how preschoolers' social–emotional learning predicts their ... · we view sel through an...

HowPreschoolers’ Social–EmotionalLearning Predicts Their Early SchoolSuccess: Developing Theory-Promoting,Competency-Based Assessments

Susanne A. Denham*, Hideko H. Bassett,Katherine Zinsser and Todd M. WyattGeorge Mason University, Fairfax, VA, USA

Starting on positive trajectories at school entry is important for chil-dren’s later academic success. Using partial least squares, we soughtto specify interrelations among all theory-based components ofsocial–emotional learning (SEL), and their ability to predict laterclassroom adjustment and academic readiness in a modellingcontext. Consequently, self-regulation, emotion knowledge, socialproblem solving, and social–emotional behaviour were assessedvia direct assessment and observation for 101 preschoolers; teachersprovided information on classroom adjustment through kindergar-ten and academic readiness in kindergarten. Our final outer(measurement) model showed robust latent variables for SEL com-ponents. Regarding the inner (structural) model, latent variablesshowed expected predictive relations among SEL components, andwith later classroom adjustment and academic readiness:preschoolers’ executive control predicted aspects of their socialcognition (i.e., emotion knowledge and social problem solving)and emotionally negative/aggressive behaviour, and emotionknowledge predicted their emotionally regulated/prosocialbehaviour. Further, most SEL components directly and/or indirectlypredicted teachers’ evaluations of later classroom adjustment andkindergarten academic readiness. Our findings extend our under-standing of SEL during preschool, suggesting that early assessmentand monitoring is possible using these instruments, and potentiallyaiding the development of programmes to maximize children’s SELin the service of early school success. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley& Sons, Ltd.

*Correspondence to: Susanne Denham, Psychology, George Mason University, Fairfax, VA,USA. E-mail: [email protected]

Infant and Child DevelopmentInf. Child. Dev. 23: 426–454 (2014)Published online 19 February 2014 in Wiley Online Library(wileyonlinelibrary.com). DOI: 10.1002/icd.1840

Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Key words: self-regulation; emotion knowledge; social problemsolving; social–emotional behaviour; classroom adjustment; academicreadiness

Even young students learn alongside and in collaboration with teachers and peers,and use their emotions to facilitate learning. Fueled by these circumstances, thereis an increasing focus on not only cognitive but also social–emotional learning(SEL) as crucial for preschoolers’ concurrent and later well-being, mentalhealth, and school success (Denham, 2006). In fact, social–emotional competen-cies are identified as among the most important abilities supporting earlyschool success and the growth of academic competence during elementaryschool (Denham, et al., 2012a; Jennings & DiPrete, 2010; Romano, Babchishin,Pagani, & Kohen, 2010).

Educators and parents are becoming ever more aware of the importance of SEL. Forexample, Head Start programmes cite emotional–behavioural issues among their topneeds for training and technical assistance (Buscemi, Bennett, Thomas, & Deluca,1996). Teachers also view children’s ‘readiness to learn’ and ‘teachability’ as markedby positive emotional expressiveness and ability to regulate emotions and behaviours(Rimm-Kaufman, Pianta, & Cox, 2000). Parents’ and teachers’ beliefs about the advan-tages of SEL can be summarized as follows:when ‘…children can interactmeaningfullywith each other and adults, follow simple rules and directions, and demonstrate…inde-pendence in the classroom…then kindergarten teachers could teach them the otheracademic skills and knowledge…’ (Wesley & Buysse, 2003, p. 357).

Further, a content analysis of early learning standards has revealed that moreand more states have standards for SEL starting at early childhood, albeit less sys-tematically and with fewer indicators than cognitive skills (Scott-Little, Kagan, &Frelow, 2006). National legislation has also been introduced, authorizing allocationof funds for technical assistance, training, and programming on SEL (Collaborativefor Academic, Social and Emotional Learning, 2012).

A Theory of Social–Emotional Learning

Because academicians, early childhood educators, parents, and even politicalbodies are viewing early childhood SEL as so important, consideration of thismulti-faceted construct would benefit from grounding in a theoretical perspective.We view SEL through an organizational, bio-ecological lens, in which specific de-velopmental tasks are central to each age, undergirded by maturing neurologicalstructures and influenced by multiple environmental elements (Waters & Sroufe,1983; Weissberg & Greenberg, 1998). This perspective organizes developmentalstability and change via reference to key tasks. SEL tasks specific to early child-hood centre on (1) maintaining positive engagement in the physical and socialenvironment, and (2) managing emotional arousal and cognitive demands, while(3) maintaining positive social interaction with peers and adults (Howes, 1987;Parker & Gottman, 1989). We view these developmental tasks as benchmarksagainst which to evaluate a preschooler’s SEL success.

Next, to theoretically explain, describe, and evaluate such wide-ranging develop-mental tasks, a broadband approach is necessary—over-reliance on any one behav-iour or set of behaviours can lead to misleading conclusions. To this end, our prismmodel of SEL can be seen in Figure 1 (from Rose-Krasnor, 1997, and Payton et al.,2000). SEL, at the model’s topmost level, can be defined as results in effectiveness ininteraction, the result of organized behaviours that meet short-term and long-term

How Preschoolers’ Social–Emotional Learning Predicts 427

Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Inf. Child. Dev. 23: 426–454 (2014)DOI: 10.1002/icd

developmental needs. This overarching definition is then differentiated in lower levelsof the prism. For example, such effectiveness can be evaluated by the self, others,and/or the social group as awhole, across contexts (see themodel’s depth dimensionfor contexts in which SEL is played out). Finally, at the prism’s lowest level,fine-grained, primarily individual, elements of SEL meet the developmental tasksof early childhood. All are vital contributors to successful, effective interaction. Atthis level, we enumerate four core components of SEL: self-regulation, social aware-ness, responsible decision making, and relationship/social skills (Payton et al., 2000;Zins, Bloodworth, Weissberg, & Walberg, 2007).

Given a clear theoretical perspective, we can move on to consideration ofevidence for contributions of each core component. Each has its own theoreticaltraditions and voluminous empirical literatures. Thus, we now briefly define eachcomponent based on current theoretical viewpoints and provide empiricalevidence for their associations with early school success, defined here as classroomadjustment and academic readiness.

Social–Emotional Learning and Early School Success

All components in our prism model work together to grease the cogs of a success-ful school experience (Denham, Brown, & Domitrovich, 2010; Wesley & Buysse,2003). But SEL success may not be easy for children just entering often-taxingacademic settings, where they are required to sit still, attend, follow directions, andapproach and enter group play—all of which may challenge their nascent abilities.

We must also consider how the components of SEL support each other and maycome together synergistically in their effects on early school success. Moreover,‘what’s measured gets treasured’—if we assess early childhood SEL well, we canmake better decisions about how to facilitate children’s functioning (Denham, 2006).

Figure 1. Prism theoretical model of social–emotional learning. Adapted from Payton et al.(2000) and Rose-Krasnor (1997).

428 S.A. Denham et al.


That is, SEL assessment should be undertaken to effectively highlight specific needsof children and classrooms in terms of programming, and showoverall effects of pro-gramming (Denham, Ji, & Hamre, 2010; Denham, Wyatt, Bassett, Echeverria, &Knox, 2009). Based on these ideas, there are dual goals for this study. First, we aimto demonstrate how SEL components directly and indirectly contribute to earlyschool success through kindergarten, adding to both theoretical and practical knowl-edge. Second, we aim to examine the efficacy of a battery of direct assessment andobservational measures of preschoolers’ social–emotional competencies in makingsuch predictions, to begin to establish the measures’ usability.

Given these goals, it is also important to define early school success for thepurposes of this study. In our view, early school success includes both classroomadjustment and academic readiness as crucial outcomes for successful introduction toschooling. Classroom adjustment can be defined as young children’s behaviours andattitudes associated with learning in the classroom environment, such as showingmotivation to learn, persisting and paying attention, participating positively in class-room activities, and enjoying school. Young children’s academic readiness is defined asthemastery of certain basic skills, such as literacy, numeracy, and general knowledge,which help ensure success in the new formal learning environment (we use the termacademic success when referring to outcomes later in schooling). We now furtherdescribe the SEL domains tapped by each of our measures, as well as (1) supportiveevidence of their importance to early school success and (2) hypothesized pathwaysamongst them.

Self-regulation: Emotional, Cognitive, and Behavioural

Young children’s self-regulation—their abilities to regulate emotion, attention, andbehaviour—has together been found to be related to their classroom adjustmentand academic readiness (Bierman, Nix, Greenberg, Blair, & Domitrovich, 2008;McClelland et al., 2007). In particular, children who have difficulties dealing withnegative emotions may not have the personal resources to focus on learning,whereas those who can maintain a positive emotional tone might remain morepositively engaged with classroom tasks (Graziano, Reavis, Keane, & Calkins,2007; Miller, Seifer, Stroud, Sheinkopf, & Dickstein, 2006; Shields et al., 2001;Trentacosta & Izard, 2007). More cognitive and behavioural forms of regulationare also related to young children’s academic success. For example, first gradeinhibitory control (i.e., walking on a line) predicted third grade reading scores (Liew,McTigue, Barrois, & Hughes, 2008; see also Ponitz, McClelland, Matthews, &Morrison, 2009). Thus, self-regulation enhances children’s early classroom adjust-ment and academic success both predictively and concurrently, often with many de-mographic covariates and earlier social/academic success and/or SEL held constant.

