Psyc 892 004 / Psyc 592 003 Early Childhood Education, Childcare, and
School Readiness
Course Syllabus - Fall 2005
Dr. Adam Winsler
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Instructor: Adam Winsler, Ph.D. Office: 2023 David King Hall
Phone: 993-1881 Office Hours: Mon, Wed 10:15-11:30 + by appt.
Email: awinsler@gmu.edu URL: http://classweb.gmu.edu/awinsler
Schedule Mon, Wed, 9:00 -10:15am Location: Krug Hall 209
Prerequisites: PSYC
611/612 or similar, + 3 credits other graduate dev psych, or permission of
instructor
Credit Hours: 3
Course Description & Goals
This course will investigate children’s early care and education, school readiness, and transition into school. Such topics are of tremendous practical and social policy importance in these days of political and empirical emphasis on early childhood and public concern over early childhood assessment and the accountability and value of early childhood education and intervention programs. Children’s transition to school represents a critical period in child development with psychological significance and implications that cut across all domains. We will approach these issues from developmental, policy, and empirical perspectives.
Required Reading
1) NICHD Early Child Care Research Network (Eds.). (2005). Child care and child development: Results from the NICHD study of early child care and youth development. New York: Guilford.
2) Clarke-Stewart, A., & Allhusen, V.D. (2005). What we know about childcare. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
3) Selected Articles (see reading list below).
Course Requirements, Activities, and Assignments
The activities of this course are designed to provide students with scaffolded learning experiences engaging in the skills and activities required in the cultures of academia and applied developmental practice (i.e. engaging in group discourse, writing scholarly papers, leading discussions, collaborating with others, disseminating research findings...). The course is designed to maximize group discussion and student participation in the learning process. This means that students might be more responsible for both their own learning and for the activities of this course than in other classes.
1) Class Participation. This is an
advanced graduate seminar course that requires active discussion and
contribution from each member of the class. Each student is expected to have
had some (in some cases - extensive) experience with at least some of the
issues discussed in the class and the course will be greatly enhanced if we can
benefit from each individual student's expertise. Students' participation grade
will be based on the a) the quantity and quality of students' verbal
participation in class and the online discussion, and b) the quality of
students' discussion leading activities. Obviously, if you are not in class
(for whatever reason - even good ones), you cannot participate that day and
your participation grade will be affected.
2) Reflection Papers. Students will be
turning in their thoughts and personal reflections on the readings frequently
throughout the semester. The goals of this activity are many: 1) to serve as a
mechanism for students to process and integrate their reading, 2) to give
students an opportunity to think critically and reflectively on the articles,
3) to serve as a base of ideas from which we can start our class discussions,
and 4) to give students multiple opportunities for feedback on their writing.
Reflections are intended to be informal, however, ease/flow of reading,
coherence, scholarly depth, and grammar/spelling will be taken into account in
their grading. Students will turn in a total of 10 of these reflection
papers spread out across the semester with only one paper allowed each week.
Students decide which days they will turn in reflections but reflection papers
must be turned in on the same day that the discussed readings are due, and late/make-up
papers will not be accepted. Refection papers should be about 2-3
pages in length and they must be word-processed, double-spaced, single-sided,
with all margins 1 inch. Students can chose to turn in more than 10 reflection
papers if they wish and receive 1-2 extra credit points (depending on
quality) for each "extra" reflection paper turned in after the
required ten. Extra credit points will be added to students’ reflections grade.
3) Discussion Leading. Each student will
chose two (2) class sessions for which s/he will come prepared to lead the
discussion or organize the class activities for that day. Important here is
that the person facilitate a real discussion, not give a lecture.
Typically, presenting a brief integrative overview/organizational framework of
the week's readings combined with bringing good discussion questions and
provocative personal reflections will do the trick. Discussion leaders are
required to post discussion questions, notes, ideas, or other advance materials
to the course WebCT site by 5:00pm the night before the class that they are
leading.
4) Classroom Observational Project.
Students will find and select some kind of childcare facility or early
childhood classroom (preschool, daycare, family daycare, kindergarten, or grade
1 classroom) to visit and to observe. Students will conduct at least two,
90-minute observations across different days, on one or more classrooms.
