{"title":"Direct observation systems for child behavior assessment in early childhood education: a systematic literature review.","authors":"Maha Al-Hendawi, Esraa Hussein, Sughra Darwish","doi":"10.1007/s44192-025-00139-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This systematic literature review critically assessed the use of direct observation systems (DOSs) in early childhood educational research, highlighting their role in the objective and systematic evaluation of child behavior and classroom dynamics. Our comprehensive analysis distinguishes between standardized and non-standardized observation systems regarding their applications, target groups, and capabilities for assessing diverse behavioral constructs in early childhood education settings. We synthesized data from 88 empirical studies, including standardized (47 studies) and non-standardized (41 studies) approaches. While the standardized DOS was defined as that which was consistently replicated across multiple research projects, the non-standardized DOS was tailored to the unique requirements of individual studies. Our findings suggest that while the standardized DOS offers a reliable method for generalized behavioral assessment, the non-standardized DOS is also widely and effectively used because it provides the flexibility required for more targeted behavioral evaluations. The Classroom Assessment Scoring System (CLASS) and the Individualized Classroom Assessment Scoring System (inCLASS) represent commonly used standardized tools, while non-standardized systems demonstrate particular strength in context-specific applications. The majority of the research was situated within pre-elementary contexts, with standardized studies having a median sample size of 158 compared to 136 non-standardized studies. Gender representation across the studies was notably equitable. A significant portion of related research has focused on populations at-risk of or diagnosed with emotional/behavioral disorders (EBDs) and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), accounting for 59.6% of standardized studies and 80.5% of non-standardized studies. DOS predominantly addressed emotional regulation (42%) and externalizing behaviors (21%).</p>","PeriodicalId":72827,"journal":{"name":"Discover mental health","volume":"5 1","pages":"21"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Discover mental health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s44192-025-00139-z","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
This systematic literature review critically assessed the use of direct observation systems (DOSs) in early childhood educational research, highlighting their role in the objective and systematic evaluation of child behavior and classroom dynamics. Our comprehensive analysis distinguishes between standardized and non-standardized observation systems regarding their applications, target groups, and capabilities for assessing diverse behavioral constructs in early childhood education settings. We synthesized data from 88 empirical studies, including standardized (47 studies) and non-standardized (41 studies) approaches. While the standardized DOS was defined as that which was consistently replicated across multiple research projects, the non-standardized DOS was tailored to the unique requirements of individual studies. Our findings suggest that while the standardized DOS offers a reliable method for generalized behavioral assessment, the non-standardized DOS is also widely and effectively used because it provides the flexibility required for more targeted behavioral evaluations. The Classroom Assessment Scoring System (CLASS) and the Individualized Classroom Assessment Scoring System (inCLASS) represent commonly used standardized tools, while non-standardized systems demonstrate particular strength in context-specific applications. The majority of the research was situated within pre-elementary contexts, with standardized studies having a median sample size of 158 compared to 136 non-standardized studies. Gender representation across the studies was notably equitable. A significant portion of related research has focused on populations at-risk of or diagnosed with emotional/behavioral disorders (EBDs) and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), accounting for 59.6% of standardized studies and 80.5% of non-standardized studies. DOS predominantly addressed emotional regulation (42%) and externalizing behaviors (21%).