Measuring social-emotional development in schoolchildren: A national-level analysis of ECLS-B cohort data

IF 3.8 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL Journal of School Psychology Pub Date : 2024-01-04 DOI:10.1016/j.jsp.2023.101270
Quentin H. Riser , Heather L. Rouse , Ji Young Choi
{"title":"Measuring social-emotional development in schoolchildren: A national-level analysis of ECLS-B cohort data","authors":"Quentin H. Riser ,&nbsp;Heather L. Rouse ,&nbsp;Ji Young Choi","doi":"10.1016/j.jsp.2023.101270","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>The present study examined the social-emotional development items assessed by kindergarten teachers in the Early Childhood Longitudinal Study-Birth Cohort to determine the optimal factor structure underlying the items as well as the reliability and validity of the resulting factors. This study identified an empirically derived factor structure for teacher-reported social development, investigated whether there was evidence of bias in teacher assessments of social-emotional constructs, examined factor invariance across demographic characteristics (i.e., race and ethnicity, sex, and poverty status), and examined the external validity of the derived factors by determining the extent to which they were associated with well-established measures of early childhood competencies. Findings suggested a 4-factor solution was optimal, consisting of (a) Interpersonal Skills, (b) Externalizing Behavior, (c) Approaches to Learning, and (d) Perspective Taking. Findings offer suggestive evidence of teacher biases in assessments and some, although not conclusive, support for the invariance of social-emotional dimension across demographic characteristics. Results provide a useful next step toward documenting reliable and valid social-emotional measures for use in early childhood research and challenges users of national datasets to think critically about the use of “scales” without a priori attention to important psychometric properties.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48232,"journal":{"name":"Journal of School Psychology","volume":"103 ","pages":"Article 101270"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of School Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022440523000985","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The present study examined the social-emotional development items assessed by kindergarten teachers in the Early Childhood Longitudinal Study-Birth Cohort to determine the optimal factor structure underlying the items as well as the reliability and validity of the resulting factors. This study identified an empirically derived factor structure for teacher-reported social development, investigated whether there was evidence of bias in teacher assessments of social-emotional constructs, examined factor invariance across demographic characteristics (i.e., race and ethnicity, sex, and poverty status), and examined the external validity of the derived factors by determining the extent to which they were associated with well-established measures of early childhood competencies. Findings suggested a 4-factor solution was optimal, consisting of (a) Interpersonal Skills, (b) Externalizing Behavior, (c) Approaches to Learning, and (d) Perspective Taking. Findings offer suggestive evidence of teacher biases in assessments and some, although not conclusive, support for the invariance of social-emotional dimension across demographic characteristics. Results provide a useful next step toward documenting reliable and valid social-emotional measures for use in early childhood research and challenges users of national datasets to think critically about the use of “scales” without a priori attention to important psychometric properties.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
衡量学龄儿童的社会情感发展:对 ECLS-B 组群数据的国家级分析
本研究对幼儿纵向研究-出生队列中幼儿园教师评估的社会情感发展项目进行了研究,以确定这些项目所依据的最佳因子结构,以及由此得出的因子的信度和效度。这项研究为教师报告的社会性发展确定了一个经验推导出的因子结构,调查了教师对社会情感建构的评估是否存在偏差的证据,检验了不同人口特征(即种族和民族、性别和贫困状况)的因子不变性,并通过确定这些因子与幼儿能力的成熟测量方法之间的关联程度,检验了推导出的因子的外部有效性。研究结果表明,4 个因子是最佳解决方案,包括(a)人际交往能力、(b)外化行为、(c)学习方法和(d)观点取向。研究结果为教师在评估中的偏差提供了提示性证据,并为不同人口特征的社会情感维度的不变性提供了一些支持(尽管不是决定性的)。研究结果为记录用于幼儿研究的可靠有效的社会情感测量方法迈出了有益的一步,同时也对国家数据集的使用者提出了挑战,要求他们在使用 "量表 "时进行批判性思考,而不要先入为主地忽视重要的心理测量特性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of School Psychology
Journal of School Psychology PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL-
CiteScore
6.70
自引率
8.00%
发文量
71
期刊介绍: The Journal of School Psychology publishes original empirical articles and critical reviews of the literature on research and practices relevant to psychological and behavioral processes in school settings. JSP presents research on intervention mechanisms and approaches; schooling effects on the development of social, cognitive, mental-health, and achievement-related outcomes; assessment; and consultation. Submissions from a variety of disciplines are encouraged. All manuscripts are read by the Editor and one or more editorial consultants with the intent of providing appropriate and constructive written reviews.
期刊最新文献
Evaluating the treatment utility of the Cognitive Assessment System: A meta-analysis of reading and mathematics outcomes The CARES classroom observation tool: Psychometrics of an observational measure of culturally responsive practices Profiles of principal stress and coping: Concurrent and prospective correlates Emotional intersection: Delineating test anxiety, emotional disorders, and student well-being Universal Teacher-Child Interaction Training in early childhood special education: Identifying mechanisms of action that explain why it works
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1