Students will do three things during the observation: 1) complete an
environmental quality rating checklist of some kind (details to follow), 2)
collect some kind of systematic data on an a priori question/topic of their choice, and 3) take
qualitative notes and make informal observations while there about anything
else interesting that was observed. Students will turn in: a) their completed
quality assessment and a 1-2 page description of their overall assessment of
quality, b) a tabulation of their systematic data collected related to their
chosen topic and a 1-2 page summary of their conclusions on the basis of that
data, and c) a 1-3 page general reflection paper on their observation
experience and their informal qualitative observations made. These items are
due together on Oct 31st.
5)
Paper.
Students will write an APA-style empirical research paper (Abstract, Intro/lit
review, Method, Results, Discussion, References, Tables etc) on a topic of
their choosing related to any aspect early childhood education (childcare,
quality, school readiness, assessment, transition to school etc…), using data
from Dr. Winsler’s Miami project (or any other relevant data that you may have
that is appropriate for the topic and approved by the instructor). Students
will meet with the instructor early on to finalize and approve their
topic/questions and an appropriate dataset will be created and given to the
students for analysis. Students may work collaboratively with one other
student on the paper if they wish and, in fact, they are encouraged to do
so. The project will be completed in the following steps:
A)
Before Sept. 14th, each student (or dyad) is
required to meet with the instructor to discuss thoughts/plans for the project,
their written draft of their research questions, and what kind of data might be
available to answer the research questions.
B)
On Oct 11th students will turn in a list
of their revised specific research questions and their specific data analysis
plan (which statistical procedures they will use to answer the research
questions (what are the X and Y variables in what procedure etc…)
C)
Final drafts of
papers are first due on Nov 14th.
Papers will then be graded and returned, and feedback from the instructor will
be given. Students are then required to revise/re-write their paper and
resubmit it on the final deadline of Dec
12 5:00pm.
6) Oral Presentation. On either the last
two weeks of class, or at the scheduled
time for the final activity, or another time toward the end of the course
negotiated by the class as a whole, students will give a brief 10 minute oral
presentation to their fellow class members briefly summarizing their course
paper.
7) Final Activity. At the
university-scheduled night for the final exam or another time toward the end of
the course negotiated by the class as a whole, students will complete/turn
in/engage in some sort of final, cumulative, integrative review,
activity/exercise/exam. The nature and format of this final activity will be
decided upon and negotiated as a class and determined as soon as possible.
8) Online Discussion. We will be using
WebCT to facilitate our discourse both inside and outside of class this
semester. Students are encouraged to post questions, issues, problems,
suggestions, whatever, as often as they like throughout the semester. This open
ended, unmoderated, online discussion can be used to discuss the weekly
readings and course content, possible venues for the final activity, or
questions/ problems that come up with course assignments.
Materials Available on Reserve (Johnson Center Library)
1) Examples of good reflection papers.
Course Technology Use
The course website is located at: http://webct41.gmu.edu You will log into this with your own individual MyWebCT account, and from there access the Psyc 892/592 WebCT page. To do this, simply enter the URL above in any browser, log in with your mason username and with your password being 2-digit month and 2-digit day of birth. Then change your password to something you like/will remember by going to password settings. We will use WebCT this semester for four purposes:
1) Course Materials -
Various course materials (syllabus, notes on readings, guidelines/grading
criteria for assignments…) are/will be available from this site.
2) Online discussion -
Discussion of and reflection on course content, inside and outside of class, is
critical for sustained student learning and motivation. This semester, students
in this course will not be limited to the discussion which occurs in the
classroom. Using GMU’s WebCT platform, students in this course may also
participate in electronic discussions in which students type in messages that
are stored in a central web location and are accessible for all other students
in the course (and the instructor) to read and respond to.
3) Online Grade Checking
Mechanism - Students may get an update of their current course grades at
any time during the course from the website. Students can see their own grades
for all assignments earned to date. The WebCT password that students will designate
on their first day of use provides assurance that others cannot access your
grades. Students will only see their own grades - not anyone else's and not
class distributions.
4) Advance posting of discussion-leader materials. Discussion leaders can post any advance materials here.