Social Awareness: Emotion Knowledge

Within social awareness, we focus on the ability to understand emotions. Emotionsconvey crucial interpersonal information and guide interaction. Inability to interpretemotions can make the classroom a confusing, overwhelming place, hinderingclassroom adjustment. Further, children’s emotion knowledge is also related to theiracademic readiness. For example, emotion knowledge is related to preschoolers’academic readiness (Garner & Waajid, 2008; Leerkes, Paradise, O’Brien, Calkins, &Lange, 2008; Shields et al., 2001). Similarly, Izard et al. (2001) found that 5-year-olds’emotion knowledge predicted their age 9 academic competence. Thus, children’s



ability to understand emotions is important to their concurrent and later success inschool, often after accounting for many important covariates.

Responsible Decision Making/Social Problem Solving

As preschoolers’ social interactions increase in frequency and complexity, theymust comprehend even emotionally difficult social situations, set prosocial goals,and determine effective ways to solve differences with peers. When asked torespond to hypothetical peer dilemmas like having one’s toy taken or one’screation destroyed, they become able to indicate different emotions such problemswould arouse and possible behaviours (e.g., aggressive, socially competent,passive, and dysregulated) they would choose as solutions. Such responses arerelated to teachers’ concurrent and later assessments of classroom adjustmentand academic readiness, even with age, gender, and earlier school adjustmentcovaried (Bascoe, Davies, Sturge-Apple, & Cummings, 2009; Bierman,Domitrovich, et al., 2008; Denham, et al., 2013b; Denham, Way, Kalb, Warren-Khot,& Zinsser, in press-b). Thus, there is multi-faceted evidence that young children’ssocial problem-solving processes are implicated in their early school success.

Relationship Skills

The goal in this aspect of SEL is positive exchanges with others and, ultimately,satisfying relationships that last over time. Numerous component skills are crucialduring early childhood, including joining others in play, initiating and maintainingconversation, cooperating, listening, and taking turns. Children with poorerrelationship skills are more likely to have difficulties with cooperative and indepen-dent participation in and liking of school, which are important aspects of classroomadjustment (e.g., Buhs & Ladd, 2001).

In terms of relationswith academic readiness and achievement, Normandeau andGuay (1998) found that kindergarten prosocial behaviour indirectly predicted firstgrade achievement via first grade cognitive self-control. Others have shown thatrelationship skills are related to early academic success (e.g., Welsh, Nix, Blair,Bierman, & Nelson, 2010), albeit often with slightly older children than studied here(e.g., Caprara, Barbaranelli, Pastorelli, Bandura, & Zimbardo, 2000; Elias & Haynes,2008). Finally, relationship skills predict promotion and retention after first grade(Agostin & Bain, 1997). Relationship skills form a solid foundation for children’sschool success.

Pathways among Components of Social–Emotional Learning

As important as these relations are between each component of SEL and earlyschool successes, these SEL components also should support one another asan interrelated network in which some abilities can be considered more founda-tional than others (Eisenberg, Sadovsky, & Spinrad, 2005). Thus, we posit acomplex model with pathways among key components of SEL, based on earlierwork (see Figure 2). We consider aspects of self-regulation and social awarenessto be foundational to more directly applied social behaviours and cognitions,and all of these aspects of SEL promote classroom adjustment and academicreadiness.

Thus, regarding themore cognitive aspects of self-regulation, ‘cool’ executive con-trol (CEC; inhibitory control, more affectively neutral, slow acting, and developing),



being more heavily influenced by the prefrontal cortex, predicts more emotional/motivational self-regulation, termed ‘hot’ executive control (HEC; delay of gratifica-tion, more reflexive, fast acting, early developing, and under stimulus control)(Brock, Rimm-Kaufman, Nathanson, & Grimm, 2009; Willoughby, Kupersmidt,Voegler-Lee, & Bryant, 2011). Next, we consider that HEC and CEC may underliesocial cognition, such as emotion knowledge and social problem solving (Carlson& Wang, 2007; Denham et al., 2012d; Schultz, Izard, Ackerman, & Youngstrom,2001). Further, these aspects of self-regulation often relate to emotionally regulated,positive, productive, and nonaggressive social behaviour (Carlson & Wang, 2007;Ramani, Brownell, & Campbell, 2010).

Emotion knowledge also may facilitate social problem solving (Garner &Lemerise, 2007; Schultz et al., 2010), as well as supporting positive and regulatedemotions and productive, prosocial behaviour (Denham et al., 2012b; Denham,1986; Schultz et al., 2010) and buffering against aggression (Denham, Caverlyet al., 2002). As already suggested, we would hypothesize that all of these aspectsof SEL, both more foundational and more applied, are independently related toclassroom adjustment and academic readiness.

Indirect, mediational pathways will also be explored; we would expect that thesocial–emotional competencies we consider more foundational might have, alongwith direct effects, indirect contributions to classroom adjustment and academicreadiness via more clearly ‘applied skills’ (see Figure 2), but little or no researchhas explored such linkages. In one of the few studies examining how aspectsof SEL enumerated here may mediate one another in contributing to earlyschool success, Denham et al. (2012b) found that emotionally negative/aggressivebehaviour mediated relations between aspects of emotion knowledge, as well asHEC, and both concurrent and later school adjustment (see also Denham, Bassett,Brown, Way, & Steed, in press-a, for the indirect contribution of executive controlto social competence via emotion knowledge).

Figure 2. Theoretical model of interrelations among social–emotional learning skills andprediction of early school success. Note. Shading denote as overarching construct: darkblue = self-regulation, red= social awareness, violet = responsible decision making, green =social–emotional behaviour, and light blue = school success.



The Present Study

Classroom adjustment and academic readiness in kindergarten are associated withearly achievement—starting children off on positive trajectories at school entry isimportant for later academic success (Romano et al., 2010; Murray & Harrison,2011). Increasing empirical evidence examining relations among social–emotionalcompetencies cited here suggests that knowing even more about how aspects ofSEL contribute to each other, and seeing the full picture of how all contribute toclassroom adjustment and academic readiness, could add to our theoreticalunderstanding, expand our ability to assess social–emotional competencies duringpreschool, and aid in the development and evaluation of SEL programming.

Thus, we sought in this study to specify interrelations among a fuller comple-ment of social–emotional competencies and their ability to predict later classroomadjustment and academic readiness, in a modelling context. We utilized partialleast-squares (PLS) modelling to accomplish the following: (1) create reliable latentvariable (LV) aggregates for directly assessed hot and cool self-regulation, emotionknowledge, and social problem solving, as well as observed relationship skills andemotion regulation, and teacher-rated classroom adjustment and academicreadiness; and (2) conduct path analyses from these aspects of SEL to classroomand academic readiness. We evaluated paths from (1) self-regulation to emotionknowledge, social problem solving, observed relationship skills and emotionregulation, and early school success, (2) emotion knowledge to social problemsolving, observed relationship skills and emotion regulation, and early schoolsuccess, and (3) social problem solving and observed social–emotional behaviourto early school success.

METHOD

Participants and Procedure

The present report is a part of a larger study focused on developing a portableassessment tool for measuring the social and emotional aspects of early schoolsuccess. One hundred and one preschoolers in the greater Northern Virginia areaparticipated in this segment of the study when they were 3 and 4 years old, andwere evaluated by teachers during preschool and also in kindergarten; approxi-mately three-quarters were 4-year-olds at the onset of the study, and half wereboys. About 56% of the children were enrolled in area Head Start programmesat study’s onset, with the remaining enrolled at several centres belonging to asingle private child care chain. The majority of participating children wereCaucasian or African-American (44% Caucasian, 42% African-American); about8% of families self-identified as Hispanic.

Data regarding children’s social–emotional competencies were collected fromlate fall to early spring of their preschool year: trained graduate and undergradu-ate research assistants performed direct assessments of children’s self-regulation,emotion knowledge, and social problem solving, and observed their relationshipskills and emotion regulation. Teachers rated children’s classroom adjustment;kindergarten teachers also completed these questionnaires, along with academicreadiness reports for each child. Preschool teacher measures were completed atthe end of the children’s preschool year (about 3months after direct assessmentswere complete), with kindergarten teacher measures collected in the spring ofthe kindergarten year. For each participating child in their classroom, preschoolteachers were compensated $15 per child; because they completed more



questionnaires (most of which are not the focus of this report), kindergartenteachers were compensated $25 per child. Children received a sticker each timethey participated.

Social–Emotional Learning Measures

Emotion knowledge: the Affect Knowledge Test (AKT)With this measure, we assessed young children’s understanding of emotion

using puppets with detachable faces that depict happy, sad, angry, and afraidexpressions. For each section of the measure, children received two points forcorrect identification of emotion and one point for identifying the correct valencebut not the correct emotion (e.g., sad for afraid).

For the labelling portion (eight items), children were asked to identify happy,sad, angry, and afraid facial expressions by verbally naming them (expressiveknowledge) and then by non-verbally pointing to them (receptive knowledge).For the situation knowledge portion, 20 vignettes were enacted using the puppets.Each was accompanied by vocal and visual affective cues emitted by thepuppet/experimenter. For eight vignettes, the puppet depicted the same emotionmost people would feel (e.g., fear when awakening from a nightmare), as an indexof children’s stereotypical emotion knowledge. In the remaining 12 vignettes, as anindex of children’s nonstereotypical emotion knowledge, the puppet depicteddifferent emotions from what each child’s mother had reported that their childwould probably feel. Among nonstereotypical situations, six vignettes werepositive versus negative emotion (e.g., happy or sad to come to preschool), withthe remaining pitting negative against negative emotion (e.g., angry at or afraidof sibling aggression). Stereotypical situation knowledge is considered to requireless inference than nonstereotypical situation knowledge, and develops earlier(Denham & Couchoud, 1990a, 1990b); both are included here as attainmentsduring preschool. For each situational vignette, children affixed the felt face oftheir choice to report the puppet’s emotion.

