarama (2008)

Rigor of PD 

Evaluation Outcome Measures

Outcomes in

 Educator Knowledge

Outcomes in 

Educator Practice 

Experimental (Random Assignment to Treatment & Control Groups)

(1) The Fidelity instrument includes "sections for each component of the implemented curriculum, such as a specific small-group or family activity. Only activities prescribed in the curriculum implemented are evaluated, and ratings are conducted in reference to the printed curriculum " (2) The Classroom Observation of Early Mathematics–Environment and Teaching (COEMET), "measures the quality of the mathematics environment and activities with an observation of three or more hours and is not connected to any curriculum". There are 31 items, all but four of which are four-point Likert scales and there are three main sections, Classroom Elements, Classroom Culture, and Specific Math Activities (SMA). Assessors complete a SMA form for each observed math activity. (3) the "Early Mathematics Assessment (EMA) is a measure of preschool children’s mathematical knowledge and skills that features two individual interviews of each child. All sessions are videotaped.The EMA assesses children’s development in a comprehensive set of mathematical topics...rather than mirroring any curriculum."

Not assessed. (1) No evidence of difference across 

the Building Blocks and comparison group in terms of fidelity of implementation of the curriculum, with both showing positive fidelity scores. There was no change over time in fidelity of implementation, and no interaction of time by group. Fidelity was not related to children's gain scores (2) There was a significant effect of treatment group for the COEMET, with Building Blocks showing highest scores, followed by PMC and then by control group. Only Building Blocks and the control group differed significantly however. The COEMET accounted for a significant amount of children's gain scores. Building Blocks had higher number of math activities, more computers running math programs, and more teacher engagement with children during math activities. No effects for class SES or program type. 

OitBtCbo"cssgta

bmBsgnacsas

166

Table A-2c. Early Mathematics Studies: Outcomes—Continued
Study

Sophian 

(2004)

Rigor of PD 

Evaluation Outcome Measures

Outcomes in

 Educator Knowledge

Outcomes in 

Educator Practice Child Outcomes

Pre-Post w/ 

Comparison 

Group (Not 

Randomly 

Assigned)

Mathematics subscale of the Developing Skills Checklist: 

naming shapes, reproducing and extending patterns, counting, 

identifying numerals, matching sets and numerals, joining and 

separating sets, identifying ordinal positions, and logical 

operations. Development of a supplementary assessment 

instrument to focus specifically on knowledge about 

measurement and about combinations of shapes (the foci of the 

intervention). While the DSC had good internal consistency 

reliability, the authors note that the new measure did not, and is 

of limited value in evaluating the intervention. It is nevertheless 

reported on as group differences were found. Note that it is not 

clear from the article whether these were teacher- administered 

measures. If teacher-administered, there is a possibility of bias.

Not assessed. Not assessed. The math intervention group scored 

significantly higher than either the literacy 

intervention group or the no intervention 

control group on DSC post-test scores, 

controlling for age and DSC pre-test scores. 

The same pattern was found for the new 

supplemental measure, with higher scores 

for the math intervention group than either 

other group controlling for age and pre-test 

scores.

167 Table A-2c. Early Mathematics Studies: Outcomes—Continued Continues next page
Study

Starkey, 

Klein, 

Clements, 

and Sarama 

(2008)

Rigor of PD 

Evaluation Outcome Measures

Outcomes in

 Educator Knowledge

Outcomes in 

Educator Practice Child Outcomes

Experimental 

(Random 

Assignment to 

Treatment & 

Control 

Groups)

The following child outcomes were assessed: mathematics 

(Woodcock Johnson [WJ] Applied Problems, Child Math 

Assessment-Abbreviated [CMA-A], Composite Score, and 

Shape Composition); reading (Test of Early Reading Ability 

[TERA], WJ Letter Word Identification, and WJ Spelling); 

phonological awareness (the Pre School Comprehensive Test of 

Phonological and Print Processing [Pre-CTOPPP], Elision 

subtest, Comprehensive Test of Phonologica Processing 

[CTOPP], Elision subtest); language assessments (Peabody 

Picture Vocabulary Test [PPVT] and Test of Language 

Development [TOLD]); and behavioral outcomes (Social Skills 

Rating system [SSRS] and Pre Scool Learning Behavior Scale 

[PLBS]). Classroom outcomes assessed were overall classroom 

environment (Early Childhood Environmental Rating Scale 

Revised [ECERS-R]), teacher-child relationships (Arnett 

Detachment, Harshness, Permissiveness, and Positive 

Interactions scales) and classroom instruction (Teacher 

Behavioral Rating Scale [TBRS], TBRS Written Expression 

scale, TBRS Phonological Awareness scale, TBRS Book 

Reading and Oral Language scales, and TBRS Math Concepts 

scale).

Not assessed. No impacts were found on ECERSR, Arnett, and Teacher Behavior 

Rating Scale including the Math 

Concepts scale.

Pre-K Mathematics supplemented with Early 

Childhood Express Math software had a 

positive effect on children's early 

mathematics skills at the end of prekindergarten compared to the control 

condition. Effects at the end of pre-K were 

found for the Child Math AssessmentAbbreviated Composite Score and Shape 

Composition. However there were no 

detectable effects at spring of the 

kindergarten year. 

168 Table A-2c. Early Mathematics Studies: Outcomes—Continued Continues next page
Study

Starkey, 

Klein and 

Wakeley 

(2004)

Rigor of PD 

Evaluation Outcome Measures

Outcomes in

 Educator Knowledge

Outcomes in 

Educator Practice Child Outcomes

Pre-Post w/ 

Comparison 

Group (Not 

Randomly 

Assigned)

Child Math Assessment (CMA): new instrument developed for 

study to assess children's informal math knowledge across a 

broad range of concepts, including number, arithmetic, 

space/geometry, measurement, patterns and logical relations. 16 

tasks each with multiple problems. Administered in two 20 

minute to 30 minute testing sessions on separate days with 

order counterbalanced. Children's performance coded from 

videotapes of testing sessions. High inter-rater reliability. 

Scores for each task and for CMA as a whole. 

Not assessed. Teachers were observed during 

each on-site training visit to 

confirm fidelity of implementation 

of a small-group activity. The paper 

indicates only that feedback was 

provided to the teacher as needed. 

No data based on these observations 

are reported, and no indication is 

given of the extent to which 

feedback was needed. A teacher 

interview administered at the end of 

the intervention indicated that there 

had been no organizer math 

curriculum prior to the intervention, 

no mathematics learning or 

readiness goals or assessments.

Pre-test to post-test increases for children in 

the intervention. Increases significant for 

both income groups but greater for lowincome children. Comparison of spring 

CMA scores for intervention and comparison 

groups indicated that intervention group 

children scored significantly higher in the 

spring in both lower- and middle-income 

groups. Low-income intervention group 

children had scores in the spring that were 

not statistically different from those of 

middle-income children who had not 

participated in the intervention. Scores 

increased significantly in the intervention 

group on all 16 tasks. For spring scores, 

significant difference by group for 10 of the 

16 tasks favoring intervention children.

169 Table A-2c. Early Mathematics Studies: Outcomes—Continued Continues next page
Study

YoungLoveridge 

(2004)

Rigor of PD 

Evaluation Outcome Measures

Outcomes in

 Educator Knowledge

Outcomes in 

Educator Practice Child Outcomes

Pre-Post w/ 

Comparison 

Group (Not 

Randomly 

Assigned)

Individual task-based interviews used to assess children's 

numeracy before and after the intervention. Pre-test included 

counting, pattern recognition, enumeration, numeral 

recognition, and addition and subtraction with concrete as well 

as imaginary objects. The post-tests included the same tasks 

augmented with more difficult items of the same type as well as 

additional tasks focusing on number facts, sequence knowledge, 

ordering sets and numerals, identifying one more than, 

enumeratition span, counting on, understanding of more, 

multiple counting, writing numerals, and place value 

understanding. High reliability in scoring the tasks. Interviews 

carried out pre-test and at the end of the two-month 

intervention, six and 15 months after the intervention. 

Assessments were carried out blind as to group. 

Not assessed. Not assessed Significant Treatment effect qualified by a 

significant Treatment by Time interaction. 

An initially very large (approx. 2 school 

days) effect of the program diminished over 

time to just over one school day six months 

after intervention and one-half school day 15 

months after intervention. Greatest progress 

made in knowledge of number sequences, 

stylized number patterns, numeral 

identification, making small collections of 

objects, and addition of two collections. 

170 Table A-2c. Early Mathematics Studies: Outcomes—Continued
Study Research Questions Research Design Sample General Comments

Brigman, Lane, 

Switzer, Lane, 

and Lawrence 

(1999)

Does a particular curriculum, 

Ready to Learn, that focuses 

on learning skills and social 

skills as taught to 4- and 5-

year-olds in a regular 

classroom by their regular 

teachers enhance their 

attending, listening and social 

skills?

There were 10 classrooms in three preschools. Five 

classes were randomly selected to use the Ready to 

Learn Curriculum (RTL) and five were comparison 

classes. There was a certified preschool teacher and 

a teacher's assistant in each class. The experience 

and training (not further defined) of the teachers in 

the treatment and comparison groups were found to 

be similar.

One-hundred and forty-five 4- and 5-year old 

children in 10 classrooms in three preschools 

participated. All three centers were in an urban 

area and with similar populations. The ethnic 

makeup in all classes was approximately 95 

percent black and 5 percent white. There was a 

certified preschool teacher and a teacher's 

assistant in each class. 

Assessors and observers may not have been "blind" 

as to treatment condition of the classes. It is difficult 

to discern from the article exactly what approach the 

RTL program used. The article refers to the teachers 

using a kit with storybooks that introduced the 

learning-social skills to the children, audiotapes of 

the stories, and a teacher manual. According to the 

article, the manual included descriptions of each of 

the five teaching strategies and follow-up role-play 

and dramatic activities to reinforce targeted skills. 

The teachers were asked to use the activities and 

strategies in a structured format for two hours per 

week for 12 weeks before the posttest and for 24 

weeks after the post test. They were also asked to 

use the story structure questions and positive peer 

reporting throughout the week to reinforce the 

targeted skills during regular lessons. With these 

details, it is still difficult to grasp exactly what the 

curriculum involved and how it was presented to the 

children. It is not clear why there were impacts on 

only one of two listening comprehension measures.

171 Table A-3a. Child Social Behavior Studies: Methodology Continues next page
Study Research Questions Research Design Sample General Comments

Denham and 

Burton (1996)

Does a classroom-based 

intervention that includes 

relationship-building, training 

in understanding emotions, 

and interpersonal cognitive 

problem solving training 

improve children's social and 

emotional behavior?

Seven child care classrooms from a suburban area 

(number of programs not noted) were assigned to 

intervention. 10 children were selected from those 

classrooms for pre- and post-assessments. The 

classrooms were not randomly assigned, and it is 

unclear if teachers' motivations to participate in the 

training differed at the outset. The intervention 

was 32 weeks with activities on emotions (based 

on the PATHS curriculum introduced two days per 

week). Problem solving activities using I Can 

Problem Solve curriculum used during the other 

two days. A multiple regression model was used to 

predict outcomes.

One hundred and thirty children observed at 

pre-test (70 from seven intervention classrooms-

-10 per class--and 60 from the same child care 

programs but not receiving the intervention. 

Age range was 3.5-5.0; 76 percent of the 

children were ethnic minorities. 63 

intervention and 42 comparison were available 

for posttest (19 percent dropout). Children 

who dropped out in the intervention group were 

more likely to pay full fees. There were no 

other differences in the characteristics of 

dropouts. The teachers in the intervention were 

primarily from ethnic minority groups. 

Credentials (just under half having a degree in 

early childhood) and experience (3-15 years) 

varied. All teachers had received 16 hours of 

in-service training in High Scope. 

The number of classrooms participating in the 

intervention is described but not the number of total 

programs. Thus it is unclear whether the 

intervention occurred in more than one classroom 

per program. The study does not use a nested 

design to account for multiple children recruited 

from the same classroom. Also, it is not clear if 

teachers in the intervention group volunteered to 

attend the training while teachers in the comparison 

group did not volunteer. NOTE: the study design is 

quasi-experimental with non-equivalent control 

groups and pretest/posttest assessments. For 

assessment of intervention fidelity, teachers 

completed quarterly reports. They could request 

consultation. They also filled out weekly ratings of 

their application of techniques and their perception 

of effectiveness.

172 Table A-3a. Child Social Behavior Studies: Methodology—Continued Continues next page
Study Research Questions Research Design Sample General Comments

Domitrovich, 

Cortes, and 

Greenberg 

(2007)

Do children whose teachers 

implemented the Preschool 

PATHS in their classrooms for 

one school year exhibit 

significantly better skills at 

posttest in four domains: 

emotional knowledge, 

inhibitory control, attention, 

and problem solving? Do 

teachers and parents of 

children who participated in 

PATHS describe these 

children as more competent 

and as exhibiting less problem 

behaviors compared to peers 

who did not participate in the 

program? 

Two Head Start programs participated in the study. 

Head Start programs were in multiple buildings 

with varying number of classrooms. The study 

utilized a randomized clinical trail with a wait-list 

control group. Randomization took place at the 

building level. A mixed block design was used due 

to the varying number of classrooms within 

buildings. Blocks were created that included at 

least two matched classrooms with similar 

neighborhood population density. The final sample 

included 10 intervention and 10 control 

classrooms. 

Two-hundred and forty-six 3- and 4-year-old 

children (120 boys and 126 girls) participated 

in the study. Ethnic makeup was relatively 

diverse and included: 47 percent AfricanAmerican, 38 percent European-American, and 

10 percent Hispanic. The number of students 

per classroom ranged from 7-16. Seventy-two 

percent of primary caregivers were biological 

mothers. 

Not much description of content of training 

workshops, or materials used both during the pd, 

and the teaching of the 30 PATHS lessons. 

Although the authors write that PATHS 

Coordinators were responsible for ensuring 

implementation fidelity, impact of PD on educator 

knowledge and practice were not assessed. 

173 Table A-3a. Child Social Behavior Studies: Methodology—Continued Continues next page
Study Research Questions Research Design Sample General Comments

Franyo and 

Hyson (1999)

When child care providers 

receive training about child 

temperament, do they show 

increased knowledge about 

temperament concepts and 

increased acceptance of 

children's behaviors and 

feelings? 

Thirty participating centers were randomly 

assigned to one of three groups: Workshop group 

(received training; 14 centers, n=119), waiting list 

group (received training after all data were 

collected; three centers, n=50) and survey group 

(no training but completed baseline measures 

assessing knowledge of temperament and 

acceptance of children; 13 centers, n=123). 

Workshop and waiting list control group were 

considered the experimental design groups (169 

caregivers from 17 centers). The survey-only group 

expanded sample for survey data at baseline. 

Despite random assignment the waiting list control 

group had fewer African-Americans. Background 

questionnaire, KATS and ACS completed about 

one week before training, the KATS and ACS 

immediately after training, and KATS and ACS 

completed four weeks after. The waiting list 

control completed materials on same timetable.

Two-hundred and ninety-two caregivers of 

children 6 years old and under in licensed child 

care centers in Baltimore County, Md. Letters 

of introduction sent to random sample of such 

centers, and enrollment was on first-come firstserve basis among those expressing interest. 

Participation was not mandatory at centers but 

fulfilled state training requirements.

Note that teachers participated in training on a 

voluntary basis within participating centers (though 

authors indicate that most participated). Also that 

number of centers in waiting list control was only 

three (while workshop group involved 14). No 

explanation of this difference is given. Authors note 

difference in race or ethnicity between workshop 

group and waiting list control group. There was no 

direct observation of caregiver behavior. No child 

assessments were completed. There was a wide 

range in the ages of children cared for.

174 Table A-3a. Child Social Behavior Studies: Methodology—Continued Continues next page
Study Research Questions Research Design Sample 

Girolametto, Weitzman and Greenberg (2004)

Can child care providers learn to facilitate peer interaction by using verbal support strategies (e.g., prompts, invitations or suggestions to interact) during naturalistic play activities, and can they maintain their use of verbal supports four months after in-service training? Do children respond to adults' verbal supports?

Random assignment to experimental and control groups by center so that colleagues from the same center could attend the in-service program together. Four centers (Eight caregivers) assigned to experimental group and three centers (nine caregivers) assigned to control group. Pre-test, posttest and follow-up three months after post-test to 

examine maintenance of gains (with new group of children).

Seventeen child care providers who worked in seven licensed day care centers in metropolitan Toronto. All had completed two years of community college with diploma in early childhood education. No significant differs between experimental and control groups on age, years of education or years of experience. All classrooms had ratios of 1:8, most with class size of 24 (but 3 with only 16). At pretest, children ranged from 32-54 mos.; most attended child care full time. No differences by group on age, gender time in day care, full- vs. part-time.

Control groufocusing on was identicagroup, but thexperimentatheir use of vcommunicatinteract togein strategies refer children praise or comexperimentaopportunitietheir peers; eincrease the Discussion nfrequency buAuthors note help some chsmall numbe

Table A-3a. Child Social Behavior Studies: Methodology—Continued

175 
Study Research Questions Research Design Sample General Comments

Gowen (1987) Can caregivers in a day care 

center be trained to facilitate 

children's play through 

increasing overall verbal 

involvement, and specifically 

nondirective verbalizations, 

commenting to children on 

their play?

Target set for caregiver verbal involvement of 50 

percent of observed intervals during observations 

of playtime. after first workshop. Target set for 

directive verbalizations of 25 percent of total 

utterances after second workshop. Pre-workshop 

observations had been carried out for a different 

purpose, and were used to document pre-workshop 

directive verbalizations. But observational 

procedures not the same before and after 

workshops, so this is not strictly a pre-post test 

design. Assessments of knowledge given before 

and after each workshop.

Seven teachers and seven teacher aides in the 

seven classrooms of a day care center (full 

staff). 50 children enrolled in the center ranged 

in age from 7-62 months. 

Note that observational procedure prior to the 

workshops differed from the procedures used after 

the workshops. Sample sizes for waves of 

observation differ somewhat so averages not based 

on identical group of caregivers. Results section 

notes that because intervention was very clear as to 

desired behaviors, observations likely reflect 

optimal rather than typical behavior. Evaluation of 

the workshops by the caregivers indicated that "most 

of the caregivers preferred workshop components 

that involved creativity and action" (p. 64). This 

study does not present child outcomes. Work 

documenting an association between caregiver 

behavior and level of child play or other outcomes 

(e.g., verbal ability in the children) is lacking in this 

study an in the literature review presented. We only 

know that teacher behavior can meet targets for 

overall verbal involvement and nondirective 

verbalizations. We also don't know if there would be 

maintenance of these targets following a period of 

months.

176 Table A-3a. Child Social Behavior Studies: Methodology—Continued Continues next page
Study Research Questions Research Design Sample General Comments

Hendrickson, 

Gardner, Kaiser 

and Riley 

(1993)

What is the effectiveness of a 

structured coaching procedure 

on teaching behavior aimed at 

increasing the positive 

interactions of socially 

withdrawn preschool-age 

children?

Multiple baseline across subjects design with three 

teachers and three socially withdrawn preschoolers. 

Baseline involved observations of teachers in 

routine activities; coaching initiated sequentially 

across the three teachers. Coaching subsequently 

discontinued and maintenance data collected once 

every week for three weeks (short term 

maintenance) and after a three-month delay. 

Follow-up data could not be collected for one child 

who had moved. With one teacher a "withdrawal 

phase" was also used in which coaching was 

discontinued and teacher was asked to conduct her 

activities as she had before coaching. 

Three day care providers between 21 and 23 

years of age, one with B.A. degree (toddler 

transition class), one with A.A. degree (infants 

and toddlers) and one a certified preschoolelementary school teacher (4-year-olds). One 

child with severe social interaction deficits 

linked with each teacher (2y, 4m girl in 

protective custody with 6m development delay; 

2y, 7m girl with mild cerebral palsy and 

significant language and motor delay; 4y, 6m 

boy with mild mental disability, ADHD and 

significant expressive language delay).

Re fidelity of implementation: A written record from 

each coaching session was reviewed to determine 

that each of the seven segments had occurred. 

Videotapes of the coaching sessions were also 

reviewed. Both approaches verified correct 

execution of the major elements of the coaching 

process. Re limitations: Authors note that it is not 

clear if increases in support and social interactions 

would have occurred without an observer present. 

Potential of observer bias. Coaching occurred 

immediately prior to observations, and this timing 

may have increased likelihood of observing 

supportive behaviors. Re PD approaches in general: 

"From a practical point of view, coaching has the 

advantages of being relatively low in cost and easy 

to implement. It is an approach to staff development 

that involves teachers in evaluation and goal 

setting." (p. 224). It is difficult to discern from 

article the number of coaching sessions completed 

with each teacher. This varied somewhat by teacher. 

Perhaps 9-14 coaching sessions if observations 

always followed coaching.

177 Table A-3a. Child Social Behavior Studies: Methodology—Continued Continues next page
Study Research Questions Research Design Sample 

Lynch, Geller and Schmidt (2004)

Does a resiliency-based curriculum--Al's Pals: Kids Making Healthy Choices-- increase preschool-age children's social competence and decrease antisocial or aggressive behavior?