Grading Procedures
Students' final grades will be determined as follows:
• Reflection Papers 25%
• Paper 30%
• Participation/ Discussion Leading 10%
• Presentation 10%
• Final Activity 10%
The Honor Code
Students in this course are
expected to behave at all times in a manner consistent with the GMU Honor Code.
(http://www.gmu.edu/departments/unilife/honorcode.html)
For purposes of clarity, the following guidelines for plagiarism will be used
in this course for the writing of the paper:
Plagiarism =
• Copying, word for word, greater than about 25% of a
sentence from someone else's work and having the words appear to be your
own words. [Note: This is regardless of 1) the type of other person's work
(whether or not it was published) and 2)
whether or not you have given the person a citation after the text or a
reference in the bibliography].
• Using greater than 25% of the words in someone
else's sentence by switching around the order of words or phrases and having
the words appear to be your own words (same notes apply, as above).
• Paraphrasing someone else's ideas or findings
or sentences without giving them a citation and reference.
• Using the same paper for this course which has been
(or will be) turned in for another course.
Students are encouraged to
collaborate and study together as much as possible throughout the course. For
collaborative papers, both students must contribute equally to the project,
including relatively equal contributions to the actual writing. Violations of
the Honor Code will not be tolerated in this course and will be immediately
reported according to GMU procedures.
Accommodation
for Students with Disabilities
It is the policy of the
University and this instructor to make reasonable accommodations for qualified
individuals with disabilities. Students who may have special needs because of a
physical or learning disability are encouraged to contact the Disability
Resource Center ASAP (222 Student Union I) 993-2474 http://www.gmu.edu/student/drc/ Students with disabilities who are in need of
accommodation relative to class attendance/arrival, course requirements, or
related aspects of course performance and who have already processed the
necessary paperwork with Disability Support Services must initiate such a
request in writing immediately, and prior to any anticipated need, to the
instructor. Such requests will be accommodated within the reasonable
constraints of fairness and timeliness with regard to the instructor and the
other students enrolled in the course.
Tentative Course Outline
|
Date |
Topic(s) |
Reading/Assignment |
|
Monday Aug 29 |
|
|
Wednesday Aug 31
|
Introduction/Overview of
Dr. Winsler’s Miami-Dade School Readiness Assessment and Intervention
Program/Data |
NICHD Ch 1 |
|
Mon. Sept 5 |
LABOR DAY – NO CLASS |
|
|
Wednesday Sept. 7 |
Contemporary and Historical
Perspectives on Childcare |
Clarke-Stewart Ch 2 &
Ch 3 |
|
Monday Sept 12 |
Clarke-Stewart Ch 1 Honig (2002) NICHD Ch 2 & Ch 3 |
|
|
Wednesday Sept. 14 |
Childcare Access,
Subsidies, and Barriers |
Adams & Rohacek (2002) Foster (2002) Shlay et al. (2004) Initial Paper Consultation Deadline |
|
Monday Sept 19 |
Infant Care, Attachment and
Mother-Child Interaction |
|
|
Wednesday Sept. 21 |
||
|
Monday Sept 26 |
Quality/Quantity
of Care and Child Cognitive/Language Outcomes |
NICHD Ch 22 Burchinal et al. (2000) Dickinson & Sprague
(2001) |
|
Wednesday Sept. 28 |
Quality/Quantity
of Care and Child Socio-Emotional/Behavioral Outcomes |
Howes et al. (1992) NICHD Ch 19, Ch 20 & Ch
21 |
|
Monday Oct. 3 |
Quality/Quantity
of Care and Overall Child Outcomes |
Clarke-Stewart Ch 5 NICHD Ch 23 & Ch 26 |
|
Wednesday Oct. 5 |
Peisner-Feinberg &
Burchinal (1997) Peisner-Feinberg et al.