The AKT has demonstrated reliability and validity (Denham et al., 2003;Denham & Couchoud, 1990a, 1990b), and is useful to document change in emotionknowledge (Domitrovich, Cortes, & Greenberg, 2007). Scores on the AKT arerelated to other indices of social–emotional competence (e.g., Miller, Gouley, Seifer,Dickstein, & Shields, 2004).

Prior to planned analyses, AKT data were checked for univariate normality.Because understanding of happiness develops earlier compared with somenegative emotions (Denham & Couchoud, 1990b), ≥88% of participants correctlyidentified this emotion’s items in expressive, receptive, and stereotypical situationscales, with attendant problematic values for kurtosis and skewness. Hence, thesehappiness items were excluded from further analyses. Negative expressive andreceptive recognition (i.e., of sadness, anger, and fear; αs = .43 and .69, respectively,for three-item scales) and stereotypical and nonstereotypical situation knowledge(i.e., for sad, angry, and fearful stereotypical and all nonstereotypical situations;αs = .76 and .84, for 6 and 12 items, respectively) aggregates were created for theemotion knowledge LV (see Denham et al., 2012d). However, because there weretoo few items in recognition scales for Cronbach’s alpha to necessarily be mean-ingful (Spiliotopoulou, 2009), the mean inter-item correlation for negativeexpressive recognition was examined as an indicator of internal consistency,because of its low alpha. According to Clark andWatson (1995), a mean inter-itemcorrelation above .14 is considered to be acceptable, but for negative expressive



recognition rinteritem(103) = .11, ns. Thus, this measure was excluded from the cre-ation of the emotion knowledge LV.

Preschool Self-Regulation Assessment (PSRA; Smith-Donald, Raver, Hayes, &Richardson, 2007)

The original PSRA consisted of 10 structured, age-appropriate tasks that assessthree aspects of preschoolers’ self-regulation: CEC, HEC, and Compliance(not used in this report because of our focus on CEC and HEC); see Table 1 formore details on the specific tasks and scoring. CEC and HEC as measured bythe PSRA have been shown to differentially contribute to variance in classroomadjustment and academic readiness across several laboratories (Brock et al.,2009; Bassett, Denham, Wyatt, & Warren-Khot, 2012; Willoughby et al., 2011).

This theory-based factor structure (CEC and HEC) of the PSRA was confirmedin our previous study (Denham, Warren-Khot, Bassett, Wyatt, & Perna, 2012c) andis the basis of LVs for this study. For CEC, Balance Beam and Pencil Tap tasks wereretained for these analyses based on Bassett et al. (2012) earlier reports of ceilingeffects with the Tower Turn Taking (αs = .88 and .93, for 3 and 16 items, for BalanceBeam and Pencil Tap, respectively); for HEC, Snack Delay and ToyWait Peek taskswere retained because of ceiling effects with the Tongue Task (αs = .84 and .90, forfour and two items, for Snack Delay and Toy Wait Peek, respectively).

Minnesota Preschool Affect Checklist—Revised/Shortened (MPAC-R/S; see Denham et al.,2012b; Herndon, Bailey, Shewark, Denham, & Bassett, 2013; see also Denham & Burton,1996; Denham, Zahn-Waxler, Cummings, & Iannotti, 1991; Sroufe, Schork, Motti, Lawroski,& LaFreniere, 1984, for earlier versions)

The MPAC-R/S is an observational measure for the assessment of children’semotional expression, regulation, and relationship skills. The MPAC-R/S includes18 items organized into scales for positive and negative emotion (e.g., ‘the childdisplays positive/negative emotion in anymanner’ (i.e., facial, vocal, or bodily)), reac-tions to frustration (e.g., ‘the child promptly verbally expresses feelings arising from aproblem situation, then moves on to the same or a new activity’), productive/unproductive involvement (e.g., ‘the child is engrossed and emotionally invested increative, productive, thematically organized, activity that has a positive emotionalfunction’), peer skills (e.g., ‘the child smoothly approaches an already ongoing activityand gets actively involved’), and prosocial behaviours (e.g., taking turns and sharing).

Each child was observed for four 5-min epochs across the data collection period ofapproximately 8weeks; observation was restricted to contexts where children are freeto interact with their peers (e.g., free play time, centre time, and recess). Each child’ssocial–emotional behaviours were captured in varying contexts, as far as possiblegiven classroom logistical constraints. Item scores equal the mean of occurrencesacross all four epochs. MPAC-R/S scales show good inter-observer reliability, with amean intraclass correlation for individual scales of .93, p< .001. Based on earlierstructural analyses (Denham et al., 2012b), items were compiled to create emotionallypositive/productive, emotionally negative/aggressive, and emotionally regulated/prosocial LVs (αs= .58, .65, and .70, for five, five, and seven items, respectively).

Both theMPAC-R andMPAC-R/S have been shown to be valid. Previous researchhas shown older preschoolers are observed to demonstrate more positive emotionexpression, emotion regulation, productive involvement in the classroom, and peerskills, and that children of non-depressed mothers were more prosocial (Denhamet al., 1991). Denhamet al. (2012b; see alsoHerndon et al., 2013) also found associationsbetween MPAC-R/S components and measures of classroom adjustment.



Table1.

Tasksof

thePresch

oolS

elf-Reg

ulationAssessm

ent(PSR

A)



Challenging Situations Task (CST; Denham, Bouril, & Belouad, 1994)Children’s choices of their own behaviours and emotions in response to three

problematic peer provocation situations were assessed using the CST, a pictorialforced choice measure. Three unambiguous hypothetical peer-oriented scenarioswere presented to the child via a picture and a short description of the transgres-sion situation. Children were then asked how they would feel about the situationgiven four emotion choices using schematic drawings and verbal labels of ‘happy’,‘sad’, ‘angry’, and ‘just okay’. Children were then asked what they would do,given four behavioural response choices (socially competent, aggressive, passive,and dysregulated/crying). Previous studies have utilized adaptations of thismeasure with preschoolers, demonstrating its validity in understanding socialcognitive processes underlying behavioural disorders (Coy, Speltz, DeKlyen, &Jones, 2001; Zahn-Waxler et al., 1994), cross-cultural comparisons (Cole & Tamang,1998), and examinations of Head Start intervention effects (Bierman, Domitrovichet al., 2008).

For the LV in this study, we chose to focus on sad and socially competentresponses, based on earlier results with the CST in which these response choicesoften related to concurrent and later school success (e.g., Denham et al. inpress-b; Denham et al., 1994). Further, we chose these responses as reflective ofSEL first because we consider that children’s acknowledging the negativity of thesituations by selecting sadness is more adaptive than either the more inflammatoryemotion of anger or, given the nature of provocation, the unrealistic emotions ofhappiness or ‘just ok’ (α= .50 across three items). We also consider ‘socially compe-tent’ behaviour responses the most adaptive of the behavioural choices (α= .39 acrossthree items, rinteritem(103) = .18, p< .05, in the acceptable range). Scores equaled thenumber of times sadness, and socially competent behaviour, respectively, was chosenacross the three scenarios.

School Success Measures

Classroom adjustment can be exemplified by attributes such as positive approachesto learning and participating positively in classroom activities. Young children’sacademic readiness can be exemplified by mastery of certain basic skills. As alreadyspecified, both are aspects of the broader construct of early school success in thenew learning environment of formal schooling. For these constructs, we chosethe following measures.

Classroom adjustment: Preschool Learning Behaviors Scale (PLBS)The PLBS is a 29-item measure that teachers complete to rate children’s

approaches to learning (Fantuzzo, Perry, & McDermott, 2004). The PLBS is reliablein three dimensions: competence motivation (11 items focusing on children’s inter-est in and approach to learning-related activities, e.g., reluctant to tackle a newactivity; αs = .88 for both preschool and kindergarten), attention/persistence (nineitems on the child’s skill in focusing and maintaining attention, e.g., tries hard, butconcentration soon fades and performance deteriorates; αs = .92 and .82 forpreschool and kindergarten, respectively), and attitude toward learning (seven itemson the child’s propensity to cooperate, accept help, and express hostility when frus-trated, e.g., does not achieve anything constructive when in a sulky mood; αs = .81and .77 for preschool and kindergarten, respectively). Multi-method, multi-sourceanalyses validate the PLBS dimensions for use with this population (Fantuzzoet al., 2004).



Early school adjustment: Teacher Rating Scale of School Adjustment (TRSSA)This measure taps several constructs reflective of young children’s behavioural

and relational adjustment to the classroom (Ladd, Kochenderfer, & Coleman,1997). Teachers provided ratings on 3-point scales for 52 items, for behaviours suchas ‘follows teacher’s directions’ (cooperative participation; eight items, αs = .90 and.93 for preschool and kindergarten, respectively), ‘works independently’ (self-directedness; nine items, Cronbach’s αs = .86 and .90), ‘likes going to school’(school liking; five items, Cronbach’s αs = .81 and .75), or ‘initiates conversationswith the teacher’ (comfort with teacher; five items, Cronbach’s αs = .76 and .62).Preschool to kindergarten stability in this sample was significant for all subscales.Subscales have demonstrated validity in socioeconomically diverse and mixedrace samples (Ladd et al., 1997).

Thus, both the PLBS and TRSSA have excellent psychometric properties andwereused to form one LV for classroom adjustment, in both preschool and kindergarten,in our analyses.