Thirty-three of 37 classrooms in a large Head Start program in Lansing, Mich., were randomly assigned (17 intervention, 16 control) to receive the curriculum or to serve as a control

No details provided about the teachers who were trained in the curriculum and who completed the ratings of the children. There were no significant differences in age, gender or ethnicity for children in the intervention and control groups. The average age of children was approximately 52 months; half were Caucasian, one quarter were AfricanAmerican, and one quarter were Hispanic or other ethnicity. There were 399 children in the study (218 in the intervention classrooms and 181 in the control classrooms).

The report pexperimentaexperimentapattern of reis that teacheabout childreteachers may the children.

Table A-3a. Child Social Behavior Studies: Methodology—Continued

178 
Study Research Questions Research Design Sample General Comments

Raver, Jones, 

Li-Grining, 

Metzger, 

Champion, and 

Sardin (2008)

Did the Chicago School 

Readiness Project (CSRP) 

have an impact on teachers' 

management of children with 

disruptive behavior and 

teachers' ability to foster an 

emotionally positive 

classroom climate? 

This study used a randomized control trial design 

and analyses focused on intent-to-treat. In other 

words, the average impact on classroom quality 

was assessed regardless of the number of trainings 

teachers participated in. The intervention was 

implemented for two cohorts of teachers, with 

Cohort 1 participating from fall to spring in 2004-

2005 and Cohort 2 participating from fall to spring 

in 2005-2006. Classroom quality and climate 

observation measures were conducted in the fall 

and spring to test for differences, both at baseline, 

and after treatment, in the intervention and control 

groups. 

A total of 87 teachers participated in CSRP at 

baseline, with 90 teachers participating in the 

spring (four teachers left, and seven more were 

enrolled). Teachers were primarily AfricanAmerican (70 percent) and Latina (20 percent), 

with an additional 10 percent being European 

American. A majority held an associate's 

degree or higher. At baseline a total of 543 

children participated in CSRP classrooms. By 

spring, the number was 509. A total of 35 

classrooms were included. 

Teachers in control group sites received staffing 

support in the form of a Teacher's Aide to try to 

ensure that teacher-child ratios were similar in 

control and intervention classrooms. 

179 Table A-3a. Child Social Behavior Studies: Methodology—Continued Continues next page
Study Research Questions Research Design Sample General Comments

Reynolds and 

Kelley (1997)

What is the effectiveness of a 

"response cost" treatment 

procedure for improving the 

behavior of aggressive 

preschoolers?

Multiple baseline design. Baseline, introduction of 

response cost system with explanation to child and 

opportunity for teacher and child to role play prior 

to beginning, treatment, withdrawal (teacher 

ceased implementation), resume treatment.

Four preschool children between 3 and 5, 

referred by parent or school for aggressive 

behavior in class, observed during baseline to 

show more than eight aggressive acts per hour 

on average, score within average range on 

WPPSI, and obtain consent. Four of the 

children were white, from two-parent families 

with both parents college educated. One child 

was black, from a single parent family, whose 

mother had high school education plus 

vocational training.

Very small sample (four children).

180 Table A-3a. Child Social Behavior Studies: Methodology—Continued Continues next page
Study Research Questions Research Design Sample 

Rhodes and Hennesy (2000)

Previous studies of training involve limited hours of training (e.g., 20) and do not focus on child outcomes. This study asks if more extensive PD is associated both with observed caregiver behavior and child outcomes.

Pre-post test design with training group and matched comparison group. Groups matched to extent possible on education, training and work experience (not matched on ratios, but these were not found to differ). Group size also not matched on, and found to be significantly larger for training group. According to authors, the lack of a waiting list made it impossible to use random assignment. 

Thirty-three caregivers participated in pre-test and 29 remained for post-test. 16 completed Foundation Course, 17 located through the Irish Preschool Playgroup Assn. (IPPA) to form the comparison group. All approached agreed. Matched on education, training, and work experience. Caregivers in both groups had completed the 20-hour intro. course or equiv. Sixty-nine percent training group; 53 percent comparison had completed postsecondary school level qualifications in childrelated field. 

"Participants funding, and working the participation IPPA trainerCourse, had Playgroups Aand were enrin adult educgroup compapostsecondarrelated field carried out agroup. Interrsufficient to that the comchange over something alcontrolled in Dropout rate 

Schottle and Peltier (1996)

Should schools employ behavior management consultants to deal with behavior problems among students?

First 24 students referred for behavior management consultant became experimental group and next 16 students became contrast group. 

Kindergarten through third-grade students enrolled in at risk schools in a Nevada school district. Students had all been referred to behavior management consultant when efforts of on-site staff unsuccessful. Students not receiving special ed. services.

No sample dArticle refernot follow rainformation intervention approach. No of group sesprovides speoverview sum

Table A-3a. Child Social Behavior Studies: Methodology—Continued

181 
Study Research Questions Research Design Sample General Comments

The sample included 272 Head Start mothers 

and their 4-year-old children and 61 Head Start 

teachers from 34 HS classrooms (23 

intervention and 13 control classrooms). The 

ethnicity of the children was 19.1 percent 

African-American, 18.0 percent Hispanic, 22.1 

percent Asian American, 1.5 percent Native 

American, 2.2 percent combination, and 36.8 

percent Caucasian. Average family income was 

$11,600. 

Fourteen Head Start centers (36 classrooms) were 

randomly assigned with two classes assigned to the 

experimental condition for every one assigned to 

the control group. The experimental group 

participated in the Incredible Years Training Series 

(23 classrooms from nine centers) and children in 

the control classrooms received the regular Head 

Start program (13 classrooms in five centers). 

Assessments occurred in the fall and late spring 

and consisted of home and classroom observations 

and teacher and parent reports. There were oneyear follow-up assessments in the spring of the 

kindergarten year including parent reports and 

home observations. 

Do the Incredible Years: 

Parent Training and Teacher 

Training Programs reduce 

parent, child, and teacher and 

classroom risk factors 

associated with conduct 

problems and strengthen the 

protective factors that help to 

prevent conduct problems? 

WebsterStratton, Reid, 

and Hammond 

(2001)

The experimental and control groups were not 

equivalent on several factors including minority 

status. Experimental families reported significantly 

more risk factors than control families. 

182 Table A-3a. Child Social Behavior Studies: Methodology—Continued Continues next page
Study Research Questions Research Design Sample General Comments

WebsterStratton, Reid 

and Hammond 

(2004)

What are additive effects of a 

theory-based teacher training 

intervention targeted at 

specific classroom risk factors 

(classroom management skills 

and collaboration with 

parents) in combination with 

either parent training, child 

social skills training, or both?

Families were assigned at random to one of six 

conditions: parent training alone (PT); parent 

training plus teacher training (PT +TT); child 

training alone (CT); child training plus teacher 

training (CT + TT); parent, child and teacher 

training (PT, CT + TT), and a waiting list control 

group. Baseline assessments in Sept. and Oct. and 

random assignment to one of six groups in Nov. 

Treatment from mid-November through April. Posttreatment assessments at the end of the school year. 

One year later in spring, assessments repeated. 

Assessments involved parent (M and F) report, 

teacher report, observation in the home, 

observation in the classroom and peer interaction 

in laboratory.

One-hundred and fifty-nine families with a 4- 

to 8-year-old child with referral for child 

misconduct occurring over at least six months; 

parent report of at least 10 problems on the 

Eyberg Child Behavior Inventory; child met 

criteria of oppositional defiant disorder (ODD); 

did not have debilitating physical impairment; 

and child was enrolled in preschool or 

elementary school. 90 percent of children were 

boys; mean age of 70.99 months; 79 percent 

Euro-American. 26 percent of sample in 

preschool. 72 teachers in the TTS condition, 

each with one child. All participated in the four 

days of training and meetings at school.

Lack of previous research examining added benefits 

of providing teacher training on top of parent 

training, child training, or both for children with 

oppositional defiant disorder. In addition, no 

treatment studies use classroom observation. "We 

did not include a TT-only condition because we did 

not believe training teachers by itself would be a 

realistic treatment option for diagnosed children 

because of the central role that parents play in the 

development of conduct problems" (p. 107). Lack of 

TT-only condition makes it impossible to consider 

separate effects of TT. Can look at effects of the 

three groups involving TT (PT+TT, CT+TT, 

PT+CT+TT) compared to control group. Especially 

important in regard to classroom practices. But 

especially for child outcomes, can ask if including 

TT appeared to function additively (effect sizes 

stronger than for CT or PT only?). In general, there 

was little evidence of an additive effect of TT on 

child outcomes. Parents and teachers reported more 

satisfaction with outcomes when teachers were also 

trained. Cell sizes were small.

183 Table A-3a. Child Social Behavior Studies: Methodology—Continued
Study

Brigman, Lane, 

Switzer, Lane, 

and Lawrence 

(1999)

Mode of Professional 

Development Delivery

PD Linkages with 

Infrastructure

Temporal Aspects of 

Professional 

Development

Participant 

Outreach Content Area

PD Content 

Grounded in Research

Description of 

Content/Curriculum

Teacher training for the five treatment group 

teachers and their five assistants occurred in 

two seven-hour workshops in Sept. These 

were followed by half-day workshops in 

Nov., Jan. and March to review skills and 

strategies, to discuss progress and difficulties 

in implementing the program.

Both teachers and 

teaching assistants 

were included, but 

there is no 

discussion of 

directors or other 

staff members

Two seven-hour 

workshops at start of 

school year with three 

half-day workshops in 

Nov., Jan. and March to 

follow-up (see column I)

"Inner city 

preschool 

children" with 

approximately 

95 percent black 

and 5 percent 

white. There is 

no description of 

socio-economic 

status

Listening 

comprehension, attending, 

and social 

skills

According to the authors, 

the RTL program focuses 

on skills that the research 

indicates are predictors of 

long term school success. 

In addition, research 

supports the effectiveness 

of the strategies chosen.

Ready to Learn focuses on three 

skill areas: listening 

comprehension including story 

structure; attending skills; and 

social skills. The skills are taught 

using five teacher strategies: (1) 

modeling-coaching-cuing); (2) 

positive peer reporting; (3) 

student story telling; (4) student 

story re-telling; and (5) the 

encouragement council.

184 Table A-3b. Child Social Behavior Studies: Features of Professional Development Continues next page
Study

Denham and 

Burton (1996)

Mode of Professional 

Development Delivery

PD Linkages with 

Infrastructure

Temporal Aspects of 

Professional 

Development

Participant 

Outreach Content Area

PD Content 

Grounded in Research

Description of 

Content/Curriculum

Four different one-day workshops were 

provided. Sessions dealt with each of the 

four components of the intervention (building 

relationships, understanding emotions, and 

interpersonal cognitive problem solving). 

The training involved interactive discussions, 

multi-modal presentation of materials, and 

assignments. 

Not noted. Teachers received four 

one-day workshops. 

Sixty-nine of the 

130 children 

were identified 

as "at risk" 

(from disadvantaged 

environments 

meeting 

eligibility 

criteria for 

subsidized or 

court-ordered 

child care)

Children's 

socialemotional 

competence

The content was based on 

research in relationships, 

emotional understanding 

and recognition, and 

interpersonal cognitive 

problem solving..

The curriculum focused on 

techniques such as "floor time" 

to build a warm relationship 

between teacher and children. 

Didactic activities emphasizing 

the labeling of emotions were 

used (based on the PATHS 

curriculum). Emotion regulatory 

techniques were encouraged with 

children. The final piece of the 

curriculum was interpersonal 

cognitive problem solving 

emphasizing the development of 

multiple problem solving 

options, evaluating the options 

and working step-by-step to 

achieve a goal.

185 Table A-3b. Child Social Behavior Studies: Features of Professional Development—ContinuedContinues next page
Study

Domitrovich, 

Cortes, and 

Greenberg 

(2007)

Mode of Professional 

Development Delivery

PD Linkages with 

Infrastructure

Temporal Aspects of 

Professional 

Development

Participant 

Outreach Content Area

PD Content 

Grounded in Research

Description of 

Content/Curriculum

One to two Head 

Start supervisory 

staff members were 

designated to serve 

as lead PATHS 

Coordinators. All 

teachers interested in 

the curriculum were 

allowed to 

participate in year 3. 

No discussion of 

assistant teachers or 

HS directors or other 

staff (other than 1-2 

"supervisory staff"). 

In the first year, staff 

worked with the research 

team to create and pilot 

the curriculum materials. 

In the second year, the 

intervention teachers were 

trained in August and 

implemented the 

curriculum in their 

classrooms between Sept.-

May. A one-day booster 

session was held in 

January. Head Start 

supervisory staff members 

met with teachers on a 

regular basis individually 

and in small groups. 

PATHS Coordinators 

conducted monthly visits 

to provide technical 

support to intervention 

teachers and monitor 

implementation. The 

program developers 

provided monthly 

supervision to PATHS 

Coordinators. In the third 

year of the study, teachers 

in the wait list control 

group and all other 

teachers interested in the 

curriculum received 

training and program 

materials. 

The sample was 

relatively 

ethnically 

diverse (as 

described in 

sample column) 

and the authors 

report a mean 

annual income 

of $7,039.

Socialemotional 

curriculum 

designed to 

improve 

children's 

socialemotional 

competence 

and reduce 

problem 

behavior

The Promoting Alternative 

Thinking Strategies 

(PATHS; Kusche and 

Greenberg, 1994) 

curriculum was modified 

to be developmental 

appropriate for early 

childhood. The authors 

report that it is based on 

the ABCD (AffectiveBehavioral-CognitiveDynamic) model of 

development (Greenberg 

and Kusche, 1993), and 

expands on previous 

curricula designed to 

improve children's social 

emotional and behavioral 

skills (e.g., the Incredible 

Years, Webster-Stratton 

and Reid, 2004). 

The PATHS curriculum 

contained 30 lessons that were 

delivered once a week by 

teachers during "circle-time". 

The curriculum was divided into 

thematic units on compliments, 

basic and advanced feelings, a 

self-control strategy, and 

problem solving. The primary 

objectives of the curriculum were 

to (1) develop children's 

awareness and communication 

regarding their own and others' 

emotions; (2) teacher self-control 

of arousal and behavior; (3) 

promote positive self-concept 

and peer relations; (4) develop 

children's problems solving skills 

by fostering the integration of 

their self-control, affect 

recognition, and communication 

skills; and (5) create a positive 

classroom atmosphere that 

supports social-emotional 

learning. The teachers also 

provided extension activities and 

were taught how to scaffold 

children's learning during a 

child's emotional reaction or 

problem with a peer. 

In year 1 of the project (note that this seems 

to be the year after the pilot phase) teachers 

in the intervention classrooms participated in 

a two-day summer training, and then a oneday booster training in January. Each site 

designated one to two Head Start supervisory 

staff members to serve as PATHS 

Coordinators. The coordinators were 

responsible for facilitating implementation 

across classrooms and sites. Coordinators 

met with teachers on a regular basis 

individually and in small groups to provide 

support and address problems. During the 

intervention year, PATHS coordinators 

conducted monthly classroom visits to 

provide technical support and monitor 

implementation. After the visit the 

Coordinators completed an implementation 

rating scale. The program developers 

provided monthly consultation to the PATHS 

Coordinators. 

186 Table A-3b. Child Social Behavior Studies: Features of Professional Development—ContinuedContinues next page
Study

Franyo and 

Hyson (1999)

Mode of Professional 

Development Delivery

PD Linkages with 

Infrastructure

Temporal Aspects of 

Professional 

Development

Participant 

Outreach Content Area

PD Content 

Grounded in Research

Description of 

Content/Curriculum

Workshop group participated in a three-hour 

training conducted on-site at one of 11 

centers. three small centers joined a larger 

center for three of the sessions (for total of 14 

centers). Six to fourteen caregivers in each 

session. The authors discuss the issue of what 

can be expected realistically from a three 

hour training. They note that attitudes toward 

children may be too global a change to occur 

with a three hour workshop. 

According to Table 

1, sample included 

center directors, 

head teachers, 

assistant teachers, 

aides and "other" so 

full staff was 

involved. Not clear 

if this was the case 

in each center.

Three hour training. Children ranged 

in age from 

infants (0-12 

months old) to 6-

year-olds. 

Centers are 

described as 

varying widely 

in SES, or 

race/ethnicity, 

and location, but 

child population 

is not described 

further. 

Knowledge and 

response to 

child 

temperament. 

Training used information 

from a literature review 

(Franyo, 1996) and 

interviews with center 

directors, results of two 

field tests, and comments 

of experienced workshop 

facilitators.

Temperament was presented as a 

concept that is characterized by 

individual differences; has a 

biological basis; is somewhat 

stable over time; and is 

expressed in a manner that is 

subject to environmental 

circumstances. 

187 Table A-3b. Child Social Behavior Studies: Features of Professional Development—ContinuedContinues next page
Study

Girolametto, 

Weitzman and 

Greenberg 

(2004)

Mode of Professional 

Development Delivery

PD Linkages with 

Infrastructure

Temporal Aspects of 

Professional 

Development

Participant 

Outreach Content Area

PD Content 

Grounded in Research

Description of 

Content/Curriculum

Six-week program with three group evening 

sessions to teach program strategies, and 

three videotaping sessions in day care center.

Not noted. Three group sessions of 

2.5 hours each. Each 

videotape session 

involved five minute 

videotape of a caregiverchild interaction followed 

by 30 minutes of 

individual feedback and 

discussion regarding the 

use of program strategies.

No report on 

family SES or 

race or ethnicity.

Facilitating 

peer 

interactions.

Theories of language 

acquisition suggest that 

more frequent peer 

interactions may facilitate 

language development. 

Social cognitive theories 

suggest more interaction 

will support development 

of skills to negotiate social 

interactions. 

The three group sessions 

involved interactive lectures, 

observation and analysis of 

videotapes illustrating program 

strategies, large- and small-group 

discussions, and role plays of 

strategies. 1) Importance of peer 

interactions and effects of 

language skills on peer 

interactions. 2) How welldefined lay areas and appropriate 

activities can encourage 

interactions with peers. 3) Verbal 

support strategies discussed and 

illustrated (e.g., prompting, 

indirect suggestions re sit cues, 

peer referrals).

188 Table A-3b. Child Social Behavior Studies: Features of Professional Development—ContinuedContinues next page
Study

Gowen (1987)

Mode of Professional 

Development Delivery

PD Linkages with 

Infrastructure

Temporal Aspects of 

Professional 

Development

Participant 

Outreach Content Area

PD Content 

Grounded in Research

Description of 

Content/Curriculum

(1) Three-day workshop on "Introduction to 

Learning Through Play; (2) half-day 

workshop two months later on 

"Communication Skills; and (3) a six- hour 

staff development meeting after each 

workshop. In addition, each trainee met twice 

with an evaluator to review results of the 

classroom observations of their behavior. 

Two of the trainers available for informal 

consultation as needed

All teachers and 

teacher aides 

included in training. 

Trainers were 

available on site for 

consultation. 

Inclusion of Director 

or other staff 

members not noted.

Three-day workshop 

followed by half day 

workshop two months 

later. One hour staff 

development meeting 

after each workshop. Two 

trainers available at center 

for informal consultation. 

Study carried 

out in day care 

center for low 

income children

Facilitating 

play thorough 

nondirective 

interactions.

Two citations for basis for 

intervention in findings 

that adult behavior can 

support the development of 

higher level play behavior 

in children.

In first workshop, aim was to 

increase appreciation of 

caregiver's role as facilitator for 

learning through play. Caregivers 

trained to comment to children 

during play in way reinforced 

exploration and play. Second 

workshop focused on increasing 

use of nondirective language and 

decreasing use of directive 

language during playtime and 

mealtime. Teachers practiced 

identifying nondirective and 

directive language during 

workshop and follow-up 

meeting. Approaches included 

guided group discuss, roleplaying, modeling of desired 

behaviors, videotapes, written 

vignettes, exercises.

189 Table A-3b. Child Social Behavior Studies: Features of Professional Development—ContinuedContinues next page
Study

Hendrickson, 

Gardner, Kaiser 

and Riley 

(1993)

Mode of Professional 

Development Delivery

PD Linkages with 

Infrastructure

Temporal Aspects of 

Professional 

Development

Participant 

Outreach Content Area

PD Content 

Grounded in Research

Description of 

Content/Curriculum

One-on-one coaching and observation in 

classroom. Setting was center serving 

children from 6 weeks to 5 years. Approx onefourth of children had multiple disabilities 

and one-third had a single disability. 

Coaching conducted in any available quiet 

area of center. After teachers 1 and 2 had 

attended three coaching sessions, were 

invited to take charge of one or all of eight 

steps in coaching process. Teachers 1 and 2 

also observed and participated in coaching of 

another teacher.

Not noted. Each coaching session 

lasted about 20 minutes.

Each of three 

study children 

were socially 

withdrawn and 

had development 

disabilities or 

delays.

Child social 

interaction for 

socially 

withdrawn 

children with 

disabilities or 

delays.

Research cited for 

approach as used with 

older children, but authors 

note (p. 215) that there are 

not studies with preschoolage children.

Eight segment coaching process. 

A 15-25 minute coaching session 

preceded classroom observations 

made during the intervention. 

Step 1) Teacher asked for three 

things she liked about lesson. 2) 

Teacher asked if would change 

anything. 3) Coach data on 

teacher's behavior. 4) Then on 

target child's behavior. 5) Coach 

shared three positive 

observations based on 

observation data and anecdotal 

notes (at least one based on 

data). 6) Coach offered 

suggestions for teacher to 

consider. 7) Coach suggested 

teacher set observable goal. 8) 

Teacher ideas for behaviors she 

might use in next session.