(2001)
|
|
|
Tuesday Oct 11 |
Clarke-Stewart Ch 6 NICHD Ch 25 Research Questions/Data Analysis
Plan Due |
|
|
Wednesday Oct. 12 |
Income as a Moderator
of Childcare Effects
|
|
|
Monday Oct 17 |
Home – Childcare
Interactions and Combinations
|
NICHD Ch 11, Ch 28, &
Ch 29 |
|
Wednesday Oct. 19 |
Meisels (1999) Child Trends (2000) |
|
|
Monday Oct 24 |
Carlton & Winsler (1999) Stipek (2002) |
|
|
Wednesday Oct. 26 |
Pianta & Kraft-Sayre
(2003) Ch 1 Pianta & Kraft-Sayre
(2003) Ch 2 Rimm-Kaufman et al. (2000) |
|
|
Monday Oct 31 |
Rouse et al. (2005) Rock & Stenner (2005) Magnuson & Waldfogel
(2005) Haskins & Rouse
(2005)
Observational Assignment Due |
|
|
Wednesday Nov. 2 |
Clarke-Stewart Ch 11 Yoshikawa et al. (2002) |
|
|
Monday Nov. 7 |
Barnett et al. (2004) Gilliam & Marchesseault
(2005) Bellm et al. (2002)
|
|
|
Wednesday Nov. 9 |
Gilliam & Zigler (2004) Gormly & Gayer (2003) Henry et al. (2003) NCEDL Pre-K Study (in
press) |
|
|
Monday Nov. 14 |
Early Childhood
Educational Intervention Programs
|
Campbell et al. (2002) Reynolds et al. (2001) Brooks-Gunn (2003) Paper Due |
|
Wednesday Nov. 16 |
Early Childhood
Educational Intervention Programs
|
Barnett (1995) Fuligni & Brooks-Gunn
(2003) Reynolds & Ou (2003) |
|
Monday Nov. 21 |
Early Childhood
Educational Intervention Programs – Head Start
|
Currie & Thomas (2000) Ramey et al. (2000) |
|
Wednesday Nov. 23 |
NO CLASS – THANKSGIVING BREAK |
|
|
Monday Nov. 28 |
Coolahan et al. (2000) Ladd et al. (1999) Raver & Knitze (2002) |
|
|
Wednesday Nov. 30 |
Early Elementary School Effects |
Entwisle (1995) Hamre & Pianta (2001) |
|
Monday Dec. 5 |
||
|
Wednesday Dec. 7 |
Student Presentations |
Clarke-Stewart Ch 10 Final Paper Revision Due Dec 12
5:00pm |
|
Monday Dec. 19? (7:30am?) |
Reading List
NICHD Ch 1
Clarke-Stewart Ch 2 Clarke-Stewart
Ch 3
Clarke-Stewart Ch 1
Honig, A. S. (2002). Choosing
childcare for young children. In M.H. Bornstein (Ed.), Handbook of parenting: Vol 5: Practical issues in parenting (2nd
Ed.) (pp. 375-405). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
NICHD Ch 2 NICHD
Ch 3
Adams, G., & Rohacek, M.
(2002). More than work support? Issues around integrating child development
goals into the child care subsidy system. Early
Childhood Research Quarterly, 17, 418-440.
Foster, E.M. (2002). Trends
in multiple and overlapping disadvantages among Head Start enrollees, Child and Youth Services Review, 24,
933-954.
Shlay, A.B. ,Weinraub, M.,
Harmon, M., & Tran, H. (2004). Barriers to subsidies: Why low-income
families do not use child care subsidies. Social
Science Research, 33, 134-157.
NICHD Ch 22
Burchinal, M.R., Roberts,
J.E., Riggins Jr., R., Zeisel, S.A.,
Neebe, E., & Bryant, D. (2000). Relating quality of center-based child care
to early cognitive and language development longitudinally. Child Development, 71, 339-367.
Dickinson, D,K., &
Sprague, K.E., (2001). The nature and impact of early childhood care
environments on the language and early literacy development of children from
low-income families. In S.B. Neuman & D.K. Kickinson (Eds.), Handbook of early literacy research (pp.
263-280). New York: Guilford.
Howes, C., Phillips, D.A.,
& Whitebook, M. (1992). Thresholds of quality: Implications for social
development of children in center-based child care. Child Development, 63, 449-460.
Clarke-Stewart Ch. 5
NICHD 23 NICHD
26
Peisner-Feinberg, E.S., &
Burchinal., M.R. (1997). Relations between preschool children’s child-care
experiences and concurrent development: The Cost, Quality, and Outcomes Study. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 32, 451-477.