Kindergarten academic readiness: ECLS-K Academic Rating ScaleKindergarten teachers completed the Academic Rating ECLS-K (U.S. Department

of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2002–2005), which includesthe following aspects of kindergarten academic readiness: (1) Language and Literacy(nine items, e.g., ‘reads simple books independently’; α= .92); (2) General Knowledge(five items, e.g., ‘forms explanations based on observations and explorations’;α= .84), and (3) Mathematical Thinking (seven items, e.g., ‘shows an understandingof the relationship between quantities’; α= .90). Teachers compared each child totheir same-age peers on 5-point scales. Scales formed one LV (α= .92).

Planned Analyses

Partial least-squaresmodelling (Falk&Miller, 1982; Ringle,Wende, &Will, 2005)wasutilized to answer our major problem questions. In common with other modellingtechniques, a measurement (outer) model as well as a structural (inner) model isspecified. For the outer model, PLS estimates LVs based on the shared variance ofthe manifest variables, using principal components weights of the manifest vari-ables. As such, each indicator varies in how much it contributes to the LV, resultingin the best possible combination of weights for predicting the LV while accountingfor all manifest variables, a distinct advantage of the method (Tsethlikai, 2010). Thus,the variance shared by the manifest measures is taken as a single index of the LV.Next, the relations among this set of theoretically derived LVs (the inner model)can be investigatedwithout sacrificing information from the larger group ofmanifestvariables. The method specifically also offers a second important advantage of beingable to model both direct and indirect pathways (Tsethlikai, 2010).

This method, which is becoming more widely known by developmentalists (e.g.,Brody, Stoneman, & McCoy, 1994; Bronstein, Ginsburg, & Herrera, 2005; Cowan,Cohn, Cowan, & Pearson, 1996; Davies & Cummings, 1998; Denham et al., 2003;Denham, Blair et al., 2002; Isley, O’Neil, Clatfelter, & Parke, 1999; Marjoribanks,1997; Tsethlikai, 2010, 2011), also allows exploration of hypothesized relations amongconstructs without some of the restrictions of LISREL structural modelling techniques.In particular, PLS is appropriate for usewith relatively small groups of participants, al-though it does require a reasonable LV: participant ratio (e.g., 10 times the number ofmanifest variables for the LVwith the largest number ofmanifest variables, or 10 timesthe largest number of paths directed at an LV; Henseler, Ringle, & Sinkovics, 2009).



Further advantages include its lack of stringent assumptions such as thoseregarding observational independence and normality of residuals (Marjoribanks,1997), as well as error-free measurement (Tsethlikai, 2011).

Outer measurement models provide information on the psychometric reliability ofour constructs’ LVs. Inner measurement models allow for the estimation of predictivevalidity via the relations among LVs and significant, hypothesized paths; bootstrapprocedures allow for significance testing of each path. Further, both inner and outermeasurement models provide information on discriminant validity, when LV correla-tions are comparedwith the square root of the LV’s average variance extracted (AVE).

Manifest variables (indicators) were hypothesized to form LVs as noted earlier.Using Smart-PLS™ (Ringle et al., 2005) and guidelines enunciated in Henseler et al.(2009), we evaluated the outer and inner models, as follows: (1) specified themanifest variables that met criteria for inclusion as indicators of LVs across twoiterations and (2) calculated pathways in the inner model using these final LVs,to discern significant pathways. To better discern our findings’ generalizability,we added socioeconomic risk based on private child care or Head Start attendance(0 = low risk; 1 = at risk) as an exogenous variable so that its contribution would bepartialled, as well as to specify its contributions to SEL and early school success.

RESULTS

Initial Model

In our first model, all hypothesized paths were estimated (see Figure 2); as well, riskwas added to the model to estimate and partial its effects. We first examined accept-ability of the outermeasurementmodel. Regarding the outermodel, three criteria arepresent: (1) the set of manifest variables represents the same underlying construct(AVE), with a reasonable total explained variance (R2); (2) the manifest variables alsoform an internally consistent LV (composite reliability); and (3) each manifest vari-able loads sufficiently on its LV to support its retention (i.e., each manifest variablecontributes to its LVand represents the construct in a similar manner as other man-ifest variables). According toHenseler et al., composite reliabilities for all LVs formedby the hypothesized collection ofmanifest variables should be≥.60, andAVE shouldbe ≥.50. Finally, each manifest variable’s outer model loading should be ≥.70.

Findings for our first model suggested the following: (1) AVEs for all threeMPAC-R/S LVs were <.50, and (2) the composite reliability for MPAC-R/Semotionally positive/productive LVwas<.60. Manifest variable loadings<.70 werefound for the following: receptive negative emotion knowledge, PSRA balance beamand snack delay, all MPAC-R/S emotionally positive/productive indicators,MPAC-R/S manifest indicators of object aggression, unprovoked physical aggres-sion, and negative affect baseline, usingwords for emotion regulation and remainingneutral or positive while doing so, sharing, smoothly joining peer activity, comfortwith teacher in preschool and kindergarten, and school liking in preschool.

Evaluation of the Reduced Outer Model

Consequently, the model was rerun without these manifest variables. As seen inTable 2, LVs for CEC, HEC, emotion knowledge, social problem solving, emotion-ally negative/aggressive behaviour, emotionally regulated/prosocial behaviour,classroom adjustment in preschool and kindergarten, and kindergarten academicreadiness were created, based on their adequate outer loading, AVEs, and



Table 2. Outer model and final R2s for latent variables (LVs): age 3 to kindergarten classroomadjustment and academic readiness



composite reliabilities. Results from this reduced model (as well as manifestvariables removed from their respective LVs) are shown in Table 2.

Initial Evaluation of the Reduced Inner Model: Convergent and DiscriminantValidity

Given these results on the outer model, we can continue to an examination of theinner model. Table 3 shows the square roots of the AVEs and the correlationsamongst LVs. This information can yield information on both convergent anddiscriminant validity. First, for convergent validity, an LV should explain betterthe variance of its own indicator than that of other LVs. One way to determine thispoint is to compare the square root of each LV’s AVE with all correlations involv-ing that LV. If the correlation between any two LVs is less than the square root ofeither of their individual AVEs, this suggests that each has more internal(extracted) variance than variance shared between the LVs.

Second, if these criteria are met for a target LV and all the other LVs, thissuggests the discriminant validity of the target LV (Fornell & Larcker, 1981).Correlations with other LVs of less than |.7| are also frequently accepted asevidence of discriminant validity. The information in Table 3 shows that thesecriteria for both convergent and discriminant validity are met for all LVs in themodel. Finally, examination of cross-loadings indicated that each manifestvariable’s loading was far higher for its assigned LV than the other LVs; by thiscriterion as well (not tabled), these LVs showed good discriminant validity.

It is also important to examine LVs’ correlations in respect to hypothesized relationsamong them. As can be seen in Table 3, preschool measures of SEL were often relatedto other preschool measures of SEL and to classroom adjustment, as well as bothkindergarten indices of school success. For example, CEC was significantly related toHEC, and both CEC and HEC were related to preschool indices of emotion knowl-edge, social problem solving, and emotionally negative/aggressive behaviour(marginally for CEC), as well as academic readiness in kindergarten. CECwas relatedto classroom adjustment at both ages. Emotion knowledge was also related to socialproblem solving and emotionally regulated/prosocial behaviour (marginally) duringpreschool, classroom adjustment at both ages (marginally for kindergarten), and

Table 3. Inner model latent variable (LV) correlations: age 3 to kindergarten classroomadjustment and academic readiness

Scale 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9.

1. Cool executive control 1.002. Hot executive control .22* 1.003. Emotion knowledge .38*** .26** .884. Social problem solving .40*** .27** .26** .755. Emotionally negative/aggressive �.18+ �.26**�.05 �.16+ .836. Emotionally regulated/prosocial .08 �.03 .17+ �.06 �.08 .897. Classroom adjustment: preschool .20* .12 .19* .24* �.27** .20* .898. Classroom adjustment:kindergarten

.33** .14 .19* .36***�.49***.22* .42*** .88

9. Academic readiness: kindergarten .41*** .27** .30** .47***�.27** .16 .26** .54*** .9410. Risk .10 .10 �.07 �.14 .19* .13 �.02 �.19* �.23*

Note. Square roots of average variances extracted (AVEs) appear in bold on the diagonal; LV correlationsappear below the diagonal.+p< .10. *p< .05. **p< .01. ***p< .001.



academic readiness in kindergarten. Social problem solving was related to preschoolemotionally negative/aggressive behaviour (marginally), classroom adjustment atboth ages, and academic readiness in kindergarten. Preschool emotionally negative/aggressive and emotionally regulated/prosocial behaviours were at least marginallyrelated, in expected directions, to classroom adjustment at both ages, and preschoolemotionally negative/aggressive behaviour was negatively related to academicreadiness in kindergarten. Finally, both classroom adjustment indices and academicreadiness in kindergarten were interrelated. LV inter-correlations thus suggested theadvisability of continuing on to evaluate the inner structural path model.

Also, in terms of the relation of SEL and school success to risk status, children atrisk exhibited more emotionally negative/aggressive behaviour in preschool. Theywere also seen as less adjusted to the classroom and less academically ready bykindergarten teachers (but not preschool teachers).

Overview of Structural Path Model

Figure 3 depicts the final structural model, in which nonsignificant hypothesizedpaths are deleted. Path coefficients in the model can be interpreted as standardizedbeta weights, each estimated after all other paths’ effects have been controlled. Toassess whether the paths were significant, bootstrapping resampling (Efron &Gong, 1983) was performed. In this procedure, the PLS parameters of a series ofrandom subsamples of the total sample are iteratively tested, until significancecan be estimated based on their convergent findings.