190 Table A-3b. Child Social Behavior Studies: Features of Professional Development—ContinuedContinues next page
Study

Lynch, Geller 

and Schmidt 

(2004)

Mode of Professional 

Development Delivery

PD Linkages with 

Infrastructure

Temporal Aspects of 

Professional 

Development

Participant 

Outreach Content Area

PD Content 

Grounded in Research

Description of 

Content/Curriculum

Teacher training in the Al's Pal's curriculum 

is provided by "expert trainers" in a two-day 

workshop. The training is described as 

"interactive" and combines theory and 

practice. The training focuses on establishing 

a "resiliency-promoting classroom 

environment" which is nurturing, provides 

opportunities for children to be involved and 

to make decisions, and establishes clear 

norms. Teachers practice techniques during 

the training that promote children's abilities 

to cope and solve problems. Teachers sign a 

participation agreement that allows them to 

participate as long as they have received the 

training. "Consultation and advanced 

training" are available (though no details are 

provided).

Program 

administrators are 

encouraged to attend 

the teacher training. 

They also receive a 

monitoring and 

observation form to 

assist them in 

monitoring 

implementation of 

the curriculum.

The training lasted two 

days

Curriculum and 

training 

implemented in 

a large Head 

Start program.

Socialemotional 

development

The PD content is based on 

resiliency research.

Teacher training curricula not 

described in detail. Classroom 

curriculum that teachers 

implement involves two lessons 

(lasting 15-20 minutes) per week 

over 23 weeks. Lessons include 

discussion led by puppets, roleplaying and use of music, books, 

artwork and movement. The 

curriculum kit for teachers 

"furnishes all needed materials 

and gives clear instructions on 

how and in what order to conduct 

the lessons".

191 Table A-3b. Child Social Behavior Studies: Features of Professional Development—ContinuedContinues next page
Study

Raver, Jones, 

Li-Grining, 

Metzger, 

Champion, and 

Sardin (2008)

Mode of Professional 

Development Delivery

PD Linkages with 

Infrastructure

Temporal Aspects of 

Professional 

Development

Participant 

Outreach Content Area

PD Content 

Grounded in Research

Description of 

Content/Curriculum

The CSRP included four components: (1) 

The teacher training component in the fall 

(with booster training in mid-winter for new 

staff); (2) Mental Health Consultants' (MHC) 

coaching of the strategies learned in the 

training in fall and winter; (3) MHC's support 

for teachers' stress reduction in winter; and 

(4) MHC's one-on-one direct consultation 

services to children in the spring. 

Trainings were 

offered for lead and 

assistant teachers. 

All treatment teachers 

were invited to participate 

in five trainings on 

Saturdays, each lasting 

six hours, in the fall and 

winter. MHC's providing 

coaching one morning a 

week in the fall and 

winter. MCHs provided 

stress reduction in the 

winter, and one-on-one 

services to children in the 

spring. 

Head-Start 

funded sites 

were selected 

based on their 

location in highpoverty neighborhoods. 

Behavior 

management 

and classroom 

climate

CSRP is based on research 

on classroom management 

and effective professional 

development as it relates to 

collaboration, coaching, 

and teacher stress. It is also 

based on recent 

interventions used to 

support children's social 

emotional development 

(e.g., Webster-Stratton et 

al., 2001). 

During the five trainings, a 

behaviorally and evidence-based 

teacher training package was 

selected and purchased, and a 

Licensed Clinical Social Worker 

delivered 30 hours of training 

over fall and winter, adapting the 

Incredible Years teacher training 

module. Teachers received 

placement of a MHC with a 

master's degree in Social Work 

in their Classrooms one morning 

a week. MCHs followed a 

manualized approach. In the 

winter, MCHs worked with 

teachers to try to help reduce 

their stress. Finally, in the 

spring, MCHs provided childfocused consultation with a small 

number of children in the 

classroom. 

192 Table A-3b. Child Social Behavior Studies: Features of Professional Development—ContinuedContinues next page
Study

Reynolds and Kelley (1997)

Mode of Professional 

Development Delivery

PD Linkages with 

Infrastructure

Temporal Aspects of 

Professional 

Development

Participant 

Outreach Content Area

PD Conten

Grounded in Re

Handout plus instruction. No duration given. Experimenter confirmed appropriate implementation through observation. No details regarding number of visits. Chart shows number of days of implementation; varies by child with maximum of about 35 days (including baseline, treatment, withdrawal, second treatment).

Not noted. Not specifically noted. 

Handout provided, instruction provided, child and teacher did role play and received feedback, experimenter observed to assure fidelity of implementation (implies that feedback was given during implementation).

Three of four children were white with highly educated parents. One child was black and had a high school educated single mother with vocational training. 

Aggressive behavior.

Not clearly noted. one citation in intrthe approach, but cis not described.

Table A-3b. Child Social Behavior Studies: Features of Professional Development—Continu

193 
Study

Rhodes and 

Hennesy (2000)

Schottle and 

Peltier (1996)

Mode of Professional 

Development Delivery

PD Linkages with 

Infrastructure

Temporal Aspects of 

Professional 

Development

Participant 

Outreach Content Area

PD Content 

Grounded in Research

Description of 

Content/Curriculum

One-hundred and twenty hours of training, 

with 90 hours of instruction ("tuition") and 

30 hours of observation over a six- to sevenmonth period. Location not noted, but course 

provided by two instructors with appropriate 

qualifications (qualifications are described). 

Auspice was Irish Preschool Playgroups 

Association. This was an advanced course 

and all participants had taken elementary 

course or equiv.

Not noted. One-hundred and twenty 

hours of training (90 

hours "tuition" and 30 

hours of observation). 

Two evenings per week 

for 24 weeks (September 

to March). Each class was 

two hours. 

Participants had 

to pay for course 

and low level of 

pay was a 

barrier. It was 

helpful that 

course was part 

time and did not 

require time off 

work.

Caregiver 

sensitivity; 

child cognitive 

and social 

development.

Basis in research of 

specific elements of 

training are not discussed

The Irish Preschool Playgroups 

Association (IPPA) offers an 

advanced course called the 

Foundation Course in Playgroup 

Practice. This involves 120 hours 

of training. It covers four broad 

areas: the needs of children, the 

value of play, the curriculum, the 

development function of 

playgroups. (A table in the paper 

gives examples of topics covered 

in each area).

Experimental group: one-on-one planning 

with eight to ten follow up visits to class. 

Contrast group: five three-hour group 

sessions (location not given).

Referral made by 

school counselor.

Joint development of 

behavior modification 

plan with eight to ten 

follow up visits to class in 

experimental group. Five 

three-hour group sessions 

in contrast group with 

same consultant.

Kindergarten 

through grade 3 

students in "at 

risk schools."

Behavior 

management.

Not clear from article. 

There is reference to 

research and distinct 

approaches taken in 

previous interventions, but 

use of this in current work 

not clear.

In experimental group teachers 

received one-on-one intervention 

from behavior management 

consultant, developing behavior 

intervention plan collaboratively 

with eight to ten follow up visits 

to class. Contrast group had 

same consultant with five threehour group classes.

194 Table A-3b. Child Social Behavior Studies: Features of Professional Development—ContinuedContinues next page
Study

WebsterStratton, Reid, 

and Hammond 

(2001)

Mode of Professional 

Development Delivery

PD Linkages with 

Infrastructure

Temporal Aspects of 

Professional 

Development

Participant 

Outreach Content Area

PD Content 

Grounded in Research

Description of 

Content/Curriculum

This study is based on 

research on oppositional 

defiant and conduct 

disorder, as well as a 

previous randomized train 

of the Incredible Years 

Parent Training Program 

(Webster-Stratton, 1998). 

Parent Training : The parent 

training groups teach positive 

discipline strategies, effective 

parenting skills, strategies for 

coping with stress, and ways to 

strengthen children's social 

skills. During training sessions, 

group leaders and parents viewed 

videotapes and then discussed 

parent-child interactions. Group 

leaders (family service workers) 

followed an intervention manual 

with specified content for each 

session. Teacher Training: The 

teacher training curriculum 

focused on teaching classroom 

management and discipline 

strategies and promoting social 

competence in the classroom. 

Teachers were also taught to 

prevent peer rejection. Training 

topics included: (a) promoting 

positive relationships with 

students and families; (b) 

strengthening student social 

skills; (c) using incentives to 

motivate students with behavior 

problems; (d) teaching how to be 

proactive; (e) handling 

misbehavior; (f) teacher children 

problem solving; (g) helping 

students verbalize feelings; and 

(h) collaborating with parents. 

Child behavior, 

particularly noncompliance and 

aggression

Average family 

income was 

$11,600, 55.8 

percent singleparent, 33.9 

percent less than 

High School 

education. 

Overall highrisk sample. 

Teachers and teacher 

assistants participated in a 

six-day training series, 

once a month, from 

November to April. In 

the fall, 13 family service 

workers from the 

experimental centers 

completed a three-day 

parent group leader 

training. Eighteen 12-

week parent groups were 

conducted during the first 

year. Four booster 

sessions were offered to 

parents in the 

kindergarten year. 

Teachers and teacher 

assistants 

participated in the 

training. Family 

service workers were 

also trained to lead 

parent groups. 

Teachers and teacher assistants participated 

in a six-day training series, once a month, 

from November to April. Teachers viewed 

videotapes of other classroom teachers and 

then discussed teacher-student interactions 

that they viewed. In the fall, 13 family 

service workers from the experimental 

centers completed a three-day parent group 

leader training. The group leaders (family 

service workers) (a) followed the detailed 

training manual and session protocol for each 

session; (b) were observed conducting groups 

at least once by the project director; (c) 

conducted their first parent group with a 

trained staff member; (d) attended 

supervision meetings; (e) kept detailed 

weekly checklists of group process, 

intervention content completed, weekly 

parent attendance, and parents' reactions. 

Eighteen 12-week parent groups were 

conducted during the first year. Four booster 

sessions were offered to parents in the 

kindergarten year. Parents viewed videotapes 

of modeled parenting skills with group 

leaders, and then discussed the parent-child 

interactions. 

195 Table A-3b. Child Social Behavior Studies: Features of Professional Development—ContinuedContinues next page
Study

WebsterStratton, Reid and Hammond (2004)

Mode of Professional 

Development Delivery

PD Linkages with 

Infrastructure

Temporal Aspects of 

Professional 

Development

Participant 

Outreach Content Area

PD Conten

Grounded in Re

Four days of training in clinic in group setting focusing on effective handling of misbehavior in class, promoting positive relationships with difficult students, and strengthening social skills across school contexts. Focus on helping child prevent peer rejection. Two meetings with therapist at school to develop individual behavior plan for child.

Not noted. Four days coordinated 

with first, second, third and fourth quarter of parent or child training.

Authors note as a limitation of the study that the sample was primarily EuroAmerican. Families were from full income range, but majority were two-parent and middle income. 

Child behavior for children with oppositional defiant disorder.

Research is basis ohypothesis that cointerventions for pand children with interventions for tewill augment positeffects. 

Table A-3b. Child Social Behavior Studies: Features of Professional Development—Continu

196
Study

Brigman, Lane, 

Switzer, Lane, 

and Lawrence 

(1999)

Rigor of PD 

Evaluation Outcome Measures

Outcomes in

 Educator Knowledge

Outcomes in 

Educator Practice Child Outcomes

Experimental 

(Random 

Assignment to 

Treatment and 

Control 

Groups)

(1) Listening comprehension Number 1: The auditory 

memory and school language and listening subtests of the 

Metropolitan Readiness Test were combined to make one 27-

item listening comprehension test. (2) Listening 

comprehension Number 2: The story structure subtest of the 

Metropolitan Readiness Test. (3) ACTeRs Comprehensive 

Teacher's Rating Scale of behavior, covering attention, 

social skills, hyperactivity and oppositional behavior. (4) 

Independent observation of attending behavior: Children 

were observed by an independent observer (about 21-22 

hours in each class) for on-task, attending behavior. The 

four measures were administered in each of the classes at 

three timepoints (Sept. Jan., March).

Not addressed. During the initial workshops as well as the 

follow-up workshops, teachers and 

assistants were asked to demonstrate their 

understanding of the RTL teaching 

strategies and materials, and all were seen 

as demonstrating competency (though no 

data are provided). In addition, there were 

weekly 30-minute classroom observations 

followed by a discussion on program 

implementation, and teachers reported 

weekly on implementation. These again 

confirmed implementation (no data 

presented).

There were significant interactions of 

Time x Group on three of the four 

outcomes. Treatment classes showed 

significant increases on independent 

observations of attending behavior, 

story structure (listening 

comprehension Number 2), and 

teacher ratings of behavior (ACTeRS 

behavior rating). 

197 Table A-3c. Child Social Behavior Studies: Outcomes Continues next page
Study

Denham and 

Burton (1996)

Rigor of PD 

Evaluation Outcome Measures

Outcomes in

 Educator Knowledge

Outcomes in 

Educator Practice Child Outcomes

QuasiExperimental 

(PostIntervention 

Only with 

Controls for 

Baseline Group 

Differences)

Children's outcomes: Preschool Competence Questionnaire 

(teacher report of social competence) and the Minnesota 

Preschool Affect Checklist (observational assessment of 

children's affect and social interaction during natural play). 

As a measure of treatment fidelity, teachers rated their own 

effectiveness in delivering the techniques.

Not addressed Not addressed The intervention was a significant 

predictor of the PCQ aggregate scores 

at posttest. There was a significant 

interaction of pretest and intervention 

status (having the intervention and 

being low on the PCQ at pretest 

predicted posttest scores). 

Intervention did not predict observed 

positive affect. It did predict negative 

affect, productiveness (involvement in 

purposeful activity) and peer skill. 

Intervention by pretest interaction 

was a significant predictor of these 

three outcomes.

198 Table A-3c. Child Social Behavior Studies: Outcomes—Continued Continues next page
Study

Domitrovich, 

Cortes, and 

Greenberg 

(2007)

Rigor of PD 

Evaluation Outcome Measures

Outcomes in

 Educator Knowledge

Outcomes in 

Educator Practice Child Outcomes

Experimental Not assessed.

(Random 

Assignment to 

Treatment and 

Control 

Groups)

(1) Revised version of the Recognition of Emotion Concepts 

subtest from the Kusche Emotional Inventory (KEI; Kusche, 

1984) to assess children's receptive emotion vocabulary. (2) 

Assessment of Children's Emotions Scales (ACES; Schultz 

et al., 2001) to assess children's emotion expression 

knowledge. (3) Denahm Puppet Interview (DPI; Denham, 

1986) to assess children's perspective-taking skills. (4) 

Day/Night task (Diamond and Taylor, 1996) to measure 

inhibitory control. (5) An adaptation of Luria's (1996) 

tapping test used to assess children's inhibitory control. (6) 

Attention Sustained subtest from the Leiter-Revised 

Assessment Battery (Roid and Miller, 1997) used to assess 

children's visual-spatial memory and attention. (7) The 

problem solving portion of the Challenging Situations Tast 

(CST; Denham et al., 1994) used to assess children's 

behavior response to common social problems. (8) 

Preschool and Kindergarten Behavior Scales (PKBS; 

Merrell, 1996) used to assess children's social skills and 

problem behaviors. (9) Parents completed the Head Start 

Competence Scale (HSCS; Domitrovich et al., 2001) to rate 

children's social emotional skills. 

Not assessed. Direct Child Assessments - 

Significant group effects were found 

on three of the four emotion 

knowledge measures (KEI, ACES 

accuracy and anger bias). Children in 

the intervention group had a larger 

emotion receptive vocabulary at posttest, were more accurate in identifying 

feelings, and the intervention reduced 

children's anger attribution bias. 

There were no significant differences 

between intervention and control 

children on measures of inhibitory 

control, attention, or problem solving. 

Effect sizes ranged from .28 (DPI) to 

.40 (ACES anger bias). TeacherReport of Child - Intervention 

children were rated at post-test as 

significantly more cooperative, 

emotionally aware, and 

interpersonally skilled than children 

in the control classrooms. There were 

no group differences in teachers' 

ratings of externalizing behaviors. 

Parent-Report of Child - Parents of 

students in the intervention group 

rated their children as significantly 

more socially and emotionally 

competent than did parents of 

children in the control group. 

199 Table A-3c. Child Social Behavior Studies: Outcomes—Continued Continues next page
Study

Franyo and 

Hyson (1999)

Rigor of PD 

Evaluation Outcome Measures

Outcomes in

 Educator Knowledge

Outcomes in 

Educator Practice Child Outcomes

Experimental 

(Random 

Assignment to 

Treatment and 

Control 

Groups)

(1) Background questionnaire (employment position, years 

of experience in ECE, ages of children in care, ethnicity and 

education, any prior training on temperament). (2) Parent 

Attitude Survey Acceptance of Children Scale (ACS): 

measures acceptance of a child's behavior and feelings and 

degree to which child is seen as individual in own right. (3) 

Knowledge about Temperament Survey (KATS, measures 

knowledge of the existence of individual differences, 

biological basis of temperament, continuity in temperament, 

goodness of fit of child and environment, and impact of 

adult temperament on children. (4) Open-ended response 

items.

Differences between the preworkshop and post-workshop 

scores on the KATS were 

significantly greater for the 

workshop group than for the 

waiting list control group. The 

same pattern occurred for the 

delayed post-workshop KATS. 

However, there were no 

statistically significant 

differences between he 

workshop group and the 

control group on the ACS. 

Thus there appeared to be 

effects on caregiver knowledge 

but not attitudes of acceptance 

of children's behavior and 

feelings.

Not assessed. Not assessed.

200 Table A-3c. Child Social Behavior Studies: Outcomes—Continued Continues next page
Study

Girolametto, 

Weitzman and 

Greenberg 

(2004)

Rigor of PD 

Evaluation Outcome Measures

Outcomes in

 Educator Knowledge

Outcomes in 

Educator Practice Child Outcomes

Experimental 

(Random 

Assignment to 

Treatment and 

Control 

Groups)

(1) Brief background questionnaire for caregivers completed 

at orientation. (2) Speech and Language Assessment Scale 

(Hadley and Rice, 1993) completed for each of the 

participating children by child care provider to ensure that 

the children's speech and language development was 

progressing typically. (3) Teacher videotaped with four 

children from classroom (15 minutes in dramatic play area, 

15 minutes in block area) with order counterbalanced. 

Transcription of middle (10 minutes of each). Seven codes 

collapsed into four subtypes of verbal support strategies. (1) 

Restricts (mentions rule governing peer interaction); (2) 

Facilitates communication (rephrases or restates child's 

utterance to another child; prompts children to talk to each 

other); (3) Peer referrals (invites children to interact; tells 

children to help each other) (4) Indirect referrals (praise for 

engaging peer interaction; alerts peers to situational 

information). Target child follows adult suggestion or 

overrides (ignores or rejects). Peer acknowledges initiation 

or no response (rejects or does not respond).

Not assessed. No differences found at pre-test on peer 

interaction codes or other basic descriptors 

of interaction (e.g., number of 

conversational utterances). At post-test: 

caregivers in experimental group talked 

significantly less but used a significantly 

higher mean length of utterance. They 

used a significantly higher overall number 

of verbal supports (as well as proportion of 

verbal supports in relation to all 

utterances), more (# and percent) 

facilitates communication, peer referrals. 

Within experimental group at three-month 

follow-up, four caregivers increased verbal 

supports, three decreased.

Children in the experimental group 

used a significantly greater number of 

uptakes and overrides than children in 

the control group in response to 

caregiver verbal support strategies. 

However the proportion of caregiver 

verbal supports that resulted in 

uptakes and overrides did not differ 

significantly. Number and proportion 

of uptakes that received an 

acknowledgment from a peer were 

examined. Peers in the experimental 

group used a significantly greater 

number of acknowledges and no 

responses compared to peers in 

control group However no differences 

when calculated as proportion of 

children's uptakes. In the 

experimental group, facilitates 

communication and peer referral most 

impact on children. No pattern in 

control group.

201 Table A-3c. Child Social Behavior Studies: Outcomes—Continued Continues next page
Study

Gowen (1987)

Rigor of PD 

Evaluation Outcome Measures

Outcomes in

 Educator Knowledge

Outcomes in 

Educator Practice Child Outcomes

Pre-Post w/o 

Comparison 

Group

Pre-workshop observations recorded directive verbalizations 

to children and total verbal behavior. Caregivers observed 

three times during playtime following first workshop and 

follow-up session. Observed two times during playtime and 

two times during mealtime following second workshop and 

follow-up session. Four categories of verbal behavior 

recorded: information sharing, information eliciting verbal 

directive, and verbal other. Two categories of nonverbal 

behavior recorded: nonverbal directive and nonverbal other. 

Assessments at beginning and end of each workshop). At 

first workshop: reasons child-initiated activities and 

caregiver-initiated activities fostered learning, learning 

objectives that could be met during block play, three 

comments caregivers could make to foster those learning 

objectives in block play, and how classroom could be 

arranged to support learning through play. Second 

workshop: 10 utterances that a caregiver might make: 

directive or not? Evaluation questionnaire completed 

anonymously evaluating workshop activities re: usefulness. 