Clarke-Steward Ch 6
NICHD Ch 25
Votruba-Drzal, E., Coley,
R.L., & Chase-Lansdale, P.L. (2004). Child care and low-income children’s
development: Direct and moderated effects. Child
Development, 75, 296-312.
Tran, H., &
Weinraub, M. (in press). Child care effects in context: Quality, stability, and
multiplicity in nonmaternal child care arrangements during the first fifteen
months. Developmental Psychology.
Loeb, S. Fuller, B., Kagan,
S.L., & Carrol, B. (2004). Child care in poor communities: Early learning
effects of type, quality, and stability. Child
Development, 75, 47-65.
NICHD Ch 11 NICHD Ch
28 NICHD
Ch 29
Meisels, S.J. (1999).
Assessing readiness. In R.C. Pianta & M.J. Cox (Eds.), The transition to kindergarten (pp. 39-66). Baltimore, MD: Paul
Brookes.
School
Readiness and the Transition to Kindergarten
Carlton, M.P., & Winsler, A. (1999). School
readiness: The need for a paradigm shift. School Psychology Review, 28,
338-352.
Stipek, D. (2002). At what
age should children enter kindergarten? A question for policy makers and
parents. SRCD Social Policy Report, 16 (2), 1-16.
Blair, C. (2002). School
readiness: Integrating cognition and emotion in a neurobiological
conceptualization of children’s functioning at school entry. American Psychologist, 57 (2), 111-127.
Pianta, R.C., & Kraft-Sayre, M. (2003). Successful kindergarten transition: Your
guide to connecting children, families, and schools. (Chapter 1 – A
developmental approach to transition – pp. 1-14). Baltimore, MD: Paul Brookes.
Pianta, R.C., & Kraft-Sayre, M. (2003). Successful kindergarten transition: Your
guide to connecting children, families, and schools. (Chapter 2 – Planning
the transition – pp. 15-35). Baltimore, MD: Paul Brookes.
Rimm-Kaufman, S.E., Pianta,
R.C., & Cox, M.J. (2000). Teachers’ judgements of problems in the
transition to kindergarten. Early
Childhood Research Quarterly, 15, 147-166.
Rouse, C., Brooks-Gunn, J.,
& McLanahan, S. (2005). School readiness: Closing racial and ethnic gaps:
Introducing the issue. The Future of
Children, 15 (1), 5-13.
Rock,
D.A., & Stenner, A.J. (2005). Assessment issues in the testing of children
at school entry. The Future of Children,
15 (1), 15-34.
Magnuson, K.A., &
Waldfogel, J. (2005). Early childhood care and education: Effects on ethnic and
racial gaps in school readiness. The
Future of Children, 15 (1), 169-195.
Haskins, R., & Rouse, C.
(2005). Closing achievement gaps. The
Future of Children Policy Brief, Spring 2005.
Clarke-Stewart Ch 11
Yoshikawa, H., Rosman, E.A.,
& Hsueh, J. (2002). Resolving paradoxical criteria for the expansion and
replication of early childhood care and education programs. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 17,
3-27.
Kagan, S.L., & Neuman,
M.J. (2005). Back to basics: Building an early care and education system. In
R.L. Lerner, F. Jacobs, & Wertlieb, D. (Eds.), Applied developmental science: An advanced textbook (pp. 437-453).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Barnett, W.S., Hustedt, J.T.,
Robin, K.B., & Schulman, K.L. (2004). The
state of preschool: 2004 state preschool yearbook. Unpublished document.
National Institute for Early Education Research. Rutgers University.
Gilliam, W.S., &
Marchesseault, C.M. (2005). From capitols
to classrooms, policies to practice: State-funded prekindergarten at the
classroom level – The National Prekindergarten Study. Technical Report.
Yale University Child Study Center.
Bellm, D., Burton, A.,
Whitebook, M., Broatch, L., & Young, M.P. (2002). Inside the pre-k classroom: A study of staffing and stability in
state-funded prekindergarten programs. Technical Report. Washington, DC:
Center for the Child Care Workforce. (just introduction and overview)
Gilliam, W.S., & Zigler, E.F. (2004). State efforts to evaluate the effects of
prekindergarten: 1977-2003. Unpublished document. Yale University Child
Study Center.