Our final structural model can be summarized by noting the following signifi-cant direct effects of LVs: CEC predicted HEC, emotion knowledge, social problemsolving, lack of emotionally negative/aggressive behaviour (all in preschool), andclassroom adjustment and academic readiness in kindergarten. HEC predictedemotion knowledge, lack of emotionally negative/aggressive behaviour, andsocial problem solving during preschool, and marginally significantly predictedkindergarten academic readiness. Emotionally negative/aggressive behaviour inpreschool negatively predicted classroom adjustment in both preschool andkindergarten. Emotionally regulated/prosocial behaviour in preschool predictedclassroom adjustment at both ages as well as, marginally, kindergarten academicsuccess. Social problem solving in preschool predicted classroom adjustment atboth ages (marginally significant for preschool), as well as academic readiness inkindergarten. Classroom adjustment in preschool predicted adjustment inkindergarten, which in turn predicted that year’s academic readiness. Finally, riskstatus positively predicted both emotionally negative/aggressive behaviour andemotionally regulated/prosocial behaviour (marginally) in preschool, and negativelypredicted social problem solving in preschool and both classroom adjustment(marginally) and academic readiness in kindergarten.

The paths just described are for direct effects. Smart-PLS™ also reports totaleffects (i.e., direct + indirect effects). Change from direct to total effects can suggestimportant indirect effects (i.e., the contribution of a variable via its contribution toothers). In our model, several important increases in variables’ contributions weredemonstrated in total effects information. For each of these results, we calculatedindirect effects via the methods specified by Sattler, Völckner, Riediger, and Ringle(2010; see also Soper, 2013). Because of the exploratory nature of these analyses, weset the p-value at .10. As already noted, we expected the contribution of more foun-dational social–emotional competencies to school success to be mediated by moreapplied social–emotional competencies (or in the case of the endogenous CEC



skill, via contributions to other foundational competencies). This expectation was,in part, upheld (see Table 4): CEC also made indirect, as well as direct, contributionsto variance in several other predictors via its contribution to HEC, as follows: (1)emotion knowledge; (2) social problem solving; and (3) emotionally negative/ag-gressive behaviour. CEC also made indirect, as well as direct, contributions to aca-demic readiness via its contributions to (1) HEC, (2) social problem solving, and (3)kindergarten classroom adjustment. Finally, CEC also made a solely indirect contri-bution to kindergarten classroom adjustment, via its contribution to social problemsolving.

Along with its direct contribution, HEC contributed indirectly to kindergartenacademic readiness via its contributions to social problem solving. Also, alongwith its direct contribution, social problem solving contributed indirectly toacademic readiness via its contribution to kindergarten classroom adjustment.Finally, emotionally regulated/prosocial behaviour contributed solely indirectlyto academic readiness via its contribution to kindergarten classroom adjustment.

DISCUSSION

The present study focused on modelling relations among preschoolers’ social–emotional competencies and their contributions to teachers’ later views of class-room adjustment and academic readiness. As such, it is one of the first examina-tions of how the various aspects of preschool SEL operate together to contribute

Figure 3. Final partial least-squares inner model. Note. Path coefficients may be interpretedas standardized beta coefficients. Levels of significance determined by t-valuesfrom bootstrapping procedures and may vary according to the standard error of the pathcoefficient. +p< .10. *p< .05. **p< .01. ***p< .001. Dotted paths are marginally significant.Shading denotes overarching construct: dark blue= self-regulation, red= social awareness,violet = responsible decision making, green= social–emotional behavior, and light blue=school success.



to early school success. Prior to discussing the implications of these findings, it isimportant to consider the stability and viability of the constructs included in themeasurement model.

Outer Model of Social–Emotional Learning Constructs

The outer model gives information on whether the manifest indicators formadequate LVs. Our results indicated that constructs of self-regulation (CEC andHEC), emotion knowledge, social problem solving, and social–emotional behav-iour (specifically, emotionally negative/aggressive and emotionally regulated/prosocial), as well as teacher-rated early school success, hung together well andshowed good discriminant validity. That is, outer model manifest loadings,lack of problematic cross-loadings, and composite reliabilities showed that theLVs were appropriately sturdy. Comparison of LV correlations with AVE andmagnitude of cross-LV correlations both supported discriminant validity. As such,these results corroborate the notion that social–emotional competencies, althoughobviously interrelated, can be seen as separate elements in a child’s skill set.

The PLS process and criteria for adequate outer models often necessitate omis-sion of originally chosen indicators. One unexpected drop from the initial modelwas the entire MPAC-R/S emotionally positive/productive involvement LV. Inearlier research, prevalence of preschoolers’ positive emotions has generally beenregarded as adaptive (Denham et al., 2003). Emotionally positive preschoolershave demonstrated better adjustment in the preschool classroom (Shin et al.,2011) and even academic readiness (Denham, Bassett, Sirotkin, & Zinsser, 2013a),and older children’s joy in the classroom is related to their anticipation of task

Table 4. Indirect mediational pathways among social–emotional competencies, classroomadjustment, and academic readiness

Predictor Mediator Criteria Indirect effect

CEC (HEC) Emotion knowledge β = .042, t= 1.69,p< .10

CEC (HEC) Social problem solving β = .046, t= 1.81,p< .10

CEC (HEC) Emotionally negative/aggressive

β = .048, t= 1.63,p< .10

CEC (HEC) Kindergarten academicreadiness

β = .044, t= 1.74,p< .10

CEC (Social problem solving) Kindergarten academicreadiness

β = .095, t= 2.07,p< .05

CEC (Kindergarten classroomadjustment)

Kindergarten academicreadiness

β = .068, t= 1.86,p< .10

CEC (Social problem solving) Kindergarten classroomadjustment

β = .078 t=1.84,p< .10

HEC (Social problem solving) Kindergarten academicreadiness

β = .064, t= 2.00,p< .05

Social problem solving (Kindergarten classroomadjustment)


β = .068, t= 1.80,p< .10

Emotionally regulated/prosocial

(Kindergarten classroomadjustment)


β = .068, t= 1.80,p< .10

Note. CEC, cool executive control; HEC, hot executive control.



success and task engagement (Pekrun, Elliot, & Maier, 2009). Similarly, productiveplay activity (Coolahan, Fantuzzo, Mendez, & McDermott, 2000)—the creative,cooperative, and helpful behaviours that facilitate successful play interactions—has been related to aspects of classroom adjustment, such as higher levels ofcompetence motivation, attention, persistence, and positive attitude toward learn-ing. On the other hand, overly exuberant positive emotions and play can be predic-tive of more negative outcomes (Rydell, Berlin, & Bohlin, 2003). Thus, although itremains to be seen, perhaps positive affect and intense involvement in appropriateplay activities were not optimally observed using the MPAC-R/S; alternatively, thiscomponent of the MPAC-R/S may predict other aspects of early school success,such as positive engagement, interaction, and relationships with adults.

OtherMPAC indicators dropped because of low loadings that included object andunprovoked aggression, sharing, smoothly joins ongoing activity, negative affectbaseline, and emotion regulation using words while maintaining neutral of positiveaffect. Several of these indicators (e.g., object aggression) were extremely low infrequency; others, although somewhat more frequent, did not load as hypothesizedand anticipated based on earlier research (e.g., emotion regulation and smoothlyjoining peer activity; cf. Denham et al., 2012b). Thus, it seems that for this group ofomitted indicators, methodological issues precluded their inclusion in LVs. Consid-ering indicators separately instead of as part of already-summed aggregate showedtheir relative weakness, and future research should tease apart these issues.

At the same time, the scale ‘Comfort with Teacher’ did not loadwell on classroomadjustment at each age; this omission seems logical, because it appearsmore affectivethan the other TRSSA scales (except for ‘School Liking’, which did not load onpreschool classroom adjustment). The dropping of one indicator each for CECand HEC did reduce to one-indicator LVs; although not an ideal situation, theremaining indicators represent tasks that are seminal in the field of self-regulation(e.g., Willoughby et al., 2011).

In summary, the SEL constructs enumerated in the outer model were largely(except for emotionally positive/involved behaviour) upheld, although notalways with all indicators hypothesized and measured. Although further studyis warranted on several of the omitted indicators (apart from emotionallypositive/involved behaviour, using words in emotionally frustrating situationsand skills in joining ongoing peer activity call for follow-up research, given theirtheoretical importance), the remaining indicators formed useful LVs. Thus, the issueof stability of constructs for use in research and for applied purposes is an importantone, and although our outer model is not ‘etched in stone’, subsequent inner modelfindings suggest that our LVs could be used in subsequent research, as well asmeriting further study and, potentially, applied usage. Nonetheless, given that ourwork is among the first to examine these social–emotional competencies in onemodel, there is a need for replication and testing the model longitudinally, withlarger sample sizes to minimize any possible capitalization on change. Such futureresearch would further understanding of both the SEL constructs and their stability,and our early school success model, to which we now turn.

Inner Model

Given an adequate outer model, our findings regarding the inner model constitutedanother contribution of thiswork; significant paths among the LVs suggested impor-tant relations amongst the variables. Many, albeit not all, of our hypothesized path-ways were upheld, and other indirect relations were discovered. Specifically, CEC



did indeed contribute to HEC, as also seen by Brock et al. (2009); Willoughby et al.(2011), and Denham et al. (2012c). Moreover, aspects of self-regulation were related toboth emotion knowledge and social problem solving; inhibiting prepotent responsesand setting aside one’s own needs facilitates exploration of others’ feelings and formu-lation of mutually satisfactory solutions to social problems (Carlson & Wang, 2007;Denham et al., in press-b; Schultz et al., 2001). It also makes sense that HEC is relatedto emotionally negative/aggressive behaviour (Ramani et al., 2010); inability to waitand tolerate emotionally taxing experiences may elicit such feelings and behavioursin young children. In sum, the direct and indirect relations of both CEC and HEC toaspects of kindergarten academic readiness also attest to their importance; although,as already noted, others have examined executive control’s direct relation with schooladjustment and academic readiness, the pathways by which it indirectly contributesto these outcomes via other aspects of SEL have not been plumbed.