There was an increase from 

before to after Workshop I on 

mean score on the assessment 

of knowledge: "caregivers 

showed an improved 

understanding of the unique 

role of child-initiated activities 

in preschool educational 

programs...and of ways in 

which learning objectives can 

be approached with 

appropriate caregiver 

comments during play" (p. 64). 

Mean performance also 

improved from pre to post 

Workshop II. Improved ability 

to distinguish directive from 

nondirective language. But this 

improved knowledge did not 

translate into improved 

performance in class for less 

educated caregivers.

Caregivers achieved target of verbal 

interactions during more than 50 percent of 

intervals during observations of playtime. 

Level of verbal plus nonverbal 

involvement was very high. Improvement 

over pre-workshop behavior for verbal 

involvement. Overall proportion of 

directive verbalizations after workshops I 

and II during playtime and mealtime was 

close to target of 25 percent (for some 

settings slightly higher). But only about 

half of the caregivers had met target during 

both play observations. Caregiver 

education was related to meeting target.

Not assessed.

202 Table A-3c. Child Social Behavior Studies: Outcomes—Continued Continues next page
Study

Hendrickson, Gardner, Kaiser and Riley (1993)

Rigor of PD 

Evaluation Outcome Measures

Outcomes in

 Educator Knowledge

Outcomes in 

Educator Practice 

Pre-Post w/o Comparison Group

Two to three observation sessions per week during group activities. Time sampling for 10 minutes. Teacher support for social interaction (either antecedent or following); social interaction (motor or verbal behavior initiated to another child and responded to within five seconds--positive behaviors only). 

Not assessed. Teacher 1: number of observation inte

with support behavior increased substantially from baseline (0) to first period of coaching (13). Several resultin return to baseline levels. Increase agduring second period of implementatio(24) with both short (21) and long term maintenance (21). Similar patterns in teachers 2 and 3 without reversal perioAlmost no baseline supportive behaviothen increases with coaching and short longer term maintenance. 

Table A-3c. Child Social Behavior Studies: Outcomes—Continued

203 
Study

Lynch, Geller 

and Schmidt 

(2004)

Rigor of PD 

Evaluation Outcome Measures

Outcomes in

 Educator Knowledge

Outcomes in 

Educator Practice Child Outcomes

Experimental 

(Random 

Assignment to 

Treatment and 

Control 

Groups)

Pre- and post -ratings of children's behavior were made by 

teachers on the Child Behavior Rating Scale-30 (CBRS-3), 

the Teacher Report of Child Coping, and the Preschool and 

Kindergarten Behavior Scale (PKBS). Ratings were 

collected in the fall and spring, approximately seven months 

apart.

Not assessed Not assessed. The authors report that they 

have qualitative data showing improved 

classroom management and an increased 

sense of efficacy after teachers are trained 

and implement the curriculum.

Paired t-tests showed significant 

positive changes for the intervention 

group on the CBRS-30 (measuring 

prosocial skills), the PKBS and two 

subscales of the Teacher Report of 

Child Coping. Problem behaviors did 

not change. The control group 

reported significantly more problem 

behaviors at the post-test and no 

changes in prosocial behaviors. 

Repeated measures ANOVA showed 

between group differences in changes 

on the CBRS, the social independence 

subscale of the PKBS and the 

problem behaviors scale of the PKBS.

204 Table A-3c. Child Social Behavior Studies: Outcomes—Continued Continues next page
Study

Raver, Jones, 

Li-Grining, 

Metzger, 

Champion, and 

Sardin (2008)

Rigor of PD 

Evaluation Outcome Measures

Outcomes in

 Educator Knowledge

Outcomes in 

Educator Practice Child Outcomes

Experimental 

(Random 

Assignment to 

Treatment and 

Control 

Groups)

(1) The CLASS (La Paro et al., 2004) was used to assess 

classroom quality using four subscales: positive climate, 

negative climate, teacher sensitivity, and behavior 

management. (2) Baseline measures of the CLASS and 

ECERS-R (Harms et al., 2003) were used to control for 

variability in sites' baseline classroom quality. 

Not assessed. Overall, treatment classrooms showed 

statistically significantly higher levels of 

positive classroom climate, teacher 

sensitivity, and behavior management (at 

trend level), and lower levels of negative 

climate. Specifically, treatment-control 

group differences were statistically 

significant for classrooms positive climate 

in March, controlling for classrooms' 

baseline level of positive climate, with an 

effect size of d = 0.89. There was also a 

treatment effect for negative climate, with 

intervention classrooms showing less 

negative climate than control classrooms 

(d = 0.64). The differences between 

treatment and control groups on teacher 

sensitivity were statistically significant 

only once the covariates were included (d 

= 0.53). Difference between treatment and 

control groups on behavior management 

were only significant at trend level 

(p<0.10, d = 0.52). 

Not assessed.

205 Table A-3c. Child Social Behavior Studies: Outcomes—Continued Continues next page
Study

Reynolds and 

Kelley (1997)

Rigor of PD 

Evaluation Outcome Measures

Outcomes in

 Educator Knowledge

Outcomes in 

Educator Practice Child Outcomes

Pre-Post w/o 

Comparison 

Group

Daily observation for about 40 minutes noting aggressive 

and destructive behavior (calculated as rate/hour). Teacher 

rating of the acceptability of the response cost procedure 

before and after treatment. Target child indicated whether he 

liked the response cost system and whether it helped him 

behave better in school.

Teacher attitude about the 

acceptability of this treatment 

approach changed for three of 

four teachers. The increased in 

their ratings of the treatment's 

acceptability.

Not assessed. Graph shows visually that child 

aggressive behavior decreased during 

treatment; increased again during 

withdrawal, and presentation of 

results describes the patterns this 

way. Descriptive statistics are 

provided but no tests of significance 

are reported on. 

206 Table A-3c. Child Social Behavior Studies: Outcomes—Continued Continues next page
Study

Rhodes and 

Hennesy (2000)

Schottle and 

Peltier (1996)

Rigor of PD 

Evaluation Outcome Measures

Outcomes in

 Educator Knowledge

Outcomes in 

Educator Practice Child Outcomes

Pre-Post w/ 

Comparison 

Group (Not 

Randomly 

Assigned)

(1) Arnett Caregiver Interaction Scale (CIS): positive 

relationship, punitiveness, permissiveness, and 

detachment.(2) Social competence rated on five-point Peer 

Play Scale (PPS) (Honest et al., 1980). Degree of 

complexity in peer play from parallel play to reciprocal 

play. (3) Cognitive competence rated on five-point Play with 

Objects Scale (POS). Rates increasing complexity of play 

with objects .

Not assessed. No significant differences between training 

and comparison group at pre-test. Training 

group made significant gains on CIS 

positive relationship while comparison 

group did not. Training group participants 

showed a significant reduction in 

detachment while comparison group 

showed no change.

Children attending centers of training 

group caregivers made significant 

gains in levels of complex social play 

from pre to post-test, while the 

comparison group did not make 

significant gains from pre to post-test. 

Children attending centers of training 

group caregivers made significant 

gains in levels of complex cognitive 

play from pre- to post-test. The 

comparison group children did not 

make significant gains in complex 

cognitive play. At the post-test, 

children in the training group had 

significantly higher scores than those 

in the comparison group on both 

measures. [Article reports on main 

effect of group, main effect of time, 

and interaction; Summary is results of 

the follow up analyses of simple 

effects.]

QuasiExperimental 

(PostIntervention 

Only with 

Controls for 

Baseline Group 

Differences)

Conners' Teacher Rating Scale completed by teacher and an 

observer rating student behavior pre-and post-intervention. 

Measures hyperactivity, conduct problems, emotionally 

indulgent, asocial, anxious-passive, daydream-attention 

problems and hyperactivity index.

Not assessed. Not assessed. In both one-on-one and group 

approaches, teacher and observer 

ratings indicated change over time. 

Students improved from at risk in 

several categories to being within 

normal range. However on five of 

seven categories, greater change was 

achieved in individual consultation 

approach. 

207 Table A-3c. Child Social Behavior Studies: Outcomes—Continued Continues next page
Study

WebsterStratton, Reid, 

and Hammond 

(2001)

Rigor of PD 

Evaluation Outcome Measures

Outcomes in

 Educator Knowledge

Outcomes in 

Educator Practice Child Outcomes

Experimental children showed 

significantly fewer conduct problems 

at school than control children. 

Children of mothers who attended six 

or more intervention sessions showed 

significantly fewer conduct problems 

at home than control children. 

Children who were the highest risk at 

baseline (high levels of noncompliant 

and aggressive behavior) showed 

more clinically significant reductions 

in these behaviors than high-risk 

children in the control group. 

Clinically significant improvements 

in children's behaviors in the 

classroom were defined as a 30 

percent decrease in observable 

deviant and noncompliant behaviors 

from baseline. One year later, the 

clinically significant reductions in 

behavior problems for the highest risk 

group were maintained. 

Experimental mothers had significantly 

lower negative parenting and significantly 

higher positive parenting than control 

mothers. Parent-teacher bonding was 

significantly higher for experimental than 

control mothers. One year later the 

experimental effects were maintained for 

parents who attended more than six 

groups. After training, intervention 

teachers showed significantly better 

classroom management skills than control 

teachers. 

Parenting Positive and Negative Constructs: (1) Negative Not assessed.

parenting includes one variable from the Parenting Practices 

Inventory (PPI) parenting practices interview, independent 

observations of critical parenting from the Coder 

Impressions Inventory (CII), and total critical statements 

from the DPICS-R (Robinson and Eyberg, 1981). (2) 

Positive parenting includes two variables from the LIFT 

parenting practices interview (positive parenting and 

monitoring), one from the parent involvement questionnaire, 

one CII variable, and one DPICS-R variable. Parent-Teacher 

Bonding Construct: The INVOLVE-P evaluates the amount 

and quality of parents' involvement with their children's 

education at home and at school. The INVOLVE-T assessed 

teacher bonding with parent and parent involvement with 

school or teacher. Child Conduct Problems at Home 

Construct:The construct includes parent report variables 

from the Eyberg Child Behavior Inventory (ECBI, Robinson 

et al., 1980) and the total Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL, 

Acherman and Edelbrock, 1991), and two independent 

observations of aggression and inappropriate behavior in the 

home (CII percentage of time childacts inappropriate and 

DPICS-R total deviance and noncompliance). Child 

Conduct Problems at School Construct: Three teacher report 

variables - ADHD rating scale (DuPaul, 1990, Social 

Competence and Behavior Evaluation (SCBE; LaFreniere et 

al., 1992) externalizing and reversed social competence 

scores, and also three independent observations of child 

behaviors at school 

(Multiple Option Observation System for Experimental 

Studies MOOSES; Tapp et al., 2001) child conduct 

problems, Social Health Profile antisocial behaviors 

(Werthamer-Larsson et al., 1990), and reversed 

engagement). Teacher Classroom Management Style and 

Classroom Atmosphere Construct: MOOSES teacher 

criticism, teacher praise, classroom atmosphere, and teacher 

coder impression--harsh discipline, and positive techniques. 

Experimental 

(Random 

Assignment to 

Treatment and 

Control 

Groups)

208 Table A-3c. Child Social Behavior Studies: Outcomes—Continued Continues next page
Study

WebsterStratton, Reid 

and Hammond 

(2004)

Rigor of PD 

Evaluation Outcome Measures

Outcomes in

 Educator Knowledge

Outcomes in 

Educator Practice Child Outcomes

Experimental 

(Random 

Assignment to 

Treatment and 

Control 

Groups)

(1) Naturalistic home observation; 60 minutes with each 

parent at each time point using Dyadic Parent-Child 

Interactive Coding System Revised; (2) 60 minutes of 

unstructured classroom time at each time point; (3) 60 

minutes of structured classroom time at each time point; (4) 

30-minute lab observation with same sex peer. Parent 

Positive and Negative Composite Scores based on 

observation and self-report. Child Conduct Problems at 

Home Composite Score based on observation and parent 

report. Child Conduct Problems at School and With Peers 

Composite Score based on observation and teacher report. 

Child Social Competence with Peers Composite based on 

observation and teacher report. Negative Classroom 

Management and Atmosphere Composite based on 

observation. Parent and Teacher Satisfaction with Program 

post intervention and at one year follow-up.

Not assessed. There was no contrast of TT alone vs. 

control. The design permits reporting 

effects for three groups that involved TT 

vs. control, and considering additive 

effects of TT (e.g. whether PT+TT>PT). 

Short-term effects on the teacher 

classroom management composite score: 

The three conditions that received TT (as 

well as the CT only condition) showed 

significant treatment effects. Effect size 

smaller for CT group than groups 

involving TT. (Suggests that changes in 

child behavior through CT can have small 

pos effects on classroom practices). In this 

instance, TT did function additively with 

CT.

No overall effect on ANCOVA for 

child conduct problems at school and 

w/ peers, but on individual contrasts 

(planned) each group involving TT 

differed from control group. Child 

social competence with peers: no 

overall effect on ANCOVA, but 

individual analyses showed effects 

when TT paired with CT (CT + TT, 

CT +PT+TT) though CT only also 

differed. All three treatment groups 

involving TT, showed "clinically 

significant" improvements on teacherreported conduct problems at school 

and observed aggressive behavior. At 

follow-up (with new teachers) these 

groups continued to show "clinically 

significant" improvement on 

observation measure but slight 

decrease in percent showing 

clinically significant improvement on 

teacher-report measure. However, TT 

generally not additive.

209 Table A-3c. Child Social Behavior Studies: Outcomes—Continued
Study Research Questions Research Design Sample General Comments

Barnett, 

Jung, Yarosz, 

Thomas, 

Hornbeck, 

Stechuk, and 

Burns (2008)

Does the Tools of the Mind 

(Tools) curriculum produce 

significantly greater gains in 

children's social behavior, 

language, and literacy than a 

control curriculum? Compared to 

a control curriculum, does Tools 

produce significantly greater 

gains in classroom quality? 

One school participated in this study. Teachers were 

randomly assigned by blocks. They were stratified by 

groups and then randomly chosen to implement the 

Tools curriculum. All treatment classes were placed on 

one floor, and control classes on another. Children with 

permission were then randomly assigned to either a 

Tools or control classroom. Children were assessed in 

the fall (October and November) and spring (late April 

through early June). Children were tested in Spanish or 

English. 

The school district involved in this study is 

part of the "Abbott" preschool education 

program. The study took place in one 

school. A total of 218 three- and four-yearold children were randomly assigned and 

participated in either a Tools or control 

classroom. In this sample, 93 percent of 

children were Hispanic, and 63 percent 

spoke English as their primary language. 

Fidelity measures were developed to assess extent to 

which teachers correctly implemented the 

curriculum. Measures indicated that the curriculum 

was not fully implemented at the beginning of the 

year. There were no significant differences between 

Tools and control children's scores at pre-test. 

210 Table A-4a. Comprehensive Curricula Studies: Methodology Continues next page
Study Research Questions Research Design Sample General Comments

Bierman, 

Nix, 

Greenberg, 

Blair, and 

Domitrovich 

(2008)

(1) Did children's executive 

function (EF) skills at the 

beginning of the prekindergarten 

year enhance their development 

in areas of cognitive and socialemotional school readiness? (2) 

Did these skills moderate their 

response to the Head Start REDI 

intervention? (3) Did the 

intervention improve children's 

EF Skills? (4) Did improvements 

in child EF skills mediate child 

outcomes in areas of cognitive or 

social-emotional school 

readiness?

Using stratified randomization, classes in three counties 

were divided into groups based on demographic 

characteristics, location (e.g., central or southeastern 

PA), and length of school day (e.g., full day, half day, 

year round). Within groups, centers were randomly 

assigned to the intervention or control group. Only 4-

year-old children participated in the study, although 

classrooms included both 3- and 4-year-olds. Teachers 

were trained and implemented the intervention which 

included curriculum-based lessons, center-based 

extension activities, and training in "coaching 

strategies" to support skill development. Pre- and postintervention child assessments were conducted by 

trained interviewers. One lead and one assistant teacher 

in each classroom provided ratings of child behavior. 

Additionally, at post-test, each child was observed 

during two 12 minute to 15 minute play sessions on 

two seperate days. Children were taken in groups of 

three to play with a toy and were rated by observers. 

356 children in 44 Head Start classrooms 

(17 percent Hispanic, 25 percent AfricanAmerican, 42 percent European American). 

Eight-six percent of eligible children 

participated. 

Note that there is not extensive information in this 

article about the professional development that 

teachers received or the content of the Head Start 

REDI program. However, an article under review is 

referenced for readers to obtain more detailed 

information. 

211 Table A-4a. Comprehensive Curricula Studies: Methodology—Continued Continues next page
Study Research Questions Research Design Sample G

Campbell and Milbourne (2005)

What are the effects of consultation with infant-toddler caregivers who completed First Beginnings, a training course which included five three-hour training classes and completion of an out-of-class project?

Changes in ITERS were compared between rooms (n=70) in which staff (n=123) completed a training course and received on-site consultation and rooms (n=26) in which staff (n=37) completed only the training course. The no consultation group consisted of staff/rooms (n=15 rooms) from one cohort of the training course plus staff/rooms (n=11 rooms) in which consultation was planned but not provided due to refusal of center directors (not unwillingness of staff). There were no pre-post ITERS differences between these 26 rooms, so they were combined into the no consultation comparison group. Participants included 180 caregivers who completed the training (from 114 rooms in 60 child care centers). Post-test ITERS were not collected from 18 of the 114 rooms. In the 96 rooms that completed pre and post test ITERS the mean age of the chidren was 22 months, averge number of chidlren present at the time of the observation was 8.36 and average number of adults was 2.32. A majority of the rooms were located in inner-city neighborhoods and provided care for children from soicioeconomically poor neighborhoods.

There were eight consultants that had a minimum of three years experience; four had Masters degrees, four had B.A. degrees.

Upon completion infant-toddler careand 15 state-approdevelopment trainthree-hour training for on-site visits, wforms and strategi

Cassidy, Buell, PughHoese, and Russel (1995)

Is participation in the Associate Degree Scholarship Program (a component of TEACH) related to improvements on teacher beliefs and practices and overall classroom quality?

Teacher beliefs and practices and overall classroom quality were examined for a group of child care teachers before and after they completed one year of coursework at the teacher's local community college. The teachers received an associates degree scholarship to attend the program (as part of the TEACH Early Childhood program). Comparisons were also made to a matched comparison group. The comparison group was recruited from the same centers as program group teachers whenever possible.

At pretest, 41 teachers participated (21 program participants and 20 comparison) (21 African-American and 20 white). At posttest, 19 remained in the program group and 15 were in the comparison group. Teachers were not eligible as comparisons if they had taken college level course work or if they were in the same room at as the program teacher.

Information was nscholarship participrovides a scholarsupport for release recipient receives through their placChildhood Associevaluated in this sindividuals alreadprogram who have sample size is a co

Table A-4a. Comprehensive Curricula Studies: Methodology—Continued

212 
Study Research Questions Research Design Sample G

Chambers and Slavin (2008)

Does Curiosity Corner implementation produce greater gains in child and classroom outcomes compared to a control curriculum?

This study was part of the PCER report on the Effects of Preschool Curriculum Programs on School Readiness. SFA researchers identified school districts that had SFA and non-SFA elementary schools in the same area. They then recruited preschools based on whether the children would transition into both SFA and non-SFA elementary schools. Preschools were blocked into groups of two or more and then randomly assigned to the treatment or control group. In the control group, teachers used a variety of curricula including Creative Curriculum and Animated Literacy. 

The SFA research team recruited preschool programs in three different states (Florida, Kansas, and New Jersey). They also targeted districts with SFA schools with preschool classes to fit their 2 (preschool curriculum type) x 2 (SFA and non SFA kindergarten classrooms) study design. Across the three locations, data were collected from 211 children and 195 parents. The children were 4.7 years old and were primarily African-American (51 percent) and white (28 percent). Ninetyseven percent of the 31 teachers were female and they had an average of 10 years of teaching experience.

SFA researchers fcondition, Curiosisignificantly imprimplementation diand early literacy 

Diamond, Barnett, Thomas, and Munro (2007)

Does the Tools of the Mind Curriculum produce significantly greater gains in children's executive function (EF) skills than a comparison curriculum? 

Teachers and assistants were randomly assigned to either the EF-training curriculum: Tools or the District's version of Balances Literacy Curriculum (dBL). Children were randomly assigned to the Tools or dBL curriculum. 

The study initially included 18 classrooms, and three more per condition were added the following year. The sample included 147 children (62 in dBL and 85 in Tools) in their second year of preschool who received their respective curriculum for one or two years. One of the dBL classrooms dropped out after year 1. 

Little information development in th

Table A-4a. Comprehensive Curricula Studies: Methodology—Continued

213 
Study Research Questions Research Design Sample G

Farran and Lipsey (2008)

Do two preschool curricula (Bright Beginnings and Creative Curriculum) affect child and classroom outcomes?

This study was part of the PCER report on the Effects of Preschool Curriculum Programs on School Readiness. Researchers randomly assigned pre school sites to one of three conditions: Bright Beginnings, Creative Curriculum, or Control. Teachers in the two treatment groups received training in their assigned curriculum. A follow-up evaluation was completed a year later. 

The sample consisted of 309 children and and 259 parents from 21 full day pre school classrooms in six counties. Children were 4.5 years old at baseline data collection and 52 percent were male. 80 percent were white, 18 percent African-American, and 11 percent Hispanic. All 21 teachers were white and had an average of 11 years of teaching experience. All of the teachers had either a bachelor's or graduate degree.

