DIRECT ASSESSMENT

CONSTRUCT

TEST AND MATERIALS

Selective attention

In a A3 sheet of paper filled with varied figures, children were asked to find and stamp, as fast as they could, first just the bunnies, and then, in a second trial, just the cats (assuming that they would ignore the distractors figures)¹

Inhibitory control

In a first game, children were told that we had a surprise for them to play with, but we still had to wrap the surprise. We asked children not to peek until we were finished wrapping the surprise. After, children were asked to wait a little bit while we wrote something on a paper, with the present in front of them. Finally, children were allowed to unwrap the present and freely play with the toy for a while, being then asked to return it.²

In a second game, children were presented a little book, which showed one out of seven animals on each page. The child was asked to ring a bell every time he/she saw an animal, except if the animal was a pig. ^{3, 4}

Working Memory

Six wooden animals were hidden in six boxes, and children were asked to find and retrieve each of the animal one by one (which meant remembering which boxes had already been opened and, therefore, were already empty).⁵

Language

Children were evaluated concerning receptive and expressive language, among other aspects. For example, children were asked to choose certain objects (receptive vocabulary), to name these and other objects (expressive vocabulary) and to describe a picture.⁶

OBSERVATION

CONSTRUCT

TEST AND MATERIALS

Children’s interactions with educators, peers and tasks

Through the videos recorded in the classrooms, we were able to observe children’s interactions with the educators, with peers and tasks.⁷

Educator-child interactions

Through the videos recorded in the classrooms, we were able to observe educators’ interactions with the group of children in two domains: Emotional and Behavioral Support and Engaged Support for Learning.⁸

Relato do educador

CONSTRUCT

QUESTIONNAIRE

Structural variables

Questions regarding educator’s training, work experience, age group, and group composition of the current children’s group. There were also questions concerning educators’ job satisfaction, perception of self-efficacy, organizational climate, and professional development. The questionnaire also contained questions about the educator’s approach, in crèche, to domains such as children’s self-regulation, mathematics, language and literacy, science and dramatic play, as well as the way they organized space and materials.⁹

Children’s social skills

The questionnaire is composed of dimensions such as “Cooperating skills” (e.g. Offers help to other children), “Empathy” (e.g. Is sensitive to the feelings of others), “Impulsivity” (e.g. Has temper outbursts or tantrums) and “Disruptive behavior” (e.g. Acts without thinking). The educator was asked to evaluate the frequency each child displayed the behaviors described in 13 items, using a 4-point scale (in which 1 meant “never” and 4 “very frequently”).¹⁰

Children’s social-emotional skills

To evaluate children’s social-emotional skills, 4 scales of the SEAM questionnaire were used – Independence (e.g. The child tries new tasks before seeking help); Regulation of Attention and Activity level (e.g. The child moves from one activity to another without problems); Cooperation with Daily Routines and Requests (e.g. The child cooperates with simple requests); Adaptative skills (e.g. The child accepts changes in routines and settings). The educator was asked to think how each item reflected the behavior of a specific child, using a 4-point scale (in which 1 represented “not true” and 4 represented “very true”).¹¹

Children’s behaviour in the classroom (self-regulation)

From the CBRS scale, we only administered the “Learning-Related Social Skills” subscale (17 items). Within this subscale, we only used items related to children’s behavioral self-regulation (e.g. Takes time to do his/her best on a task). The educator was asked to evaluate the frequency of the described behaviors in each child, using a 5 points scale (in which 1 represented “never” and 5 represented “always”).¹²

Children autonomy support in the classroom

From the TASC questionnaire, we only used the “Autonomy Support” scale (12 items). This scale comprises the following domains “cohersive/ autoritarian behavior” (e.g. I have to lead this child through his/ her schoolwork step by step), “respect” (e.g. I let this child make a lot of his/her own decisions regarding schoolwork), “choice” (e.g. I try to give this child a lot of choices about classroom assignments) and “relevance” (I explain to this child why we learn certain things in school). The educator was asked to say how each item applied to each child’s autonomy, using a 4 points scale (in which 1 represented “not true” and 4 represented “very true”).¹³

Educator-child relationship

Educator-child relationship was evaluated with a 22 items questionnaire with 3 domains: closeness (e.g. I share an affectionate, warm relationship with this child), conflict (e.g. This child easily becomes angry with me) and dependency (e.g. This child reacts strongly to separation from me). The educator was asked to analyse how each of the items reflected his/her relationship with each child, using a 4 points scale (in which 1 represented “definitely does not apply” and 5 represented “definitely applies”).¹⁴