Specifically regarding indirect effects, CEC appeared foundational via indirectcontributions to aspects of kindergarten academic readiness via bothHEC and socialproblem solving; finally, its contribution to HEC also led to indirect contributions topreschool emotion knowledge, social problem solving, and emotionally negative/aggressive behaviour. HEC and social problem solving, too, evidenced indirecteffects on kindergarten academic readiness. In sum, identification of such indirecteffects is a strength of this model. Further, as in Denham et al. (2003, 2012d), emotionknowledge predicted emotionally regulated/prosocial behaviour (see also Denhamet al., in press-a; Schultz et al., 2010). In contrast, emotion knowledge did not predictearly school success; however, its contribution to emotionally regulated/prosocialbehaviour is one that has been theoretically suggested for decades (e.g., Denham,1986). It is theoretically useful to have more evidence of this relation with emotion-ally regulated/prosocial behaviour, which in turn did directly predict all aspects ofearly school success both directly and indirectly. Others (e.g., Welsh et al., 2010) havefound only direct relations. These relations are an example of the practical signifi-cance of training preschoolers in emotion knowledge (e.g., Domitrovich et al.,2007). In contrast to the positive contribution of emotionally regulated/prosocial be-haviour, emotionally negative/aggressive behaviour negatively predicted school ad-justment at both ages, consistent with findings by, for example, Ladd, Birch, andBuhs (1999). For a myriad of reasons, being angry and aggressive is not conduciveto a positive transition to formal schooling (Shields et al., 2001).

Social problem solving response choices of sad feelings and socially competence be-haviours following peer provocation were related to school adjustment at both agesand academic readiness in kindergarten. These findings echo those of Bascoe et al.(2009) andBierman,Domitrovich et al. (2008), providing further support for the impor-tance of being able to think and feel constructively about social difficulties in earlyschool success.

Preschool classroom adjustment significantly predicted the same construct ofearly school success in kindergarten but not academic readiness. Preschool pro-vides young children with opportunities to adjust classroom settings where a childneeds to learn how to follow teachers’ instructions and classroom routines, andconcentrate on and participate in new activities, all while getting along with peers.The social demands of preschool classrooms and kindergarten classrooms arefairly similar; thus, children who are well adjusted in the preschool classroommay thus have an advantage in similarly adjusting to more formal school settings(i.e., kindergarten). Entrance into kindergarten, however, represents a significantchange in the academic expectations placed on children, and therefore, it is not sur-prising that classroom adjustment in preschool did not predict academic readiness,but kindergarten adjustment did. Furthermore, it is important to consider,



methodologically, that a relation may be more expected between kindergartenclassroom adjustment and academic readiness because the same teacher com-pleted these measurements.

Although not a focus of this study, socioeconomic risk was included in themodel in order to examine contributions of SEL constructs with such riskaccounted for, and its inclusion thus strengthened our findings. Nonetheless, someof risk’s direct effects were of interest; as expected, children at socioeconomic risk,perhaps due to more chaotic and unpredictable environments, showed lesspositive patterns of social problem solving. As well, they were observed to bemore emotionally negative/aggressive. Finally, children at risk were not seen bytheir Head Start teachers as less adjusted to school, but by kindergarten, teachersdid see them as less academically prepared. Such patterns are supported byprevious research examining emotion regulation across differing income, risk,and sociocultural contexts (Raver, 2002, 2004).

In sum, one distinct strength of this modelling approach was that it led us touncover how foundational and more applied social–emotional competencies bothdirectly and indirectly contribute to academic readiness. In contrast to Duncanet al. (2007), we find that, even when earlier adjustment to a school environmentand risk status are accounted for, social–emotional competencies have importantdirect, and heretofore unspecified indirect effects, on kindergarten school adjust-ment and academic readiness. Furthermore, the model assessed contributions ofeach social–emotional competencies with the others partialled out. In short, SELcompetencies matter, both individually and together, for early school success.

Implications and Conclusions

These variable-centred analyses complement person-centred analyses of data from4-year-olds in the larger study. These analyses utilized data from the PSRA, CST,MPAC, and AKT in very similar conceptualizations to that enunciated here. In clus-ter analyses, three profiles for ‘types’ of children were isolated: SEL Competent-Social/Expressive, SELCompetent-Restrained, and SELRisk. For example, difficultyin understanding and identifying emotions, an angry-aggressive pattern of socialproblem solving, and emotionally negative/aggressive behaviour were threefeatures characterizing children in the SEL Risk group, and this group also showeddeficiencies in classroom adjustment in both preschool and kindergarten (Denhamet al., 2012a); the two ‘competent’ profile groups were evaluated relatively similarlyby preschool and kindergarten teachers, suggestive of equifinality.

Considering these two sets of analyses together can be instructive. We need toknow what ‘types’ of children differ on social–emotional competencies that leadto different patterns of early school success, so that we recognize them in the class-room, but also what specific aspects of differences (i.e., what specific competen-cies) lead to early school success (Bergman & Magnusson, 1997), so that we maytarget programming and instruction where they are needed. Thus, we know fromDenham et al. (2012a) that some children can be characterized by an overall SELRisk profile but that there are two ways to be SEL Competent—more sociallyactive and emotionally expressive, versus more restrained—and that the childrenin the SEL Risk group are at a disadvantage in early school success. We also knowvia the present study’s variable-centred analyses that specific social–emotionalcompetencies may perhaps be most directly and indirectly important to classroomadjustment and academic readiness—CEC, HEC, emotionally negative/aggressive and emotionally regulated/prosocial behaviour, and adaptive social



problem solving, with a boost to emotionally regulated/prosocial behaviour fromemotion knowledge.

These complementary views add up to useful information both from researchand applied viewpoints. In terms of applied viewpoints, these person-centredand variable-centred results, when viewed together, bolster our assertion thatour direct assessments and observational system could be used to pinpointindividual children’s strengths, weaknesses, and progress, as well as evaluatingprogramme effectiveness. All of the competencies represented by the LVs in ourvariable-centred analyses appear worthy of tracking longitudinally and promo-tion, either because they are directly or indirectly related to, or supportive of, earlyschool success. Person-centred analyses also suggest that these competencies sortinto profiles typifying individual children and groups of children who couldbenefit from careful assessment.

Thus, knowing the level of children’s CEC, HEC, emotion knowledge, socialproblem solving, and social–emotional behaviours could assist in planningsupportive early childhood instruction and teacher interaction. In fact, based onthese and our other results, our research team is conducting ongoing work com-puterizing our emotion knowledge, social problem solving, and social–emotionalbehaviour measures for use by educators in the early childhood classroom. Weenvision teachers, social workers, and/or mental health consultant using suchsimplified, but developmentally grounded, assessments as a battery to inform theirpractice. The methods under development require little training, are very simple toperform, and will yield reports on a child’s or classroom’s progress. Such a batterycould help early childhood personnel to know and reflect upon the aspects of SELthat support early school success. It is hoped that such knowledge can ultimatelytranslate into teacher action—helping children become more knowledgeable aboutemotions, self-regulated, and behaviourally skilled in social–emotional areas, inorder to understand individuals’ strengths and weaknesses, promote instruction,and evaluate programming.

Adoption of such a battery in preschool classrooms would represent a signifi-cant shift from the way that SEL is currently typically assessed. For example,common assessments used in Head Start programmes to evaluate children’s SELinclude the Ages and Stages Questionnaire (ASQ-SE; Squires, Bricker, & Twombly,2002) and the Teaching Strategies GOLD online assessment system (Lambert, Kim,Taylor, & McGee, 2010). Both the ASQ and the GOLD rely heavily, if not exclu-sively, on teacher reports of observed child behaviour. Although many of the itemsteachers rate children on using the ASQ (e.g., ‘When upset, can your child calmdown within 15minutes?’) or GOLD (e.g., ‘Manages feelings’) overlap with theconstructs enumerated in our model earlier, the lack of direct assessments raisesconcerns of single-reporter bias. Historically, the use of direct assessments inapplied settings has been time prohibitive (both for administration and training onassessment procedures); however, computer-based assessment techniques mayameliorate such concerns and enable practitioners to make instructional decisionsbased on valid and reliable assessments of children’s SEL.