Researchers found trainings for BrighCurriculum did noclassroom outcomthe classroom levephonological awarBeginnings classr

Kontos, Howes, and Galinsky (1996)

Which family child care providers seek and complete training? Does training make a difference to the quality of care provided?

Three communities (San Fernando Valley, Calif.; Dallas, Texas; Charlotte, N.C.) offering Family-toFamily training for family child care providers were included. Data were collected from 130 providers enrolled in the training (68 in Calif, 31 in N.C. and Texas) and 112 providers from the same communities not enrolled in F-to-F training. Pre-post comparisons of business organization, motivation, and dimensions of quality were compared within the training group. A comparison of outcomes was also made between the training group and the comparison group.

Two-hundred and forty-two providers, 130 participating in Family-to-Family family child care training in three communities and 112 regulated providers in those same communities who were not participating in F-to-F training. The training group was slightly younger (37.9 years) than the comparison group (40.5 years) but there were no other significant differences on the demographic characteristics. The majority of providers were white (59 percent in the training group, and 71 percent in the comparison group). 29 percent of the training group and 17 percent of the comparison group was African-American. The remainder was Latino or other ethnicities. Nearly a quarter of both groups had a B.A. degree or higher, while around 50percent had some college or an A.A. degree, and around 25 percent had a high school degree or less.

General findings ato-Family training providers: slightly activity daily, moras a stepping stonhave a smaller ratiwere similar in strWho drops out? Ppractices with slig

Table A-4a. Comprehensive Curricula Studies: Methodology—Continued

214 
Study Research Questions Research Design Sample General Comments

Lambert and 

Abbott-Shim 

(2008)

Does Creative Curriculum 

implementation produce greater 

gains in child and classroom 

outcomes compared to a control 

curriculum?

This study was part of the PCER report on the Effects 

of Preschool Curriculum Programs on School 

Readiness. Researchers randomly assigned Head Start 

sites in North Carolina and Georgia to the treatment or 

control condition. The treatment group classrooms 

received training in Creative Curriculum and the 

control group classrooms used teacher-developed, 

nonspecific curricula.

Researchers recruited full day Head Start 

programs in North Carolina and Georgia. 

Data were collected on 190 children and 

168 parents. At the time of the fall baseline 

data collection, children were 4.5 years old 

and the majority were African-American 

(85 percent). All 18 teachers participating 

were female and the majority were AfricanAmerican (89 percent). The teachers had 

an average of 12 years of teaching 

experience and half (50 percent) had an 

associate's degree.

The Head Start teachers, assistants, and site 

managers were offered a stipend for participating in 

the study. Treatment and control classrooms were 

housed in the same centers, and there may have 

been a few instances where a treatment group 

teacher inadvertently shared aspects from Creative 

Curriculum with a control teacher. Focus groups did 

not reveal much information about sharing.

Powell and 

File (2008)

Does implementation of the 

Project Approach Curriculum 

result in better child outcomes, 

measures of classroom 

environment, or measures of 

classroom instruction than 

implementation of a teacherdeveloped generic curriculum? 

This study was part of the PCER report on the Effects 

of Preschool Curriculum Programs on School 

Readiness. Twelve of the 13 teachers were randomly 

assigned (one site had two teachers, in this site, both 

teachers were assigned to the same condition). The 

treatment group (seven classrooms) received Project 

Approach. The remaining six classrooms were provided 

two curricula (Doors to Discovery and Growing with 

Mathematics). However, teachers in the control 

classrooms reported using teacher-developed, 

nonspecific curricula.

Public prekindergarten classrooms were 

recruited via convenience sampling. A total 

of 13 teachers from 12 schools and 204 

children were included in the sample. 

Children were an average of 4.6 years old 

at the time of baseline data colletion. 

Children were racially diverse (40 percent 

African-American, 28 percent white, 17 

percent Hispanic). The 12 teachers in the 

sample were all white females. Teaches had 

an average of 11 years teaching experience 

with eight years teaching preschool. All of 

the teachers had at least a bachelor's degree 

and a current teaching license or certificate.

This study has a small sample size (13 classrooms). 

215 Table A-4a. Comprehensive Curricula Studies: Methodology—Continued Continues next page
Study Research Questions Research Design Sample G

Priest and Zoellick (2008)

For classrooms already using Creative Curriculum, does supplementation of Ladders to Literacy produce greater gains in child and classroom outcomes?

This study was part of the PCER report on the Effects of Preschool Curriculum Programs on School Readiness. Head Start classrooms were randomly assigned to the treatment or control condition. The treatment group classrooms received training in Ladders to Literacy. In the control classrooms, Creative Curriculum was implemented as it normally is (i.e., without the Ladders to Literacy add-on.

Researchers recruited Head Start classrooms, less than half of which were full-day programs. Data were collected on 123 children (62 treatment, 61 control) and 20 parents. Children were 4.6 years old at the time of baseline data collection and were ethnically diverse: 39 percent white, 11 percent African-American, 31 percent Hispanic. Most of the 14 participating teachers were female and white, and had an average of 9 years of teaching experience. 29 percent had an associate's degree.

Researchers found Curriculum with Limproved child ousignificant improvinstruction.

Starkey, Klein, Clements, and Sarama (2008)

Does implementation of the Ready, Set, Leap! Curriculum result in better child outcomes, measures of classroom environment, or measures of classroom instruction than implementation of the High Scope Curriculum? 

This study was part of the PCER report on the Effects of Preschool Curriculum Programs on School Readiness. The 39 classrooms participating in this study were matched by teacher experience, school location, score on a state report card and other easily measured characteristics. Based on these matches, blocks of two or more were created. Random assignment to the treatment (Ready, Set, Leap! ) or 

control group (High Scope ) occurred within each of these blocks resulting in a total of 21 treatment and 18 control classrooms. Child assessments occurred in the fall (35 days after program implementation), spring of the Pre-K year, and fall of the Kindergarten year.

Prekindergarten programs in New Jersey whose directors attended a regional prekindergarten center meeting and NAEYC certified child care centers were recruited. All centers offered full-day prekindergarten. Thirty-nine classrooms, drawn from a convenience sample of 21 schools, participated in the study. A total of 286 families participated in the study. Children were approximately 4.5 years old upon entering the study. The majority of children were African-American and parents of children in the study were primarily unmarried, with a high school education or less, working full-time. Teachers in this study were primarily African-American with an average of eight years teaching experience, five years experience teaching preschool. The majority of teachers (69 percent) had a bachelor's degree.

Teachers and teacand control groupparticipating in thmeasured through coaching visits (thcoordinator ratingobservational codisampling procedu

Table A-4a. Comprehensive Curricula Studies: Methodology—Continued

216 
Study Research Questions Research Design Sample General Comments

Thornburg, 

Mayfield, 

Morrison, 

and Scott 

(2008)

Does implementation of the 

Project Construct Curriculum 

result in better child outcomes, 

measures of classroom 

environment, or measures of 

classroom instruction than 

implementation of a teacherdeveloped generic curriculum? 

This study was part of the PCER report on the Effects 

of Preschool Curriculum Programs on School 

Readiness. Preschools collected via a convenience 

sample were organized into blocks of two based on 

matching by easily identifiable characteristics, such as 

teacher experience, school location, or score on a state 

report card. Random assignment occurred within these 

blocks resulting in 10 control and 11 treatment 

programs.

A convenience sample of full-day child 

care centers were recruited through phone 

calls and follow-up letters. Data were 

collected from 228 children (212 parents) 

from 21 preschool centers. Children were 

an average of 4.7 years old upon entering 

the study. The majority were white (65 

percent) and African-American (25 

percent). Of the 23 teachers who 

participated in this study, the majority were 

white (70 percent) or African-American 

(26 percent) with no college education (61 

percent) and no teaching credential (78 

percent). Teachers had an average of 10 

years teaching experience and eight years 

experience teaching preschool.

Both treatment and control groups (one year post 

intervention) were offered free training in Project 

Construct. Additionally, the treatment classrooms 

received supplies and materials.

217 Table A-4a. Comprehensive Curricula Studies: Methodology—Continued
Study

Barnett, 

Jung, Yarosz, 

Thomas, 

Hornbeck, 

Stechuk, and 

Burns (2008)

Mode of Professional 

Development Delivery

PD Linkages with 

Infrastructure

Temporal Aspects of 

Professional 

Development

Participant 

Outreach Content Area

PD Content 

Grounded in Research

Description of 

Content/Curriculum

Teachers participating in the Tools classrooms 

received four days of curriculum training before 

classes began. During the school year, Tools 

teachers received 30 min. classroom visits about 

once a week from a Tools trainer to address any 

problems with the curriculum. Tools teachers also 

received one half-day workshop and five one-hour 

lunchtime meetings to discuss the curriculum. 

The study took place in 

New Jersey's high 

poverty districts. 

Median family income 

was $34,935. Seventy 

percent of children in 

the district came from 

homes where English 

was not the primary 

language. In this 

sample, 93 percent of 

children were 

Hispanic, and 63 

percent spoke English 

as their primary 

language. 

 Teachers participating in 

the Tools classrooms 

received four days of 

curriculum training 

before classes began. 

During the school year, 

Tools teachers received 

30min classroom visits 

about once a week. Tools 

teachers also received one 

half-day workshop and 

five one-hour lunchtime 

meetings. 

The study took place 

in a high-poverty 

district. In this 

sample, 93 percent 

of children were 

Hispanic, and 63 

percent spoke 

English as their 

primary language. 

Self-regulation, 

literacy, and 

mathematics. 

The curriculum is based on 

both research on the 

association between selfregulation and children's 

literacy and math skills, 

and on the theories of 

Luria (1966) and Vygotsky 

(1978) suggesting that selfregulation can be promoted 

through various activities. 

Basic principles include: (1) children 

construct their own knowledge; (2) 

development cannot be separated 

from its social context; (3) learning 

can lead development; and (4) 

language plays a central role in 

mental development. Tools has an 

emphasis on both broad foundational 

skills (e.g., self regulation, attention, 

etc.) and also specific literacy and 

math prerequisites. The Tools 

curriculum includes 40 activities 

designed to promote dramatic play, 

encourage self-regulatory private 

speech, and teach the use of external 

aids to facilitate attention and 

memory. 

218 Table A-4b. Comprehensive Curricula Studies: Features of Professional Development Continues next page
Study

Bierman, 

Nix, 

Greenberg, 

Blair, and 

Domitrovich 

(2008)

Mode of Professional 

Development Delivery

PD Linkages with 

Infrastructure

Temporal Aspects of 

Professional 

Development

Participant 

Outreach Content Area

PD Content 

Grounded in Research

Description of 

Content/Curriculum

The intervention included curriculumbased lessons, center-based 

extension activities, and training in 

"coaching strategies" to support skill 

development. 1) Four language and 

emergent literacy skills were 

targeted: (a) vocabulary, (b) syntax, 

(c ) phonological sensitivity, and (d) 

print knowledge. An interactive 

reading program was developed to 

target vocabulary, and encourage 

story retelling and narrative 

comprehension. Teachers also played 

sound games with children, and 

utilized a set of letter-learning 

activities in alphabet centers. (2) The 

PATHS Curriculum (Domitrovich et 

al., 2007) was used to target four 

skill domains: (a) prosocial 

friendship skills, (b) emotional 

understanding and emotional 

expression skills, (c) self-control, and 

(d) problem solving skills. Teachers 

presented concepts using modeling 

stories, puppet characters, 

photographs, and role-play 

demonstrations. Additionally, "takehome" packets were mailed to 

parents containing tips and activities. 

Teachers attended four days of training workshops 

and received weekly mentoring provided by local 

education consultants. There was no information 

included in this article about the content of the 

trainings or mentoring. 

Not noted. The intervention occurred 

over the course of a year. 

Teachers participated in 

four days of training 

workshops, and received 

weekly mentoring. 

All Head Start 

programs including 

an ethnically diverse 

sample of children 

(17 percent 

Hispanic, 25 percent 

African-American, 

42 percent European 

American).

Language/emer

gent literacy 

skill 

enrichment; 

Socialemotional skills 

enrichment

The authors report that 

little is known about how 

the developing executive 

function skills of 

preschoolers affect and are 

affected by school 

readiness interventions. 

However, the intervention 

is based on research on 

executive function skills, 

early reading skills, and 

social-emotional outcomes. 

Table A-4b. Comprehensive Curricula Studies: Features of Professional Development—Continued 219 Continues next page
Study

Campbell and Milbourne (2005)Cassidy, Buell, PughHoese, and Russel (1995)

Mode of Professional 

Development Delivery

PD Linkages with 

Infrastructure

Temporal Aspects of 

Professional 

Development

Participant 

Outreach Content Area

PD Content 

Grounded in Rese

Group training plus on-site consultation. Material was presented through active, hands-on, participatory learning with opportunties to apply information within the class session. Participants completed an out-of-class project to facilitate a strengths-based view of infants with special needs. Three one-hour consultation ssessions were completed on-site. Participants completed a selfassessment (based on ITERS) and indicated whether they would to target the area for improvement. Consultants completed a summary sheet prior to consultation that indicated where ITERS subscale scores were below three. Two outcomes were targeted through consultation. During the first visit the consultant and consultee jointly developed a follow-up plan for each of the outcomes (strategies to use, steps to be completed, who would be responsible, deadlines, etc.). The most commonly used strategies sues included providing or reviewing resources or materials, brainstorming, modeling and discussion. The second and third visits were used to implement the plan.

None described. Training: five classes 

lasting three hours over three to four months; Consultation: three one hour on-site visits (one after the first training, one after the second or third, and one before the fifth).

Training and consultation for providers working with low income infants and toddlers.

Infant and toddler development and classroom environment.

No information was 

provided about the rebase for the training course. The training consultation model wloosely based on a smof empirical articles.

Community college courses. TEACH includes a 

scholarship and a salary increase or bonus when a provider completes a credential, certificate, degree.

The evaluation covered 1 year of participation in the community college coursework

The focus of the professional development was on providers who had not previously taken college courses 

Early childhood education.

The TEACH program developed because oassociations in the literature linking teacqualifications and classroom quality 

Table A-4b. Comprehensive Curricula Studies: Features of Professional 

Development—Continued

220 
Study

Chambers 

and Slavin 

(2008)

Diamond, 

Barnett, 

Thomas, and 

Munro 

(2007)

Mode of Professional 

Development Delivery

PD Linkages with 

Infrastructure

Temporal Aspects of 

Professional 

Development

Participant 

Outreach Content Area

PD Content 

Grounded in Research

Description of 

Content/Curriculum

SFA trainers provided two days of initial training to 

treatment group teachers. Ongoing support was 

then provided, including implementation visits 

where trainers observed teachers' instructional 

practices and the classroom environment. Each 

treatment group teacher received three days of 

follow-up support.

None reported The treatment group 

received their initial 

training in Curiosity 

Corner at the beginning 

of the preschool year. 

Follow-up support 

sessions were conducted 

in the fall, winter, and 

spring of the same year.

When non-SFA 

schools with 

preschool programs 

were not available, 

Head Start centers 

were recruited.

language and 

literacy, 

cognitive, 

mathematical, 

physical, social, 

creative, and 

personal 

development

Curiosity Corner is a comprehensive 

curriculum developed by the Success 

for All Foundation (SFA) that 

includes 38 thematic units designed 

to promote children's' language and 

literacy and cognitive, mathematical, 

social, personal, creative, and 

physical development 

Only information given is that all teachers in the 

control and intervention classrooms received the 

same resources and same amounts of teacher 

training and support. 

Not noted. Preschoolers included in 

the sample received the 

dBL or Tools curriculum 

for one or two years. 

Low-income, urban 

school district- all 

children came from 

low-income families 

(78 percent with 

yearly income 

<$25,000). 

Executive 

function (or 

cognitive 

control)

The authors note that Tools 

has been refined over 12 

years of research in 

preschool and 

kindergarten. 

The Tools curriculum includes 40 EFpromoting activities, including selfregulatory private speech, dramatic 

play, and aids to facilitate memory 

and attention. Tools teachers spent 

about 80 percent of their day 

promoting EF skills. The dBL 

curriculum was based on balanced 

literacy and included the same 

academic content as Tools, but did 

not address EF. 

221 Table A-4b. Comprehensive Curricula Studies: Features of Professional Development—ContinuedContinues next page
Study

Farran and 

Lipsey 

(2008)

Kontos, 

Howes, and 

Galinsky 

(1996)

Mode of Professional 

Development Delivery

PD Linkages with 

Infrastructure

Temporal Aspects of 

Professional 

Development

Participant 

Outreach Content Area

PD Content 

Grounded in Research

Description of 

Content/Curriculum

Teachers assigned to the two curricula received 2.5 

days of curriculum implementation training prior to 

the beginning of the 2002 through the 2003 school 

year. They also had access to implementation 

support throughout the year. Onsite consultation 

was provided four times throughout the year as 

well.

2.5 days of curriculum 

implementation training 

and four on-site 

consultations occurring in 

September, October, 

November to January, and 

late February.

Language and 

literacy 

development

Bright Beginnings is an integrated 

curriculum focusing on nine units: 1) 

language and literacy 2) 

mathematics 3) social and personal 

development 4) healthful living 5) 

scientific thinking 6) social studies 

7) creative arts 8) physical 

development 9) technology. Creative 

Curriculum addresses four areas of 

development: 1) social or emotional 

2) physical 3) cognitive 4) language 

development.

Workshop training offered at a community college 

(two sites) and an RandR (one site). No details 

were provided about the characteristics of the 

trainers. Home visits were also conducted but no 

information was given about the purpose or content 

of the visits or who conducted the visits.

None described. Varied across sites from 

2.5-6 hour sessions 

totaling 15-25 hours of 

class time. No 

information was offered 

about the number of 

weeks over which the 

training was held.

Training was aimed 

at Family Child Care 

providers.

Covered 

business 

practices and 

issues expected 

to improve 

quality 

including

The training provided was 

designed to be more 

rigorous in breadth and 

depth than what was 

offered in other family 

child care training. There 

was no background 

information about whether 

the training was grounded 

in research.

Training was developed to address 

local needs but certain components 

were required at all sites including 

business practices; local regulations; 

health, safety and nutrition; child 

development and age-appropriate 

activities; environments to promote 

learning, guidance and discipline; 

special needs children; parentprovider relationships; professional 

development and community 

resources; diversity issues; and 

personal and family development.

222 Table A-4b. Comprehensive Curricula Studies: Features of Professional Development—ContinuedContinues next page
Study

Lambert and 

Abbott-Shim 

(2008)

Powell and 

File (2008)

Mode of Professional 

Development Delivery

PD Linkages with 

Infrastructure

Temporal Aspects of 

Professional 

Development

Participant 

Outreach Content Area

PD Content 

Grounded in Research

Description of 

Content/Curriculum

Teachers assigned to receive Creative Curriculum 

training took part in a four day training session in 

August 2002. They then received refresher sessions 

throughout the 2003 and 2004 school year (either 

half or full day).

None reported Four days of training 

occurred from August 

2003 to February 2004.

Because it was a 

Head Start setting, 

most children were 

from low-income 

families. 

Social/ 

emotional, 

physical, 

cognitive, and 

language 

development.

Creative Curriculum addresses four 

areas of development: 1) 

social/emotional 2) physical 3) 

cognitive 4) language development.

Training included: 18 hours of introductory 

training, 12 hours of follow-up training, and 12 

hours of individual consultation time provided 

between October and May. The introductory 

training topics included: benefits of Project 

Approach, distinctions between projects and 

themes, criteria for selecting good project topics, 

examination of three phases of proejcts, and the use 

of webbing to link curriculum goals to project 

work. Follow-up training included a site visit to a 

reaearch participant with high fidelity to Project 

Approach , presentations/critiques of participants' 

projects, a dicussion focused on barriers/challenges 

in implementing Project Approach, and the 

generation of anticipatory planning webs. 

Individual consulting time was mostly used for 

observation with 20 minutes devoted to 

individualized consultation.

None mentioned. Training activities 

included: 18 hours of 

introductory training (six 

hours each day for three 

days at the beginning of 

the school year), 12 hours 

of follow-up training (six 

hours each day for two 

days in January), and 12 

hours of individual 

consultation time 

provided between 

October and May

None mentioned. Scientific 

exploration, 

spontaneous 

play, systematic 

instruction, and 

project work.

No mention of an 

empirical-basis for this 

intervention was provided.

The Project Approach Curriculum 

focuses on in-depth investigations of 

real-world topics. The curriculum 

has three components: spontaneous 

play, systematic instruction, and 

project work. Structural features of 

Project Approach include: 

discussion, fieldwork, representation, 

investigation, and display. 

According to the curriculum, 

classrooms should spend at least 45 

minutes to 60 minutes engaged in 

investigation and discovery. 

Mentoring visits as part of the 

professional development of this 

project focused on: clarifications and 

reminders about the components of 

Project Approach, suggestion and 

feedback for planning and 

intervention, and provision of 

resources to support project work.