Gormly, W.T., & Gayer, T.
(2003). Promoting school readiness in
Oklahoma: An evaluation of Tulsa’s pre-k program. Unpublished document.
CROCUS working paper #1.
Henry, G.T., Henderson, L.W.,
Ponder, B.D., Gordon, C.S., Mashburn, A.J., & RIckman, D.K. (2003). Report of the findings from the Early
Childhood Study: 2001-02.
Unpublished Document. Atlanta, GA: Andrew Young School of Policy
Studies.
Unknown (Pianta’s NCEDL Pre-K
Study) (In press). Ready to learn?: Children’s pre-academic achievement in
pre-kindergarten programs. Developmental
Psychology.
Campbell, F.A., Ramey, C.T.,
Pungello, E., Sparling, J., & Miller-Johnson, S. (2002). Early childhood
education: Young adult outcomes from the Abecedarian project. Applied Developmental Science, 6, 42-57.
Reynolds, A.J., Temple, J.A.,
Robertson, D.L., & Mann, E.A. (2001). Long-term effects of an early
childhood intervention on educational achievement and juvenile arrest: A
15-year follow-up of low-income children in public schools. Journal of the American Medical Association,
285, 2339-2346.
Brooks-Gunn, J. (2003). Do you believe in magic?: What
we can expect from early childhood intervention programs. SRCD Social Policy
Report, 17 (1), 1-14.
Barnett, W.S. (1995).
Long-term effects of early childhood programs on cognitive and school outcomes.
Future of Children, 5 (3), 25-50.
Fuligni, A.S., &
Brooks-Gunn, J. (2003). The Profiles Project. In J. Brooks-Gunn, A.S. Fuligni,
& L.J. Berlin (Eds.), Early child
development in the 21st century: Profiles of current initiatives
(pp. 16-64). New York: Teachers College Press.
Reynolds, A.J., & Ou,
S.R. (2003). Promoting resilience through early childhood intervention. In S.S.
LUTHAR, (Ed.) Resilience and vulnerability:
Adaptation in the context of childhood adversities (pp. 436-459). New York:
Cambridge University Press.
Currie,
J., & Thomas, D. (2000). School quality and the long-term effects of Head
Start. The Journal of Human Resources, 35,
755-774
Ramey, S.L., Ramey, C.T.,
Phillips, M.M., Lanzi, R.G., Brezausek, C., Katholi, C.R., & Snyder, S.
(2000). Head Start children’s entry into
public school: A report on the National Head Start/Public School Early
Childhood Transition Demonstration Study. Technical report. Washington,
DC.: Administration for Children and Families. (Executive summary only)
Coolahan, K., Fantuzzo, J.,
Mendez, J., & McDermott, P. (2000). Preschool peer interactions and
readiness to learn: Relationships between classroom peer play and learning behaviors
and conduct. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 92, 458-465.
Ladd, G.W., Birch, S.H.,
& Buhs, E.S. (1999). Children’s social and scholastic lives in
kindergarten: Related spheres of influence. Child
Development, 70, 1373-1400.
Raver, C.C., & Knitze, J.
(2002). Promoting the emotional
well-being of children and families: Ready to enter: What research tells
policymakers about strategies to promote social and emotional school readiness
among three- and four-year-old children. Policy Paper #3. Columbia
University, New York: National Center for Children in Poverty.
Early Elementary School Effects
Entwisle, D. (1995). The role
of schools in sustaining early childhood program benefits. The Future of Children, 5 (3), 133-144.
Hamre, B.K., & Pianta, R.C.
(2001). Early teacher-child relationships and the trajectory of children’s
school outcomes through eighth grade. Child
Development, 72, 625-638.
Clarke-Stewart Ch 9 Clarke-Stewart Ch 10 NICHD
Ch 30
PSYC 892 - Fall 2005 - Student Information
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Name ___________________________________________
G# ___________________________________________
Degree Program/Year ___________________________________________
Phone Number(s) ___________________________________________
___________________________________________
Email Address ___________________________________________
Previous Developmental ___________________________________________
Psych Grad Courses
__________________________________________
___________________________________________
Previous Statistics ___________________________________________
Grad Courses
__________________________________________
___________________________________________