It also could be useful to integrate these findings within the important compo-nents of preventive, competence-based programming. Programmes that focus onemotions and their effective utilization (in terms of expressiveness, knowledge,and regulation), as well as social problem solving, have already been createdand evaluated. For example, Izard’s Emotion-Based Programme, the PreschoolPATHS programme, and Dinosaur School have variously shown positive effectson children’s emotional expressiveness, emotion knowledge, and emotionregulation, as well as social problem solving (Domitrovich et al.; Izard et al.,



2008; Webster-Stratton, Reid, & Stoolmiller, 2008). Programmes specificallydesigned to promote self-regulation have also begun to be evaluated; althoughone key programme, Tools of the Mind, has not shown convincing effects on eitherexecutive function or classroom adjustment and academic readiness in recentrandomized trials (Wilson & Farran, 2012), others that take different approaches(e.g., practicing specific aspects of behavioural self-regulation via adapted circletime games, Tominey & McClelland, 2011, or attending to both children’s andteachers’ social–emotional needs, Raver et al., 2011) have shown effects on bothself-regulation and academic readiness. Such programmes on emotion and self-regulation could benefit from targeted assessment such as that of our SEL battery

In short, we have made progress in showing that (1) certain social–emotionalcompetencies work well as reliable, discriminable constructs and may ultimatelybe the basis of assessment tools to form useful battery useful in applied settingsand that (b) they predict, over a short period and then to kindergarten, teachers’views of children’s positive school-related attitudes, persistence, and cooperation.These preliminary findings illustrated complex relations between preschoolers’SEL and their early school success, and emphasized SEL’s importance. Moreover,applied uses of our findings could be very important, pending future fine-tuningof the classroom assessment battery and confirmatory work on constructs used.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The present study was funded by NICHD grant #R01HD51514. We are grateful tothe many children, families, and teachers who participated in this study, and thedirectors of the facilities who so cooperatively worked with us. We also thankAfra Ahmad, Charlotte Anderson, Chavaughn Brown, Kelly Graling, Chazity Johnson,Bess Lam, Melissa Mincic, Carol Morris, So RiMun, Alyssa Perna, Yana Segal Sirotkin,Sara Kalb Thayer, Erin Way, and Jessy Zadrazil Newman for their unstintingassistance in study organization and data collection.

REFERENCES

Agostin, T. M., & Bain, S. K. (1997). Predicting early school success with developmental andsocial skills screeners. Psychology in the Schools, 34, 219–228. DOI: 10.1002/(SICI)1520-6807(199707)34:3<219::AID-PITS4>3.0.CO;2-J

Bascoe, S. M., Davies, P. T., Sturge-Apple, M. L., & Cummings, E. M. (2009). Children’srepresentations of family relationships, peer information processing, and school adjustment.Developmental Psychology, 45, 1740–1751. DOI: 10.1037/a0016688

Bassett, H. H., Denham, S. A., Wyatt, T., & Warren-Khot, H. K. (2012). Refining the Pre-school Self-Regulation Assessment (PSRA) for use in preschool classrooms. Infant andChild Development, 21, 596–616.

Bergman, L. R., & Magnusson, D. (1997). A person-oriented approach in research ondevelopmental psychopathology. Development and Psychopathology, 9, 291–319. DOI:10.1017/S095457949700206X.

Bierman, K. L., Domitrovich, C. E., Nix, R. L., Gest, S. D., Welsh, J. A., … Gill, S. (2008).Promoting academic and social–emotional school readiness: The Head Start REDI program.Child Development, 79, 1802–1817. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-8624.2008.01227.x

Bierman, K. L., Nix, R. L., Greenberg, M. T., Blair, C., & Domitrovich, C. E. (2008). Executivefunctions and school readiness intervention: Impact, moderation, and mediation in theHead Start REDI program. Development and Psychopathology, 20, 821–843. DOI: 10.1017/S0954579408000394



Brock, L. L., Rimm-Kaufman, S. E., Nathanson, L., & Grimm, K. J. (2009). The contributionsof ‘hot’ and ‘cool’ executive function to children’s academic achievement, learning-relatedbehaviors, and engagement in kindergarten. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 24,337–349. DOI: 10.1016/j.ecresq.2009.06.001

Brody, G. H., Stoneman, Z., & McCoy, J. K. (1994). Forecasting sibling relationships in earlyadolescence from child temperaments and family processes in middle childhood. ChildDevelopment, 65, 771–784. DOI: 10.2307/1131417

Bronstein, P., Ginsburg, G. S., & Herrera, I. S. (2005). Parental predictors of motivationalorientation in early adolescence: A longitudinal study. Journal of Youth and Adolescence,34, 559–575. DOI: 10.1007/s10964-005-8946-0

Buhs, E. S., & Ladd, G. W. (2001). Peer rejection as antecedent of young children’s schooladjustment: An examination of mediating processes. Developmental Psychology, 37, 550–560.DOI: 10.1037/0012-1649.37.4.550

Buscemi, L., Bennett, T., Thomas, D., & Deluca, D. A. (1996). Head Start: Challenges andtraining needs. Journal of Early Intervention, 20, 1–13. DOI: 10.1177/105381519602000101

Caprara, G. V., Barbaranelli, C., Pastorelli, C., Bandura, A., & Zimbardo, P. G. (2000). Prosocialfoundations of children’s academic achievement. Psychological Science, 11, 302–306. DOI:10.1111/1467-9280.00260

Carlson, S. M., & Wang, T. (2007). Inhibitory control and emotion regulation in preschoolchildren. Cognitive Development, 22, 489–510. DOI: 10.1016/j.cogdev.2007.08.002

Clark, L. A., & Watson, D. (1995). Constructing validity: Basic issues in objective scaledevelopment. Psychological Assessment, 7, 309–319. DOI: 10.1037/1040-3590.7.3.309

Cole, P. M., & Tamang, B. L. (1998). Nepali children’s ideas about emotional displays in hypo-thetical challenges. Developmental Psychology, 34, 640–646. DOI: 10.1037/0012-1649.34.4.640

Collaborative for Academic, Social and Emotional Learning. (2012). SEL Act 2012 press release.http://casel.org/publications/academic-social-and-emotional-learning-act-of-2011-summary.Retrieved August 31, 2012.

Coolahan, K., Fantuzzo, J., Mendez, J., & McDermott, P. (2000). Preschool peer interactionsand readiness to learn: Relationships between classroom peer play and learning behav-iors and conduct. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92, 458–465. DOI: 10.1037/0022-0663.92.3.458

Cowan, P. A., Cohn, D. A., Cowan, C. P., & Pearson, J. L. (1996). Parents’ attachment histo-ries and children’s externalizing and internalizing behaviors: Exploring family systemsmodels of linkage. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 64, 53–63. DOI: 10.1037/0022-006X.64.1.53

Coy, K., Speltz, M. L., DeKlyen, M., & Jones, K. (2001). Social cognitive processes in pre-school boys with and without oppositional defiant disorder. Journal of Abnormal Child Psy-chology, 29, 107–119.

Davies, P. T., & Cummings, E. M. (1998) Exploring children’s emotional security as a medi-ator of the link between marital relations and child adjustment. Child Development, 69,124–139.DOI: 10.2307/1132075

Denham, S. A. (1986). Social cognition, prosocial behavior, and emotion in preschoolers:Contextual validation. Child Development, 57, 194–201. DOI: 10.2307/1130651

Denham, S. A. (2006). Social–emotional competence as support for school readiness: What isit and how do we assess it? Early Education and Development, 17, 57–89.DOI: 10.1207/s15566935eed1701_4

Denham, S. A., & Couchoud, E. A. (1990a). Young preschoolers’ ability to identify emotionsin equivocal situations. Child Study Journal, 20, 193–202.

Denham, S. A., & Couchoud, E. A. (1990b). Young preschoolers’ understanding of emotions.Child Study Journal, 20, 171–192.

Denham, S. A., & Burton, R. (1996). A social–emotional intervention for at-risk 4-year-olds.Journal of School Psychology, 34, 225–245. DOI: 10.1016/0022-4405(96)00013-1

Denham, S. A., Bassett, H. H., Brown, C. A., Way, E., & Steed, J. (in press-a). “I know howyou feel”: Preschoolers’ emotion knowledge contributes to early school success. Journalof Early Childhood Research. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1476718X13497354

Denham, S. A. Bassett, H. H., Mincic, M. M., Kalb, S. C., Way, E., Wyatt, T., & Segal, Y.(2012a). Social–emotional learning profiles of preschoolers’ early school success: A



person-centered approach. Learning and Individual Differences, 22, 178–189. DOI: 10.1016/j.lindif.2011.05.001

Denham, S. A., Bassett, H. H., Sirotkin, Y., & Zinsser, K. (2013a). Head Startpreschoolers’ emotional positivity and emotion regulation predict their social–emotionbehavior, classroom adjustment, and early school success. National Head Start AssociationDialog, 16(2).

Denham, S. A., Bassett, H. H., Thayer, S. K., Mincic, M., Sirotkin, Y. S., & Zinsser, K. (2012b).Observing preschoolers’ social–emotional behavior: Structure, foundations, and predic-tion of early school success. Journal of Genetic Psychology, 173, 246–278.

Denham, S. A., Bassett, H. H., Way, E., Kalb, S. C., Warren-Khot, H. K., & Zinsser, K. (in press-b).“How would you feel? What would you do?” Development and underpinnings ofpreschoolers’ social information processing. Journal of Research in Childhood Education.

Denham, S. A., Bassett, H. H., Way, E., Mincic, M., Zinsser, K., & Graling, K. (2012d). Pre-schoolers’ emotion knowledge: Self-regulatory foundations, and predictions of earlyschool success. Cognition and Emotion, 26, 667–679. DOI: 10.1080/02699931.2011.602049

Denham, S. A., Blair, K. A., DeMulder, E., Levitas, J., Sawyer, K., Auerbach-Major, S., &Queenan, P. (2003). Preschool emotional competence: Pathway to social competence.Child Development, 74, 238–256. DOI: 10.1111/1467-8624.00533

Denham, S. A., Bouril, B., & Belouad, F. (1994). Preschoolers’ understanding of challengingpeer situations. Child Study Journal, 24, 1–21.

Denham, S. A., & Brown, C. A., & Domitrovich, C. E. (2010). “Plays nice with others”:Social–emotional learning and academic success. Early Education and Development, 21,652–680. DOI: 10.1080/10409289.2010.497450

Denham, S. A., Caverly, S., Schmidt, M., Blair, K., DeMulder, E., Caal, S.…Mason, T. (2002).Preschool understanding of emotions: Contributions to classroom anger and aggression.Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 43, 901–916. DOI: 10.1111/1469-7610.00139

Denham, S. A., Ji, P., &Hamre, B. (2010). Compendium of social–emotional learning and associatedassessment measures. Chicago, IL: Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning.