223 Table A-4b. Comprehensive Curricula Studies: Features of Professional Development—ContinuedContinues next page
Study

Priest and Zoellick (2008)Starkey, Klein, Clements, and Sarama (2008)

Mode of Professional 

Development Delivery

PD Linkages with 

Infrastructure

Temporal Aspects of 

Professional 

Development

Participant 

Outreach Content Area

PD Content 

Grounded in Rese

Since Creative Curriculum was in use in both treatment and control conditions, all teachers received at least one day of Creative Curriculum training from a staff member at Teaching Strategies, Inc. Treatment group teachers also received training in Ladders to Literacy to implement 27 language and literacy activities that covered three domains (print or book awareness, metalinguistic awareness, and oral language).

None reported The treatment group 

received their initial training in Ladders to Literacy in September of the preschool year, followed by ongoing Ladders to Literacy training on a monthly basis throughout the school year (October 2003 to April 2004).

Because it was a Head Start setting, most children were from low-income families. 

Print and book awareness, metalinguistic awareness, oral language

Treatment group participants received four full days of professional development training. These trainings occurred in September, November, January, and March.

Ready, Set, Leap! Curriculum aligns with the goals and research requirements of three entities: National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC), National Head Start Association, Early Reading First initiative.

Four full days of professional development were provided to teachers in the treatment group. These trainings occurred in September, November, January, and March.

None mentioned. Language and 

early literacy, mathematics, science, social studies, fine arts, health and safety, personal and social development, physical development, and technology applications

Chapter specifies thaReady, Set, Leap Curriculum is researbased. However, no references to the literare provided.

Table A-4b. Comprehensive Curricula Studies: Features of Professional Development —Contin

224 
Study

Thornburg, 

Mayfield, 

Morrison, 

and Scott 

(2008)

Mode of Professional 

Development Delivery

PD Linkages with 

Infrastructure

Temporal Aspects of 

Professional 

Development

Participant 

Outreach Content Area

PD Content 

Grounded in Research

Description of 

Content/Curriculum

Training on Project Construct consisted of three 

12-hour modules, four four-hour on-site 

consultations in the classroom, and two three-hour 

follow-up workshops with voluntary attendance. 

The three module topics were: the young child and 

learning environment, early literacy and expressive 

arts, and young children's mathematical and 

scientific thinking.

None mentioned. The three 12-hour 

modules were offered in 

August, October, and 

November of the 

implementation year. 

Onsite consultations 

occurred after the teacher 

completed each module 

training session.

None mentioned. Cognitive, 

representational

, sociomoral, 

and physical

The Project Construct 

Curriculum is based on 

theory (constructivism). 

No mention of an 

empirical basis was made.

Project Construct is based on 

constructivism and was developed by 

the Missouri Department of 

Elementary and Secondary 

Education. This curriculum sets forth 

29 goals within a context of four 

developmental domains: cognitive, 

representational, sociomoral, and 

physical.

225 Table A-4b. Comprehensive Curricula Studies: Features of Professional Development—Continued
Study

Barnett, 

Jung, Yarosz, 

Thomas, 

Hornbeck, 

Stechuk, and 

Burns (2008)

Rigor of PD 

Evaluation Outcome Measures

Outcomes in

 Educator Knowledge

Outcomes in 

Educator Practice Child Outcomes

Experimental 

(Random 

Assignment to 

Treatment and 

Control 

Groups)

Child measures: (1) PPVT-III (Dunn and Dunn, 1997) assessed receptive 

vocabulary. (2) Woodcock-Johnson - Revised and the Woodcock-Muñoz 

(WJ-R, Woodcock and Johnson, 1989; WM-R, Woodcock and MuñozSandoval, 1996) assessed cognitive abilites and achievement. The LetterWord Identification and Applies Problems subtests were administered. 

(3) Get Ready to Read (Whitehurst and Lonigan, 2001) assessed 

children's early literacy skills. (4) The Wechsler Preschool Primary scale 

of Intelligence Animal Pegs subtest (WPPSI) measured children's 

nonverbal problem solving and visual-motor proficiency. (5) The 

EOWPVT-Revised assessed expressive vocabulary. (6) The IDEA Oral 

Language Proficiency Test (OLPT; Ballard and Tighe, 1999) assessed 

the receptive and expressive language skills of Spanish-speaking 

children. (7) The teacher form of the Problem Behaviors Scale of the 

SSRS (Gresham and Elliot, 1990) assessed children's externalizing and 

internalizing behaviors. Classroom measures: (1) The ECERS-R (Harms 

et al., 1998) assessed global classroom quality. (2) The Supports for 

Early Literacy Assessment (SELA; Smith et al., 2001) assessed the 

quality of the literacy environment. (3) The Preschool Classroom 

Implementation (PCI) scale (Frede, 1989) assessed the frequence and use 

of teachers' scaffolding techniques. (4) The CLASS (Pianta et al., 2005) 

measured emotional climate, classroom management, and instruction. 

Not assessed. On the ECERS-R, SELA, and PCI, 

Tools classrooms scored higher 

than control classrooms on total 

scores, with an effect size of about 

2. The Tools classrooms scored 

significantly higher on three 

ECERS-R subscales most closely 

related to curriculum: Language 

and Reasoning, Activities, and 

Interactions. Comparisons for 

individual items on the CLASS 

showed that Tools classrooms 

scored higher than control 

classrooms on productivity. 

Using regressions, statistically significant effects of 

curriculum were found on the SSRS (effect size = .47) 

and the PPVT-III (es = .22) and OLPT (es = .35). 

However, when adjusting for multiple comparisons, the 

ordinary regression estimated effects on the PPVT and 

OLPT are not longer significant at the .05 level, 

adjusting for multiple comparisons. Using hierarchical 

linear modeling to account for the multi level nature of 

the data, the SSRS remained statistical significant, 

however the OLPT becomes significant at the .10 level, 

and the PPVT is no longer significant (p=.101). 

226 Table A-4c. Comprehensive Curricula Studies: Outcomes Continues next page
Study

Bierman, Nix, Greenberg, Blair, and Domitrovich (2008)

Rigor of PD 

Evaluation Outcome Measures

Outcomes in

 Educator Knowledge

Outcomes in 

Educator Practice 

Experimental (Random Assignment to Treatment and Control Groups)

Cognitive performance :Backward word span task-working memory; Peg tapping task-working memory and inhibitory control; and DCCS-working memory, inhibitory control, and set shifting skills. Behavioral 

performance : Walk-a-line slowly task-behavioral inhibitory control on a motor task; Task orientation-sustain attention. Langauge and emergent literacy : Expressive One-Word Picture Vocabulary Test- vocabulary; Blending and Elision Scales of the Test of Preschool Early Literacy (TOPEL)-phonological sensitivity; and the Print Knowledge Scale of the TOPEL-children's familiarity with written text. Social-emotional regulation : Social Competence Scale- prosocial behaviors and emotion regulation; Seven items from the Teacher Observation and Child Adaptation-Revises (TOCA-R)-overt aggression; Preschool Social Behavior Scale-Teacher Form-relational aggression. 

Not assessed. Not assessed. (1) Predict

predicted language/eoutcomes. were more growth of the behavilikely to aemotional did not mocognitive pmoderator Specificalon the behhigher levand improwere in a Hpreinterveinterventiono significexcept on classroomcontrols (ethe same dTask orieninterventioas observeaggression

Table A-4c. Comprehensive Curricula Studies: Outcomes—Continued

227 
Study

Campbell and Milbourne (2005)Cassidy, Buell, PughHoese, and Russel (1995)

Rigor of PD 

Evaluation Outcome Measures

Outcomes in

 Educator Knowledge

Outcomes in 

Educator Practice 

Pre-Post w/ Comparison Group (Not Randomly Assigned)

Arnett CIS and ITERS. Not assessed Consultation did not have a 

significant effect on caregiver interactions measured by the CIS. Consultation had no significant effects on ITERS. Twenty-one percent of the consultation rooms showed observable change compared to 5.7 percent of the no consultation rooms (statistical significance was not noted for this comparison). A significant interaction between time (pre or post) and consultation (yes or no) was found, primarily because the no consultation group decreased in average quality over time.

Not assess

Pre-Post w/ Comparison Group (Not Randomly Assigned)

ECERS, ITERS, Teacher Beliefs Scale (TBS; 36 self-report items on a 1-5 Likert scale assessing the importance of various classroom practices) and the Instrumental Activities Scale (IAS; 34 self-report items on a 1-5 Likert scale which asks about the frequency of provision of various types of classroom activities).

The gain score on the TBS was significant for the scholarship group but not the comparison group (though overall pre-post differences were not significant for the full group)

ECERS and ITERS scores increased significantly for the scholarship group but not the comparison group. Additional analyses comparing "meaningful change" (.5 on the ECERS or ITERS) found that all six study participants who achieved this goal were scholarship recipients.

Not assess

Table A-4c. Comprehensive Curricula Studies: Outcomes—Continued

228 
Study

Chambers 

and Slavin 

(2008)

Diamond, 

Barnett, 

Thomas, and 

Munro 

(2007)

Rigor of PD 

Evaluation Outcome Measures

Outcomes in

 Educator Knowledge

Outcomes in 

Educator Practice Child Outcomes

Experimental 

(Random 

Assignment to 

Treatment and 

Control 

Groups)

The following child outcomes were assessed: mathematics (Woodcock 

Johnson [WJ] Applied Problems, Child Math Assessment-Abbreviated 

[CMA-A], Composite Score, and Shape Composition); reading (Test of 

Early Reading Ability [TERA], WJ Letter Word Identification, and WJ 

Spelling); phonological awareness (the Pre School Comprehensive Test 

of Phonological and Print Processing [Pre-CTOPPP], Elision subtest, 

Comprehensive Test of Phonologica Processing [CTOPP], Elision 

subtest); language assessments (Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test 

[PPVT] and Test of Language Development [TOLD]); and behavioral 

outcomes (Social Skills Rating system [SSRS] and Pre Scool Learning 

Behavior Scale [PLBS]). Classroom outcomes assessed were overall 

classroom environment (Early Childhood Environmental Rating Scale 

Revised [ECERS-R]), teacher-child relationships (Arnett Detachment, 

Harshness, Permissiveness, and Positive Interactions scales) and 

classroom instruction (Teacher Behavioral Rating Scale [TBRS], TBRS 

Written Expression scale, TBRS Phonological Awareness scale, TBRS 

Book Reading and Oral Language scales, and TBRS Math Concepts

 scale).

Not assessed A positive impact on reading was 

found at the end of kindergarten. A 

positive impact was found at the 

classroom level on early language 

instruction.

No impacts on child outcomes were found.

Experimental 

(Random 

Assignment to 

Treatment and 

Control 

Groups)

(1) Dots task-congruent condition: children had to press on the same side 

as an image that appeared; Dots task-Incongruent: children had to press 

on the opposite side of the image, requiring inhibition of the tendency to 

respond to the side where the image appeared; Dots-Mixed-Incongruent 

and congruent trials were mixed. (2) Flanker task-children had to focus 

on a small shape in the middle instead of the large shape surrounding it. 

For the "Reverse" Flanker, children had to focus on the outside shape, 

inhibiting attention to the inside. 

Not assessed. Not assessed. On the Dots-Congruent task, which had minimal EF 

demands, children in both groups performed similarly, 

though older children performed better. With the task 

requiring inhibition (Dot-Incongruent), Tools children 

significantly outperformed bBL children. Almost twice 

as many Tools as dBL children achieved >75 percent. 

On the Flanker task, again requiring inhibition, tools 

children significantly outperformed dBL children (85 

percent compared with 65 percent). The most 

demanding Dots and Flanker conditions showed the 

largest effects. 

229 Table A-4c. Comprehensive Curricula Studies: Outcomes—Continued Continues next page
Study

Farran and Lipsey (2008)Kontos, Howes, and Galinsky (1996)

Rigor of PD 

Evaluation Outcome Measures

Outcomes in

 Educator Knowledge

Outcomes in 

Educator Practice 

Experimental (Random Assignment to Treatment and Control Groups)

For both Bright Beginnings and Creative Curriculum, the following child outcomes were assesed: mathematics (Woodcock Johnson [WJ] Applied Problems, Child Math Assessment-Abbreviated [CMA-A], Composite Score, and Shape Composition; reading (Test of Early Reading Ability [TERA], WJ Letter Word Identification, and WJ Spelling); phonological awareness (the Pre School Comprehensive Test of Phonological and Print Processing [Pre-CTOPPP], Elision subtest, Comprehensive Test of Phonologica Processing [CTOPP], Elision subtest); language assessments (Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test [PPVT] and Test of Language Development [TOLD]); and behavioral outcomes (Social Skills Rating system [SSRS] and Pre Scool Learning Behavior Scale [PLBS]). Classroom outcomes assessed were overall classroom environment (Early Childhood Environmental Rating Scale Revised [ECERS-R]), teacherchild relationships (Arnett Detachment, Harshness, Permissiveness, and Positive Interactions scales) and classroom instruction (Teacher Behavioral Rating Scale [TBRS], TBRS Written Expression scale, TBRS Phonological Awareness scale, TBRS Book Reading and Oral Language scales, and TBRS Math Concepts scale)

Not assessed. Analyses showed significant 

improvements in early literacy and phonological awareness instruction in the Bright Beginnings classrooms. There were no statistically significant differences between teachers in Creative Curriculum and control classrooms.

Children wand Creatisignificanton any chi

Pre-Post w/ Comparison Group (Not Randomly Assigned)

Demographics (age, education, ethnicity, marital status, and income); organization of family child care; business practices; motivation; work commitment; Arnett CIS; Howes Adult Involvement Scale; structural quality indicators (group size, ratio, experience, and number of workshops, courses or conferences), and FDCRS. 

Training was associated with improvements in business practice (reporting child care income on taxes). 

No improvements were reported on sensitivity, harshness, detachment, and involvement with children. Global quality improved in two of the three sites. The authors then define observable pre-post change as moving from a lower to higher level and increasing by one point (in a three category variable: inadequate, adequate, and good) or maintaining good quality. Nineteen percent of providers made an observable improvement, 73 percent made no observable change and 8percent got worse.

Not assess

Table A-4c. Comprehensive Curricula Studies: Outcomes—Continued

230 
Study

Lambert and 

Abbott-Shim 

(2008)

Powell and 

File (2008)

Rigor of PD 

Evaluation Outcome Measures

Outcomes in

 Educator Knowledge

Outcomes in 

Educator Practice Child Outcomes

Experimental 

(Random 

Assignment to 

Treatment and 

Control 

Groups)

The following child outcomes were assessed: mathematics (Woodcock 

Johnson [WJ] Applied Problems, Child Math Assessment-Abbreviated 

[CMA-A], Composite Score, and Shape Composition); reading (Test of 

Early Reading Ability [TERA], WJ Letter Word Identification, and WJ 

Spelling); phonological awareness (the Pre School Comprehensive Test 

of Phonological and Print Processing [Pre-CTOPPP], Elision subtest, 

Comprehensive Test of Phonologica Processing [CTOPP], Elision 

subtest); language assessments (Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test 

[PPVT] and Test of Language Development [TOLD]); and behavioral 

outcomes (Social Skills Rating system [SSRS] and Pre Scool Learning 

Behavior Scale [PLBS]). Classroom outcomes assessed were overall 

classroom environment (Early Childhood Environmental Rating Scale 

Revised [ECERS-R]), teacher-child relationships (Arnett Detachment, 

Harshness, Permissiveness, and Positive Interactions scales) and 

classroom instruction (Teacher Behavioral Rating Scale [TBRS], TBRS 

Written Expression scale, TBRS Phonological Awareness scale, TBRS 

Book Reading and Oral Language scales, and TBRS Math Concepts

 scale)

Not assessed. Analyses showed significant 

improvements at the classroom 

level on overall classroom quality, 

teacher-child relationships, early 

literacy instruction, and early 

language instruction. 

No impacts on child outcomes were found.

Experimental 

(Random 

Assignment to 

Treatment and 

Control 

Groups)

Mathematics: Woodcock Johnson Applied Problems, Child Math 

Assessment Abbreviated Composite Score and Shape Composition; 

Reading: Test of Early Reading Ability (TERA), Woodcock Johnson 

Letter Word Identification, Woodcock Johnson Spelling. Phonological 

awareness: Preschool Comprehensive Phonological and Print Processing 

(Pre-CTOPPP), Elision subtest, Comprehensive Test of Phonological 

Processing Kindergarten (CTOPP), Elision subtest.Language 

Assessments: Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test (PPVT), Test of 

Language Development (TOLD)- Grammatic Understanding 

Subtest.Behavioral Assessments: Social Skills Rating System (SSRS)- 

Social Skills and Problem Behaviors scales, Preschool Learning 

Behaviors (PLBS) Overall Classroom Environment : Early Childhood 

Rating Scale-Revised (ECERS-R).Teacher-Child Relationships: Arnett 

Detachment, Harshness, Permissiveness, Positive Interactions. 

Classroom Instruction : Teacher Behavior Rating Scale (TBRS) Print 

and Letter Knowledge, Written Expression, Phonological Awareness, 

Book Reading and Oral Language, and Math Concepts scales

Not assessed. No significant differences between 

the control and treatment groups 

were found on overall classroom 

environment, teacher-child 

interactions, or classroom 

instruction.

The only statistically significant differences between 

children in the control and treatment groups were on 

the spring kindergarten assessment of the in behavior 

assessments with the treatment group exhibiting more 

problem behaviors (d=.49), displaying weaker social 

skills (d=-.44) and fewer learning behaviors (d=.-.42). 

There were no significant differences on any of the 

reading, math, phonological awareness, or language 

when comparing the treatment and control groups. 

231 Table A-4c. Comprehensive Curricula Studies: Outcomes—Continued Continues next page
Study

Priest and 

Zoellick 

(2008)

Starkey, 

Klein, 

Clements, 

and Sarama 

(2008)

Rigor of PD 

Evaluation Outcome Measures

Outcomes in

 Educator Knowledge

Outcomes in 

Educator Practice Child Outcomes

Experimental 

(Random 

Assignment to 

Treatment and 

Control 

Groups)

The following child outcomes were assessed: mathematics (Woodcock 

Johnson [WJ] Applied Problems, Child Math Assessment-Abbreviated 

[CMA-A], Composite Score, and Shape Composition); reading (Test of 

Early Reading Ability [TERA], WJ Letter Word Identification, and WJ 

Spelling); phonological awareness (the Pre School Comprehensive Test 

of Phonological and Print Processing [Pre-CTOPPP], Elision subtest, 

Comprehensive Test of Phonologica Processing [CTOPP], Elision 

subtest); language assessments (Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test 

[PPVT] and Test of Language Development [TOLD]); and behavioral 

outcomes (Social Skills Rating system [SSRS] and Pre Scool Learning 

Behavior Scale [PLBS]). Classroom outcomes assessed were overall 

classroom environment (Early Childhood Environmental Rating Scale 

Revised [ECERS-R]), teacher-child relationships (Arnett Detachment, 

Harshness, Permissiveness, and Positive Interactions scales) and 

classroom instruction (Teacher Behavioral Rating Scale [TBRS], TBRS 

Written Expression scale, TBRS Phonological Awareness scale, TBRS 

Book Reading and Oral Language scales, and TBRS Math Concepts 

scale)

Not assessed A positive impact was found at the 

classroom level on early literacy 

instruction. There were no other 

significant improvements after the 

Ladders to Literacy 

supplementation.

No impacts on child outcomes were found.

Experimental 

(Random 

Assignment to 

Treatment and 

Control 

Groups)

Mathematics: Woodcock Johnson Applied Problems, Child Math 

Assessment Abbreviated Composite Score and Shape Composition; 

Reading: Test of Early Reading Ability (TERA), Woodcock Johnson 

Letter Word Identification, Woodcock Johnson Spelling. Phonological 

awareness: Preschool Comprehensive Phonological and Print 

Processing (Pre-CTOPPP), Elision subtest, Comprehensive Test of 

Phonological Processing Kindergarten (CTOPP), Elision 

subtest.Language Assessments: Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test 

(PPVT), Test of Language Development (TOLD)- Grammatic 

Understanding Subtest.Behavioral Assessments: Social Skills Rating 

System (SSRS)- Social Skills and Problem Behaviors scales, Preschool 

Learning Behaviors (PLBS) Overall Classroom Environment : Early 

Childhood Rating Scale-Revised (ECERS-R).Teacher-Child 

Relationships: Arnett Detachment, Harshness, Permissiveness, Positive 

Interactions. Classroom Instruction : Teacher Behavior Rating Scale 

(TBRS) Print and Letter Knowledge, Written Expression, Phonological 

Awareness, Book Reading and Oral Language, and Math Concepts 

scales

Not assessed. No significant differences between 

the control and treatment groups 

were found on overall classroom 

environment, teacher-child 

interactions, or classroom 

instruction.

The only statistically significant differences in math 

assessments between children in the control and 

treatment groups were on the fall assessment of the 

Shape Composition scale of the CMA-A assessmenttreatment group outperforming control (d=.25), and on 

the CMA-A Composite Score in the spring- control 

group outperforming the treatment (d=-.24). There 

were no significant differences on any of the reading, 

phonological awareness, language, or behavior 

assessments when comparing the treatment and control 

groups. 

232 Table A-4c. Comprehensive Curricula Studies: Outcomes—Continued Continues next page
Study

Thornburg, 

Mayfield, 

Morrison, 

and Scott 

(2008)

Rigor of PD 

Evaluation Outcome Measures

Outcomes in

 Educator Knowledge

Outcomes in 

Educator Practice Child Outcomes

Experimental 

(Random 

Assignment to 

Treatment and 

Control 

Groups)

Mathematics: Woodcock Johnson Applied Problems, Child Math 

Assessment Abbreviated Composite Score and Shape Composition; 

Reading : Test of Early Reading Ability (TERA), Woodcock Johnson 

Letter Word Identification, Woodcock Johnson Spelling. Phonological 

awareness: Preschool Comprehensive Phonological and Print 

Processing (Pre-CTOPPP), Elision subtest, Comprehensive Test of 

Phonological Processing Kindergarten (CTOPP), Elision 

subtest.Language Assessments: Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test 

(PPVT), Test of Language Development (TOLD)- Grammatic 

Understanding Subtest.Behavioral Assessments: Social Skills Rating 

System (SSRS)- Social Skills and Problem Behaviors scales, Preschool 

Learning Behaviors (PLBS) Overall Classroom Environmen t: Early 

Childhood Rating Scale-Revised (ECERS-R).Teacher-Child 

Relationships: Arnett Detachment, Harshness, Permissiveness, Positive 

Interactions. Classroom Instruction : Teacher Behavior Rating Scale 

(TBRS) Print and Letter Knowledge, Written Expression, Phonological 

Awareness, Book Reading and Oral Language, and Math Concepts 

scales

Not assessed. No significant differences between 

the control and treatment groups 

were found on overall classroom 

environment, teacher-child 

interactions, or classroom 

instruction.

The only statistically significant differences in math 

assessments between children in the control and 

treatment groups were on the spring pre-kindergarten 

assessment of the Shape Composition scale of the 

CMA-A assessment- control group outperforming 

treatment (d=.-.42). There were no significant 

differences on any of the reading, phonological 

awareness, language, or behavior assessments when 

comparing the treatment and control groups. 

233 Table A-4c. Comprehensive Curricula Studies: Outcomes—Continued
Study Research Questions Research Design Sample General Comments

Arnett (1989) Does the Tools of the Mind (Tools) 

curriculum produce significantly 

greater gains in children's social 

behavior, language, and literacy 

than a control curriculum? 

Compared to a control curriculum, 

does Tools produce significantly 

greater gains in classroom quality? 

One school participated in this study. Teachers were 

randomly assigned by blocks. They were stratified by 

groups and then randomly chosen to implement the 

Tools curriculum. All treatment classes were placed on 

one floor, and control classes on another. Children with 

permission were then randomly assigned to either a 

Tools or control classroom. Children were assessed in 

the fall (October and November) and spring (late April 

through early June). Children were tested in Spanish or 

English. 

The school district involved in this study is 

part of the "Abbott" preschool education 

program. The study took place in one school. 

A total of 218 3- and 4-year-old children were 

randomly assigned and participated in either a 

Tools or control classroom. In this sample, 93 

percent of children were Hispanic, and 63 

percent spoke English as their primary 

language. 

Fidelity measures were developed to 

assess extent to which teachers 

correctly implemented the curriculum. 

Measures indicated that the curriculum 

was not fully implemented at the 

beginning of the year. There were no 

significant differences between Tools 

and control children's scores at pretest. 

Campbell and Milbourne 

(2005)

(1) Did children's executive 

function (EF) skills at the beginning 

of the prekindergarten year enhance 

their development in areas of 

cognitive and social-emotional 

school readiness? (2) Did these 

skills moderate their response to the 

Head Start REDI intervention? (3) 

Did the intervention improve 

children's EF Skills? (4) Did 

improvements in child EF skills 

mediate child outcomes in areas of 

cognitive or social-emotional school 

readiness?

Using stratified randomization, classes in three 

counties were divided into groups based on 

demographic characteristics, location (e.g., central or 

southeastern Penn.), and length of school day (e.g., full 

day, half day, year round). Within groups, centers were 

randomly assigned to the intervention or control group. 

Only 4-year-old children participated in the study, 

although classrooms included both 3- and 4-year-olds. 

Teachers were trained and implemented the 

intervention which included curriculum-based lessons, 

center-based extension activities, and training in 

"coaching strategies" to support skill development. Preand post-intervention child assessments were 

conducted by trained interviewers. One lead and one 

assistant teacher in each classroom provided ratings of 

child behavior. Additionally, at post-test, each child 

was observed during two 12 to 15 minute play sessions 

on two seperate days. Children were taken in groups of 

three to play with a toy and were rated by observers. 

Three-hundred and fifty-six children in 44 

Head Start classrooms (17 percent Hispanic, 

25 percent African-American, 42 percent 

European American). Eight-six percent of 

eligible children participated. 

Note that there is not extensive 

information in this article about the 

professional development that teachers 

received or the content of the Head 

Start REDI program. However, an 

article under review is referenced for 

readers to obtain more detailed 

information. 

234 Table A-5a. General Approaches Studies: Methodology Continues next page
Study Research Questions Research Design Sample General Comments

Cassidy, Buell, PughHoese, and Russell (1995)Does Curiosity Corner 

implementation produce greater 

gains in child and classroom 

outcomes compared to a control 

curriculum?

This study was part of the PCER report on the Effects 

of Preschool Curriculum Programs on School 

Readiness. SFA researchers identified school districts 

that had SFA and non-SFA elementary schools in the 

same area. They then recruited preschools based on 

whether the children would transition into both SFA 

and non-SFA elementary schools. Preschools were 

blocked into groups of two or more and then randomly 

assigned to the treatment or control group. In the 

control group, teachers used a variety of curricula 

including Creative Curriculum and Animated Literacy. 

The SFA research team recruited preschool 

programs in three different states (Florida, 

Kansas, and New Jersey). They also targeted 

districts with SFA schools with preschool 

classes to fit their two (preschool curriculum 

type) two-by-two (SFA and non SFA 

kindergarten classrooms) study design. Across 

the three locations, data were collected from 

211 children and 195 parents. The children 

were 4.7 years old and were primarily AfricanAmerican (51 percent) and white (28 percent). 

97 percent of the 31 teachers were female and 

they had an average of 10 years of teaching 

experience.

SFA researchers found that compared 

to a control condition, Curiosity 

Corner implementation did not 

significantly improve child outcomes. 

The implementation did have a 

positive effect on reading and early 

literacy instruction.

Fantuzzo, Childs, 

Hampton, Ginsburg-Block, 

Coolahan and Debnam 

(1997)

Does the Tools of the Mind 

Curriculum produce significantly 

greater gains in children's executive 

function (EF) skills than a 

comparison curriculum? 

Teachers and assistants were randomly assigned to 

either the EF-training curriculum: Tools or the 

District's version of Balances Literacy Curriculum 

(dBL). Children were randomly assigned to the Tools 

or dBL curriculum. 

The study initially included 18 classrooms, 

and three more per condition were added the 

following year. The sample included 147 

children (62 in dBL and 85 in Tools) in their 

second year of preschool who received their 

respective curriculum for one or two years. 

One of the dBL classrooms dropped out after 

year 1. 

Little information provided about 

professional development in this 

article. 

235 Table A-5a. General Approaches Studies: Methodology—Continued Continues next page
Study Research Questions Research Design Sample General Comments

Fiene (2002) Does Creative Curriculum 

implementation produce greater 

gains in child and classroom 

outcomes compared to a control 

curriculum?

This study was part of the PCER report on the Effects 

of Preschool Curriculum Programs on School 

Readiness. Researchers randomly assigned Head Start 

sites in North Carolina and Georgia to the treatment or 

control condition. The treatment group classrooms 

received training in Creative Curriculum and the 

control group classrooms used teacher-developed, 

nonspecific curricula.

Researchers recruited full day Head Start 

programs in North Carolina and Georgia. Data 

were collected on 190 children and 168 

parents. At the time of the fall baseline data 

collection, children were 4.5 years old and the 

majority were African-American (85 percent). 

All 18 teachers participating were female and 

the majority were African-American (89 

percent). The teachers had an average of 12 

years of teaching experience and half (50 

percent) had an associate's degree.

The Head Start teachers, assistants, 

and site managers were offered a 

stipend for participating in the study. 

Treatment and control classrooms 

were housed in the same centers, and 

there may have been a few instances 

where a treatment group teacher 

inadvertently shared aspects from 

Creative Curriculum with a control 

teacher. Focus groups did not reveal 

much information about sharing.

Researchers found that conducting 

implementation trainings for Bright 

Beginnings and Creative Curriculum 

did not result in improved child or 

classroom outcomes. A positive impact 

was found at the classroom level on 

early literacy instruction and 

phonological awareness instruction in 

Bright Beginnings classrooms.

The sample consisted of 309 children and and 

259 parents from 21 full day preschool 

classrooms in six counties. Children were 4.5 

years old at baseline data collection and 52 

percent were male, 80 percent were white, 18 

percent African-American, and 11 percent 

Hispanic. All 21 teachers were white and had 

an average of 11 years of teaching experience. 

All of the teachers had either a bachelor's or 

graduate degree.

This study was part of the PCER report on the Effects 

of Preschool Curriculum Programs on School 

Readiness. Researchers randomly assigned pre school 

sites to one of three conditions: Bright Beginnings, 

Creative Curriculum, or Control. Teachers in the two 

treatment groups received training in their assigned 

curriculum. A follow-up evaluation was completed a 

year later. 

Do two preschool curricula (Bright 

Beginnings and Creative 

Curriculum) affect child and 

classroom outcomes?

Fantuzzo, Childs, 

Stevenson, Coolahan, 

Ginsburg, Gay, Debnam, 

and Watson (1996)

236 Table A-5a. General Approaches Studies: Methodology—Continued Continues next page
Study Research Questions Research Design Sample General Comments

Kontos, Howes, and 

Galinsky (1996)

Does implementation of the Project 

Approach Curriculum result in 

better child outcomes, measures of 

classroom environment, or 

measures of classroom instruction 

than implementation of a teacherdeveloped generic curriculum? 

This study was part of the PCER report on the Effects 

of Preschool Curriculum Programs on School 

Readiness. Twelve of the 13 teachers were randomly 

assigned (one site had two teachers, in this site, both 

teachers were assigned to the same condition). The 

treatment group (seven classrooms) received Project 

Approach. The remaining six classrooms were 

provided two curricula (Doors to Discovery and 

Growing with Mathematics). However, teachers in the 

control classrooms reported using teacher-developed, 

nonspecific curricula.

Public pre-kindergarten classrooms were 

recruited via convenience sampling. A total of 

13 teachers from 12 schools and 204 children 

were included in the sample. Children were an 

average of 4.6 years old at the time of baseline 

data colletion. Children were racially diverse 

(40% African-American, 28 percent white, 17 

percent Hispanic). The 12 teachers in the 

sample were all white females. Teaches had an 

average of 11 years teaching experience with 

eight years teaching preschool. All of the 

teachers had at least a bachelor's degree and a 

current teaching license or certificate.

This study has a small sample size (13 

classrooms). 

Palsha and Wesley (1998) For classrooms already using 

Creative Curriculum, does 

supplementation of Ladders to 

Literacy produce greater gains in 

child and classroom outcomes?

This study was part of the PCER report on the Effects 

of Preschool Curriculum Programs on School 

Readiness. Head Start classrooms were randomly 

assigned to the treatment or control condition. The 

treatment group classrooms received training in 

Ladders to Literacy. In the control classrooms, 

Creative Curriculum was implemented as it normally is 

(i.e., without the Ladders to Literacy add-on.

Researchers recruited Head Start classrooms, 

less than half of which were full-day 

programs. Data were collected on 123 children 

(62 treatment, 61 control) and 20 parents. 

Children were 4.6 years old at the time of 

baseline data collection and were ethnically 

diverse: 39 percent white, 11 percent AfricanAmerican, 31 percent Hispanic. Most of the 

14 participating teachers were female and 

white, and had an average of nine years of 

teaching experience. Twenty-nine percent had 

an associate's degree.

Researchers found that supplementing 

Creative Curriculum with Ladders to 

Literacy did not result in improved 

child outcomes. The only area of 

significant improvement was early 

literacy instruction.

237 Table A-5a. General Approaches Studies: Methodology—Continued Continues next page
Study Research Questions Research Design Sample General Comments

Pianta, Mashburn,Downer, Hamre, andJustice (2008)

To what extent does participation in the MyTeachingPartner (MTP) Consultation or Web-only conditions differentially associate with changes in the observed quality of teachers' interactions with children over the course of the school year? Which of these intervention conditions is more effective in a particular set of classrooms, namely those with a majority of children from highpoverty families and with low skill levels, and with teachers who made greater use of the web-based video exemplars? 

Random assignment of teachers was conducted at the district level. Based on the distribution of numbers of classrooms per district, districts were classified into large, medium, and small, then assigned randomly by size to condition. All teachers received access to webbased versions of MTP lesson plans in language and literacy and a Web-version of PATHS (Promoting AlternativeThinking Strategies) curriculum in social competence. Teachers were asked to use these materials during the week. One group of teachers (n=52) received access to video-clip exemplars of high quality interactions. The other group (n=61) received MTP Consultation support. Teachers videotaped their implementation of an instructional activity in language or literacy or social competence, mailed the tape to their assigned consultant, who edited the tape into one to two minute segments that were paired with written feeback. 

One-hundred and thirteen pre-kindergarten teachers, 61 in the Consultation group and 52 in the Web-only group. Teachers in the comparison represented 24 school districts statewide. Nintey-five percent of teachers were women. The majority of teachers reported their race/ethnicity as Caucasian (72 percent), 24 percent reported AfricanAmerican, and 4 percent reported multi-racial. 66 percent of teachers had a B.A. degree and 35percent had advanced degrees, while 85 percent were specifically certified to teach 4-year-olds. Teachers had an average of 16 years of classroom experience, with High Scope and Creative Curriculum being the most common. Sixty-six teachers from 15 districts assigned to control condition (only child outcome data collected)

Article has detailed information abourecruitment of participants. The state where the study was conducted not mentioned in article. 

Wesley (1994) Does implementation of the Ready, 

Set, Leap! Curriculum result in better child outcomes, measures of classroom environment, or measures of classroom instruction than implementation of the High 

Scope Curriculum? 

This study was part of the PCER report on the Effects of Preschool Curriculum Programs on School Readiness. The 39 classrooms participating in this study were matched by teacher experience, school location, score on a state report card and other easily measured characteristics. Based on these matches, blocks of two or more were created. Random assignment to the treatment (Ready, Set, Leap!) or 

control group (High Scope ) occurred within each of 

these blocks resulting in a total of 21 treatment and 18 control classrooms. Child assessments occurred in the fall (35 days after program implementation), spring of the Pre-K year, and fall of the Kindergarten year.

Prekindergarten programs in New Jersey whose directors attended a regional prekindergarten center meeting and NAEYC certified child care centers were recruited. All centers offered full-day prekindergarten. Thirty-nine classrooms, drawn from a convenience sample of 21 schools, participated in the study. A total of 286 families participated in the study. Children were approximately 4.5 years old upon entering the study. The majority of children were African-American and parents of children in the study were primarily unmarried, with a high school education or less, working full-time. Teachers in this study were primarily African-American with an average of eight years teaching experience, five years experience teaching preschool. The majority of teachers (69 percent) had a bachelor's degree.

Teachers and teacher assistants in botthe treatment and control groups received an incentive for participating in the study. Fidelity to curriculum wmeasured through a triangulation of data from: coaching visits (three timeper year), site coordinator ratings (three times per year), and observational coding based on a 90 second time sampling procedure. 

Table A-5a. General Approaches Studies: Methodology—Continued

238 
Study Research Questions Research Design Sample General Comments

Whitaker et al. (2007) Does implementation of the Project 

Construct Curriculum result in 

better child outcomes, measures of 

classroom environment, or 

measures of classroom instruction 

than implementation of a teacherdeveloped generic curriculum? 

This study was part of the PCER report on the Effects 

of Preschool Curriculum Programs on School 

Readiness. Preschools collected via a convenience 

sample were organized into blocks of two based on 

matching by easily identifiable characteristics, such as 

teacher experience, school location, or score on a state 

report card. Random assignment occurred within these 

blocks resulting in 10 control and 11 treatment 

programs.

A convenience sample of full-day child care 

centers were recruited through phone calls and 

follow-up letters. Data were collected from 

228 children (212 parents) from 21 preschool 

centers. Children were an average of 4.7 years 

old upon entering the study. The majority 

were white (65 percent) and African-American 

(25 percent). Of the 23 teachers who 

participated in this study, the majority were 

white (70 percent) or African-American (26 

percent) with no college education (61 

percent) and no teaching credential (78 

percent). Teachers had an average of 10 years 

teaching experience and eight years 

experience teaching preschool.

Both treatment and control groups 

(one year post intervention) were 

offered free training in Project 

Construct. Additionally, the treatment 

classrooms received supplies and 

materials.

239 Table A-5a. General Approaches Studies: Methodology—Continued
Study

Arnett (1989) Campbell and Milbourne (2005)

Mode of Professional 

Development Delivery

PD Linkages with 

Infrastructure

Temporal Aspects of 

Professional Development

Participant 

Outreach

Content Area PD Co

Grounded i

A four course training program was developed by the Bermuda College. The program included courses in Communication and Child Development in the first year, and courses in Child Care and Preschool Activities during the second year. Following these courses, participants in the training program took place in a two-week practicum in which they worked alongside a caregiver previously trained in the Bermuda College program, or a more highly trained caregiver.

None described. The four courses in the Bermuda 

College training program were semester-long. The practicum occurred after the completion of these courses.

Training was aimed at Child Care providers

Communication, child development, child care, preschool activities

The author nthere was littprevious resethe effects of training levecare providerinteractions wattitudes towchildren in th

Group training plus on-site consultation. Material was presented through active, hands-on, participatory learning with opportunities to apply information within the class session. Participants completed an out-ofclass project to facilitate a strengths-based view of infants with special needs. Three one-hour consultation sessions were completed on-site. Participants completed a self-assessment (based on ITERS) and indicated whether they would to target the area for improvement. Consultants completed a summary sheet prior to consultation that indicated where ITERS subscale scores were below 3. Two outcomes were targeted through consultation. During the first visit the consultant and consultee jointly developed a follow-up plan for each of the outcomes (strategies to use, steps to be completed, who would be responsible, deadlines, etc.). The most commonly used strategies included providing or reviewing resources or materials, brainstorming, modeling and discussion. The second and third visits were used to implement the plan.

None described. Training: five classes lasting 

three hours over three to four months; Consultation: Three one hour on-site visits (one after the first training, one after the second or third, and one before the fifth).

Training and consultation for providers working with low income infants and toddlers.

Infant and toddler development and classroom environment.

No informatiprovided aboresearch base training courtraining plus consultation loosely based small set of earticles.

Table A-5b. General Approaches Studies: Features of Professional Development

240 
Study

Cassidy, Buell, PughHoese, and Russell (1995)

Fantuzzo, Childs, 

Hampton, Ginsburg-Block, 

Coolahan and Debnam 

(1997)

Mode of Professional 

Development Delivery

PD Linkages with 

Infrastructure

Temporal Aspects of 

Professional Development

Participant 

Outreach

Content Area PD Content 

Grounded in 

Research

Community college courses. TEACH includes a 

scholarship and a salary 

increase or bonus when 

a provider completes a 

credential, certificate, 

degree.

The evaluation covered one year 

of participation in the community 

college course work

The focus of the 

professional 

development was on 

providers who had 

not previously taken 

college courses 

Early childhood 

education.

The TEACH program 

was developed because 

of associations in the 

literature linking 

teacher qualifications 

and classroom quality 

Collaborative Training between parents and teachers 

occurred both on-site and in off-site sessions at a 

Teacher Center. The focus of Collaborative Training is 

on (a) empowerment through mutual parent and teacher 

trainees collaboration, (b) the use of experiential, handson learning activities and (c) the use of indigenous 

parent and teacher exemplars to provide instruction and 

coaching at the Teacher Center as well as in the 

trainee's natural classroom environment. Parentteacher teams from the same Head Start center attend 

training and work alongside an exemplary teacherparent volunteer team. Thirty-three percent of CT 

training - exemplar led instruction and discussion; sixtyseven percent - participatory hands on activities. 

Workshop Training: Parents and teachers had separate 

experiences led by external experts and addressed the 

same overall objectives at the CT training. Over 75 

percent was lectures and discussion. Some role plays 

were used but did not use field based observation or 

guided practice as in the CT group.

None reported. Teaching Center training 

occurred in five sessions held 

over a 10-week period. Three 

sessions were half-days, and two 

sessions were full-days.

Providers and 

teachers served a 

diverse group of lowincome children 

participating in Head 

Start.

Parent involvement and 

interactions with 

children.

This evaluation was 

designed specifically to 

improve upon a model 

of training that had 

been evaluated using an 

experimental design.

241 Table A-5b. General Approaches Studies: Features of Professional 

Development—Continued

Continues next page
Study

Fiene (2002)

Fantuzzo, Childs, 

Stevenson, Coolahan, 

Ginsburg, Gay, Debnam, 

and Watson (1996)

Mode of Professional 

Development Delivery

PD Linkages with 

Infrastructure

Temporal Aspects of 

Professional Development

Participant 

Outreach

Content Area PD Content 

Grounded in 

Research

On-site mentoring. None described. The mentoring occurred over a 

period of four months, but no 

details are provided about the 

number of visits conducted or the 

duration of each visit.

The focus of the 

intervention was on 

providers serving 

infants and toddlers.

Environment. Not adequately 

described to know.

Collaborative Training between parents and teachers 

occurred both on-site and in off-site sessions at a 

Teacher Center. The Workshop Training occurred in 

the off-site Teacher Center

Curriculum is based on 

principles of social 

learning theory but only 

a handful of empirical 

studies are cited.

Parent involvement and 

interactions with 

children.

Providers and 

teachers served a 

diverse group of lowincome children 

participating in Head 

Start.

Classroom Training (CW): 

Training occurred in six sessions 

over a 12 week period (five half 

day sessions and one full day). 

Workshop Training (WT): 

Teachers had four full-day 

inservice sessions in which they 

attended one to two workshops 

per day; parents had community 

meetings at local centers over 

several two to three hour 

sessions.

None reported

242 Table A-5b. General Approaches Studies: Features of Professional 

Development—Continued

Continues next page
Study

Kontos, Howes, and Galinsky (1996)Palsha and Wesley (1998)

Mode of Professional 

Development Delivery

PD Linkages with 

Infrastructure

Temporal Aspects of 

Professional Development

Participant 

Outreach

Content Area PD Co

Grounded i

Workshop training offered at a community college (two sites) and an RandR (one site). No details were provided about the characteristics of the trainers. Home visits were also conducted but no information was given about the purpose or content of the visits or who conducted the visits.

None described. Varied across sites from 2.5-6 

hour sessions totaling 15-25 hours of class time. No information was offered about the number of weeks over which the training was held.

Training was aimed at Family Child Care providers.

Covered business practices and issues expected to improve quality including

The training was designed more rigoroubreadth and dwhat was offother family training. Thbackground information whether the twas grounderesearch.

Two-day in-service training for consultants; On-site consultation for consultees following a specified service process.

None reported, except that, as in Wesley 1994, a team approach was utilized to help create a shared knowledge that would help sustain changes.

Consultants made 10 to 14 visits to sites, each lasting one-to-four hours, over a period of 6-12 months.

Nineteen percent of the children were children with special needs.

Assessment and improvement of the child care environment.

The consultawas develop"best practicrecommendathe literature consultation. assessment t(ITERS, ECEFDCRS) havestablished aassessment othat relates to outcomes.

Table A-5b. General Approaches Studies: Features of Professional Development—Continued

243 
Study

Pianta, Mashburn,Downer, Hamre, andJustice (2008)Wesley (1994)

Mode of Professional 

Development Delivery

PD Linkages with 

Infrastructure

Temporal Aspects of 

Professional Development

Participant 

Outreach

Content Area PD Co

Grounded i

Teachers received access to web-based versions of MTP lesson plans in language and literacy and a Webversion of PATHS curriculum in social competence. Teachers received a laptop computer to access Web sites. Web-only group received one to two minute video clips that accompany text from the CLASS (Classroom Assessment Sorting System) manual. Consultation group were assigned to a consultant for the year. Teachers sent videotapes of their activities to consultants who edited the tapes into small segments that corresponds to written feedback posted on a private website for teachers' viewing. Teachers and consultants then met on-line in a video chat to discuss feedback.

District coordinators wanted all teachers in their program to receive the same professional development. 

Teachers were asked to implement an MTP-Language and Literacy activity for at least 10 min. a day, and a PATHS activity once per week. Teacher reports on frequency of use of materials varied. All teachers submitted digital videos of implementation of instructional activities every two weeks from September-June. Web only group accessed website at own choice. Consultation group feedback cycle lasted two weeks. 

Focus of professional development was on teachers in statefunded pre-k program. The pre-K program is targeted to serve an "at-risk" population 

Improve teacher-child interactions. Teachers given language, literacy, and social competence teaching materials

This PD modon literature quality teachinteractions iclassrooms aliterature on literacy instrModel also dliterature on learning and argument thacoaching, meand consultaapproaches tprofessional development effective.

On-site consultation following a specified service process.

The authors note that administrators from four programs actively participated in the consultation, but this was not a requirement of the consultation. In other sites, programs were asked to include all staff who had direct impact on one another in the classroom. This "team" approach is used to solidify the new learning and prevent "backsliding" to old ways. 

Consultation was delivered in 12 on-site visits (on average; no range was provided). No details were provided about the length of each visit. Programs were visited every two weeks, so a conservative estimate of the duration of consultation is six months (24 weeks).

Classrooms serving infants and toddlers with special needs were the focus of the project.

Assessment and improvement of the child care environment.

The consultawas develop"best practicrecommendathe literature consultation. assessment t(ITERS) has established aassessment othat relates to outcomes.

Table A-5b. General Approaches Studies: Features of Professional Development—Continued

244 
Study

Whitaker et al. (2007)

Mode of Professional 

Development Delivery

PD Linkages with 

Infrastructure

Temporal Aspects of 

Professional Development

Participant 

Outreach

Content Area PD Content 

Grounded in 

Research

Varying levels of internet materials and print materials 

were provided to teachers as well as the chance to have 

video discussions with teaching consultants for the 

program.

There is no information 

about the link between 

the PD in this study and 

school/center 

administrative support.

Teachers were given a computer 

as part of the program and also 

received various levels of access 

to the main MTP Web site. The 

study was meant to gauge the 

teachers' involvement and 

initiative in using the website and 

services provided, therefore the 

possible involvement varied (that 

is, a teacher could have chosen 

not to access the website or 

materials at all or she could have 

accessed materials and training 

on a daily basis. Bi-weekly 

discussion groups were held for 

the "consultancy group" over the 

course of the year.

Intervention focused 

on teachers in prekindergarten 

classroom settings

A support program for 

teachers - teachers were 

offered the MTP 

Curriculum for Language 

and Literacy, Banking 

Time, and the PATHS 

curriculum - all meant to 

improve teachers skills 

in language, literacy, and 

social relationships.

The resources were 

combined in a total 

package that was tested 

and refined in a 

previous study by 

Kinzie et al., 2005

245 Table A-5b. General Approaches Studies: Features of Professional 

Development—Continued
Study

Arnett (1989) 

Campbell and Milbourne 

(2005)

Description of 

Content/Curriculum

Rigor of PD 

Evaluation

Outcme Measures Outcomes in 

Educator 

Knowledge

Outcomes in Educator Practive Child Outcomes

The Communication course 

included instruction in behavior 

management, fostering selfesteem, and talking to children 

on a developmentally 

appropriate level. The Child 

Development course was an 

introductory course covering 

stages and milestones of 

development. The course in 

Child Care provided health and 

nutrition information. The 

Preschool Activities course dealt 

with how to construct a preschool curriculum.

Quasi-Experimental 

(no random 

assignment)

To assess differences in childrearing attitudes, the Parental 

Modernity Scale was administered. A 26-item Caregiver 

Interaction Scale was also used.

Not assessed. For childrearing attitudes, a clear pattern was found 

toward less authoritarian attitudes as level of 

training increased. Caregivers who had completed 

half or all of the Bermuda College training program 

were found to be less authoritarian than those with 

no training. For observed behavior, there was a 

pattern toward a higher rating on the Positive 

Interaction factor of the Caregiver Interaction Scale 

as the amount of training increased. Also, those 

who had completed all or half of the training were 

rated lower on the Detachment factor than those 

with no training.

Not assessed.

Group training content focused 

on key components of infanttoddler care: including children 

with special needs, caregiverchild relationships, strategies for 

promoting development and 

learning, brain-behavior 

relationships, inclusion and 

diversity, working with families 

and use of community resources. 

Pre-Post w/ 

Comparison Group 

(Not Randomly 

Assigned)

Arnett CIS and ITERS. Not assessed Consultation did not have a significant effect on 

caregiver interactions measured by the CIS. 

Consultation had no significant effects on ITERS. 

Twenty-one percent of the consultation rooms 

showed observable change compared to 5.7 percent 

of the no consultation rooms (statistical 

significance was not noted for this comparison). A 

significant interaction between time (pre or post) 

and consultation (yes or no) was found, primarily 

because the no consultation group decreased in 

average quality over time.

Not assessed.

246 Table A-5c. General Approaches Studies: Outcomes Continues next page
Study

Cassidy, Buell, PughHoese, and Russell (1995)

Fantuzzo, Childs, 

Hampton, Ginsburg-Block, 

Coolahan and Debnam 

(1997)

Description of 

Content/Curriculum

Rigor of PD 

Evaluation

Outcme Measures Outcomes in 

Educator 

Knowledge

Outcomes in Educator Practive Child Outcomes

Program recipients were 

required to enroll in A.A.S. 

program in Early childhood 

education or child development 

at a local community college and 

complete 12 to 20 credit hours 

during each year. The average 

number of courses taken during 

the year was four. The majority 

of courses taken related to ECE 

methods or child-related courses. 

75 percent of students took two 

or more methods courses. 

Overall, 46 percent of courses 

taken were methods, 41 percent 

were child-related and 13 

percent were general education. 

Pre-Post w/ 

Comparison Group 

(Not Randomly 

Assigned)

ECERS, ITERS, Teacher Beliefs Scale (TBS; 36 self-report 

items on a 1 to 5 Likert scale assessing the importance of 

various classroom practices) and the Instrumental Activities 

Scale (IAS; 34 self-report items on a 1 to 5 Likert scale which 

asks about the frequency of provision of various types of 

classroom activities).

The gain score on 

the TBS was 

significant for the 

scholarship group 

but not the 

comparison group 

(though overall prepost differences 

were not 

significant for the 

full group)

ECERS and ITERS scores increased significantly 

for the scholarship group but not the comparison 

group. Additional analyses comparing "meaningful 

change" (.5 on the ECERS or ITERS) found that all 

six study participants who achieved this goal were 

scholarship recipients.

Not assessed.

The field-based curriculum 

supported the early childhood 

curriculum used at the Teacher 

Center, provided more hands-on 

learning and focused on helping 

parents understand and practice 

developmentally appropriate 

techniques. 

Experimental 

(Random 

Assignment to 

Treatment and 

Control Groups)

Teacher-Teacher Collaboration Scale: six-items that 

participants rate on a four-point Likert scale (alpha=.82). 

Teachers report on their seeking and sharing of teaching ideas, 

materials, resources and advice, the amount of interaction 

occurring between classrooms and the level of cohesiveness 

among teaching teams. Interaction Coding System: Coding of 

adult-adult interactions completed for a 10-minute sample of a 

group activity selected by parents and teaching staff. 

Interactions during 15-second intervals were coded 

continuously for each adult in the classroom. Codes qualified 

the nature of interaction: directive vs. nondirective and positive 

vs. negative; codes also qualified each adult's role in the 

interaction (initiates vs. responds). Interrater reliability was 

high.

Not assessed CT teachers and parents reported more satisfaction 

with the training than those in the WT group. 

Teachers in the CT group reported greater teacherteacher collaboration and higher levels of 

collaboration with parent volunteers than teachers 

in the CT groups. Parents in the CT group reported 

higher levels of collaboration with teachers, and 

articipa-ted more in classroom activities, than 

parents in the WT group. Parents and teachers in 

the CT group made more non-directive and 

directive initiations than adults in the WT group. 

Teachers and parents in the CT group displayed 

more instruction, praise and supportive touch with 

children than teachers and parents in the WT 

group. Parents in the CT group also displayed 

more verbal exchanges and responses to child 

initiations than parents in the WT group (there 

were no CT or WT differences on these categories 

for teachers). Teachers in both groups showed 

higher levels of adult-child positive interactions 

than parents. Teachers in the CT group showed the 

highest level of positive instruction and praise.

Not assessed.

247 Table A-5c. General Approaches Studies: Outcomes—Continued Continues next page
Study

Fiene (2002)

Fantuzzo, Childs, 

Stevenson, Coolahan, 

Ginsburg, Gay, Debnam, 

and Watson (1996)

Description of 

Content/Curriculum

Rigor of PD 

Evaluation

Outcme Measures Outcomes in 

Educator 

Knowledge

Outcomes in Educator Practive Child Outcomes

The mentoring model used a 

problem solving approach. 

Mentor first developed 

relationship with the mentee then 

began making suggestions. Few 

details about the mentoring 

process were described.

Experimental 

(Random 

Assignment to 

Treatment and 

Control Groups)

ITERS, Arnett CIS, the Knowledge of Infant Development 

(KIDI) and the Bloom Scales of Organizational Climate.

No pre-post 

difference on the 

KIDI.

No pre-post difference on the ITERS, the CIS, or 

the Bloom. Follow up tests are inappropriate but 

show that Routines and Learning Activities from 

the ITERS and sensitivity from the CIS were 

increased.

Not assessed.

Teachers and parents in the CT group reported Not assessed.

higher levels of active involvement in the training 

and greater satisfaction than teachers and parents in 

the WT group. Teachers in the CT group reported 

higher levels of collaborative classroom activity, 

while parents reported higher levels of teacher 

support and affirmation. CT and WT Parents did 

not differ in reports of their perceived role in the 

classroom. On adult-child interactions, there were 

no differences between CT and WT on 

participation in group activity and three of the four 

positive initiation categories (physical gestures, 

instruction, and verbal exchanges). WT parents 

and teachers together made more responses to child 

initiations than CT parents and children. CT 

teachers were observed to praise more than WT 

teachers.

Active Involvement in Training Scale: 15-item dichotomous Not assessed

scale on which parents and teachers rate the training 

experience; Training Satisfaction Scale: 11-item four-point 

Likert scales completed by teachers and parents; TeacherParent collaboration scale: 18 items on a four-point scale 

rating teacher-parent relationship, teachers' perception of the 

value of including parents in the classroom, how teachers 

structure parent involvement, level of center support for parent 

involvement. Parent Affirmation Scale: 15 items, dichotomous, 

assesses parents' perceptions of their classroom experiences. 

Parent Role in the Classroom: nine items on a four-point Likert 

scale. Questions reflect the degree to which parent volunteers 

feel that their classroom role and authority are clear, and 

congruent with their knowledge and skill level. Adult Child 

Interaction Coding System: two independent coders coded 20 

minutes during a group classroom learning activity for (1) 

positive initiations to children (2) positive responses to 

children's initiations, (3) positive participation in group 

activities, and (4) negative verbalization. 

Experimental 

(Random 

Assignment to 

Treatment and 

Control Groups)

In the Collaborative Training 

approach (a) training methods 

emphasized experiential handson learning, (b) instruction and 

coaching were provided by 

indigenous exemplars and (c) 

parent and teacher trainees 

participated in training together. 

Exemplary teacher parent teams 

were videotaped in various daily 

activities. During training, 

participants viewed the tapes and 

identified practices they wanted 

to adopt and then practiced the 

new methods. They were taped 

in their own classroom settings 

and received feedback from coparticipants and exemplars. In 

Workshop Training, teachers and 

parent received separate training 

experiences led by outside 

experts giving lectures, 

presenting materials and leading 

discussions. Some role plays 

were used but did not use field 

based observation or guided 

practice as in the CT group. 

248 Table A-5c. General Approaches Studies: Outcomes—Continued Continues next page
Study

Kontos, Howes, and 

Galinsky (1996)

Palsha and Wesley (1998)

Description of 

Content/Curriculum

Rigor of PD 

Evaluation

Outcme Measures Outcomes in 

Educator 

Knowledge

Outcomes in Educator Practive Child Outcomes

Training was developed to 

address local needs but certain 

components were required at all 

sites including business 

practices; local regulations; 

health, safety and nutrition; child 

development and ageappropriate activities; 

environments to promote 

learning, guidance and 

discipline; special needs 

children; parent-provider 

relationships; professional 

development and community 

resources; diversity issues; and 

personal and family 

development.

Pre-Post w/ 

Comparison Group 

(Not Randomly 

Assigned)

Demographics (age, education, ethnicity, marital status, and 

income); organization of family child care; business practices; 

motivation; work commitment; Arnett CIS; Howes Adult 

Involvement Scale; structural quality indicators (group size, 

ratio, experience, and number of workshops, courses or 

conferences), and FDCRS. 

Training was 

associated with 

improvements in 

business practice 

(reporting child 

care income on 

taxes). 

No improvements were reported on sensitivity, 

harshness, detachment, and involvement with 

children. Global quality improved in two of the 

three sites. The authors then define observable prepost change as moving from a lower to higher level 

and increasing by one point (in a three category 

variable: inadequate, adequate, and good) or 

maintaining good quality. Nineteen percent of 

providers made an observable improvement, 73 

percent made no observable change and 8 percent 

got worse.

Not assessed.

A model of on-site consultation 

that uses the environmental 

rating scales as a description of 

needs that can serve as a 

springboard for consultation (by 

providing a framework for 

quality against which current 

practices could be compared. 

The model emphasizes 

collaboration to identify 

strategies for change. 

Consultants promote change by 

enabling consultees to improve 

their practice.

Pre-Post w/o 

Comparison Group

ITERS, FDCRS, and ECERS were completed before and after 

the consultation as well as six months later.

Not assessed ITERS: pre-post comparison (n=7), significant 

differences on mean and on three of seven 

subscales; follow-up (n=3), significant differences 

on mean and seven of seven subscales. ECERS: 

pre-post comparison (n=14), significant differences 

on mean and seven of seven subscales; follow-up 

(n=10), significant differences on mean and seven 

of seven subscales. FDCRS: pre-post comparison 

(n=4), no statistically significant differences on 

mean or subscales; follow-up (n=3) no significant 

differences on mean or subscales (except of one 

category, space and furnishings).

Not assessed.

249 Table A-5c. General Approaches Studies: Outcomes—Continued Continues next page
Study

Pianta, Mashburn,

Downer, Hamre, and

Justice (2008)

Wesley (1994)

Description of 

Content/Curriculum

Rigor of PD 

Evaluation

Outcme Measures Outcomes in 

Educator 

Knowledge

Outcomes in Educator Practive Child Outcomes

MyTeachingPartner Web-based 

lesson plans in language and 

literacy. A Web-version of the 

Preschool PATHS-Promoting 

Alternative Thinking Strategies 

curriculum in social competence. 

Video exemplars of high-quality 

teacher-child interaction tied to 

CLASS dimensions (Emotional 

Support, Classroom 

Organization, Instructional 

Climate) Consultants trained in 

teaching young children and was 

trained to reliability on the 

CLASS. 

Experimental 

design (Random 

assignment to one 

of two forms of 

interaction-focused 

professional 

development 

support).

Observers' ratings of teacher-child interactions on domains

(Emotional Climate, Classroom Organization, Instructional

Support) described on a seven-point rating scale on a minimum

of four occasions across the school year. 

None assessed. Teachers in the Consultation condition had more 

positive growth compared to teachers in Web-only 

condition for each of the seven dimensions of 

teacher-child interactions. For Teacher Sensitivity, 

Instructional Learning Formats, and Language 

Modeling, the rates of change were significantly 

different between Consultation and Web-only 

teachers. Consultation condition teachers showed 

greater improvement in aspects of interaction 

involving reading,responding to student cues, using 

a variety of instructional formats, and stimulating 

language development. Teachers in high-poverty 

classrooms who received Consultation had greater 

increases in quality of teacher-child interactions. 

Preliminary analyses indicate 

significant gains for child 

outcomes in literacy and 

language for children in 

classrooms receiving 

consultation (report in 

preparation at time of press). 

Repeated on-site visits were used 

to enhance the relationship 

between consultant and 

consultee (to show a 

commitment to change, to 

experience routines first hand, to 

understand the concerns, needs 

and resources). The joint 

assessment of the program was 

implemented so that consultees 

could gain skills to diagnose 

their own needs and to avoid the 

perception that the consultant 

was there to monitor or to be the 

expert.

Pre-Post w/o 

Comparison Group

ITERS was completed by a third party evaluator (i.e., not the 

consultant or consultee who were also using ITERS) before 

and after consultation. Satisfaction of consultees with the 

consultation process was assessed using likert scale ratings (1 

to 5, unsatisfactory to excellent). 

Not assessed. A test of pre-post ITERS scores revealed 

significant differences on six of seven subscales: 

Furnishings and Display, Personal Care Routines, 

Listening and Talking, Learning Activities, 

Interaction, and Program Structure. No pre-post 

differences were found on the Adult Needs 

subscale. Exact mean scores were not provided but 

a review of figure 3 shows that all subscale scores 

were below 4 prior to consultation. After 

consultation, scores were at 5 or above on 

Furnishings and Display and Listening and Talking.

Not assessed.

250 Table A-5c. General Approaches Studies: Outcomes—Continued Continues next page
Study

Whitaker et al. (2007)

Description of 

Content/Curriculum

Rigor of PD 

Evaluation

Outcme Measures Outcomes in 

Educator 

Knowledge

Outcomes in Educator Practive Child Outcomes

Access to a Web site which 

offered these three 

curricula/resources: MTP 

curriculum for language and 

literacy development, a 36-week 

set of child-driven activities that 

focus on language and literacy 

development, Banking time: a 

set of techniques designed to 

build positive, supportive 

relationships between a teacher 

and her students, PATHS 

curriculum, thirty-six week set of 

activities designed to promote 

skills for developing positive 

social relationships.

Quasi-Experimental 

(Post-Intervention 

Only with Controls 

for Baseline Group 

Differences)

Teachers completed post evaluation surveys and also 

participated in focus groups. Additionally, usage of the MTP 

website was monitored through Web server logs throughout 

the year to determine teachers frequency of visits to the 

program website as well as duration of visits.

Not assessed Not assessed. Not assessed.

251 Table A-5c. General Approaches Studies: Outcomes—Continued