Denham, S. A., Kalb, S. C., Way, E., Warren-Khot, H. K., Rhoades, B. L., & Bassett, H. H.(2013b). Emotion-related and social–cognitive problem solving in preschoolers: Indicatorof early school readiness? Early Childhood Development and Care, 183, 667–688. DOI:10.1080/03004430.2012.682728

Denham, S. A., Warren-Khot, H. K., Bassett, H. H., Wyatt, T., & Perna, A. (2012c). Factorstructure of self-regulation in preschoolers: Testing models of a field-based assessmentfor predicting early school readiness. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 111,386–404. DOI: 10.1016/j.jecp.2011.10.002

Denham, S. A., Way, E., Kalb, S. C., Warren-Khot, H. K., & Bassett, H. H. (2013c).Preschoolers’ social information processing and school readiness: The ChallengingSituations Task. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 31, 180–197. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-835X.2012.02085.x

Denham, S. A., Wyatt, T. M., Bassett, H. H., Echeverria, D., & Knox, S. S. (2009). Assessingsocial–emotional development in children from a longitudinal perspective. Journal ofEpidemiology and Community Health, 63, i37–i52. DOI: 10.1136/jech.2007.070797

Denham, S. A., Zahn-Waxler, C., Cummings, E. M., & Iannotti, R. J. (1991). Social compe-tence in young children’s peer relations: Patterns of development and change. ChildPsychiatry and Human Development, 22, 29–44. DOI: 10.1007/BF00706057

Domitrovich, C., Cortes, R., & Greenberg, M. (2007). Improving young children’s social andemotional competence: A randomized trial of the preschool “PATHS” curriculum. Journalof Primary Prevention, 28(2), 67–91. DOI: 10.1007/s10935-007-0081-0

Duncan, G. J., Dowsett, C. J., Claessens, A., Magnuson, K., Huston, A. C., Klebanov, P., …Japel, C. (2007). School readiness and later achievement. Developmental Psychology, 43,1428–1446. DOI: 10.1037/0012-1649.43.6.1428

Efron, B., & Gong, G. (1983). A leisurely look at the bootstrap, the jackknife, and cross-validation. The American Statistician, 37, 36–48. DOI: 10.1080/00031305.1983.10483087

Eisenberg, N., Sadovsky, A., & Spinrad, T. L. (2005). Associations of emotion-related regula-tion with language skills, emotion knowledge, and academic outcomes. New Directions forChild & Adolescent Development, 2005(109), 103–118.



Elias, M. J., & Haynes, N. M. (2008). Social competence, social support, and academicachievement in minority, low-income, urban elementary school children. SchoolPsychology Quarterly, 23, 474–495. DOI: 10.1037/1045-3830.23.4.474

Falk, R. F., &Miller, N. B. (1982). A primer for soft modeling. Akron: The University of Akron Press.Fantuzzo, J., Perry, M. A., & McDermott, P. (2004). Preschool approaches to learning and

their relationship to other relevant classroom competencies for low-income children.School Psychology Quarterly, 19, 212–230. DOI: 10.1521/scpq.19.3.212.40276

Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models withunobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18, 39–50.

Garner, P. W., & Lemerise, E. A. (2007). The roles of behavior adjustment and conceptions ofpeers and emotions in preschool children’s peer victimization. Development and Psychopa-thology, 19, 57–71. DOI: 10.1017/S0954579407070046

Garner, P. W., &Waajid, B. (2008). The associations of emotion knowledge and teacher–childrelationships to preschool children’s school-related developmental competence. Journal ofApplied Developmental Psychology, 29, 89–100. DOI: 10.1016/j.appdev.2007.12.001

Graziano, P. A., Reavis, R. D., Keane, S. P., & Calkins, S. D. (2007). The role of emotion reg-ulation in children’s early academic success. Journal of School Psychology, 45, 3–19. DOI:10.1016/j.jsp.2006.09.002

Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., & Sinkovics, R. R. (2009). The use of partial least squares pathmodeling in international marketing. In R. R. Sinkovics, & P. N. Ghauri (eds.), Advancesin International Marketing, 20, 277–319. DOI: 10.1108/S1474-7979(2009)0000020014

Herndon, K. J., Bailey, C. S., Shewark, E., Denham, S. A., & Bassett, H. H. (2013). Pre-schoolers’ emotion expression and regulation: Relations with school adjustment. Journalof Genetic Psychology, 174, 642–663.

Howes, C. (1987). Social competency with peers: Contributions from child care. EarlyChildhood Research Quarterly, 2, 155–168.

Isley, S. L., O’Neil, R., Clatfelter, D., & Parke, R. D. (1999). Parent and child expressed affectand children’s social competence: Modeling direct and indirect pathways. DevelopmentalPsychology, 35, 547–560.

Izard, C., Fine, S., Schultz, D., Mostow, A., Ackerman, B., & Youngstrom, E. (2001). Emotionknowledge as a predictor of social behavior and academic competence in children at risk.Psychological Science, 12, 18–23. DOI: 10.1111/1467-9280.00304

Izard, C. E., King, K. A., Trentacosta, C. J., Laurenceau, J. P., Morgan, J. K., Krauthamer-Ewing, E. S., & Finlon, K. J. (2008). Accelerating the development of emotion competencein Head Start children. Development and Psychopathology, 20, 369–397. DOI: 10.1017/S0954579408000175

Jennings, J. L., & DiPrete, T. A. (2010) Teacher effects on social and behavioral skills in earlyelementary school. Sociology of Education, 83, 135–159. DOI: 10.1177/0038040710368011

Ladd, G. W., Birch, S. H., & Buhs, E. S. (1999). Children’s social and scholastic lives in kin-dergarten: Related spheres of influence? Child Development, 70, 1373–1400. DOI: 10.1111/1467-8624.00101

Ladd, G. W., Kochenderfer, B. J., & Coleman, C. C. (1997). Classroom peer acceptance,friendship, and victimization: Distinct relational systems that contribute uniquely to chil-dren’s school adjustment? Child Development, 68, 1181–1197.

Lambert, R. G., Kim, D. H., Taylor, H., & McGee, J. R. (2010). Technical manual for theTeaching Strategies GOLD™ assessment system. Charlotte, NC: Center for EducationalMeasurement and Evaluation.

Leerkes, E. M., Paradise, M., O’Brien, M., Calkins, S. D., & Lange, G. (2008). Emotion andcognition processes in preschool children. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 54, 102–124. DOI:10.1353/mpq.2008.0009

Liew, J., McTigue, E. M., Barrois, L., & Hughes, J. N. (2008). Adaptive and effortful controland academic self-efficacy beliefs on achievement: A longitudinal study of 1st through3rd graders. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 23, 515–526. DOI: 10.1016/j.ecresq.2008.07.003

Marjoribanks, K. (1997). Family background, social and academic capital, and adolescents’aspirations: A mediational analysis. Social Psychology of Education, 2(2), 177–197. DOI:10.1023/A:1009602307141



McClelland, M. M., Cameron, C. E., Connor, C. M., Farris, C. L., Jewkes, A. M., & Morrison,F. J. (2007). Links between behavioral regulation and preschoolers’ literacy, vocabulary,and math skills. Developmental Psychology, 43, 947–959. DOI: 10.1037/0012-1649.43.4.947

Miller, A. L., Gouley, K. K., Seifer, R., Dickstein, S., & Shields, A. (2004). Emotions and be-haviors in the head start classroom: Associations among observed dysregulation, socialcompetence, and preschool adjustment. Early Education and Development, 15, 147–165.DOI: 10.1207/s15566935eed1502_2

Miller, A. L., Seifer, R., Stroud, L., Sheinkopf, S. J., & Dickstein, S. (2006). Biobehavioralindices of emotion regulation relate to school attitudes, motivation, and behaviorproblems in a low-income preschool sample. Annals of the New York Academy of Science,1094, 325–329. DOI: 10.1196/annals.1376.043

Murray, E., & Harrison, L. J. (2011). The influence of being ready to learn on children’s earlyschool literacy and numeracy achievement. Educational Psychology, 31, 529–545. DOI:10.1080/01443410.2011.573771

Normandeau, S., & Guay, F. (1998). Preschool behavior and first-grade school achievement:The mediational role of cognitive self-control. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90,111–121. DOI: 10.1037/0022-0663.90.1.111

Parker, J. G., & Gottman, J. M. (1989). Social and emotional development in a relational con-text: Friendship interaction from early childhood to adolescence. In T. J. Berndt, & G. W.Ladd (Eds.), Peer relationships in child development (pp. 95–131). New York, NY: JohnWiley and Sons.

Payton, J. W., Wardlaw, D. M., Graczyk, P. A., Bloodworth, M. R., Tompsett, C. J., &Weissberg, R. P. (2000). Social and emotional learning: A framework for promotingmental health and reducing risk behaviors in children and youth. Journal of School Health,70(5), 179–185.

Pekrun, R., Elliot, A. J., & Maier, M. A. (2009). Achievement goals and achievement emo-tions: Testing a model of their joint relations with academic performance. Journal of Edu-cational Psychology, 101, 115–135. DOI: 10.1037/a0013383

Ponitz, C. C., McClelland, M. M., Matthews, J. S., & Morrison, F. J. (2009). A structured ob-servation of behavioral self-regulation and its contribution to kindergarten outcomes. De-velopmental Psychology, 45, 605–619. DOI: 10.1037/a0015365

Ramani, G. B., Brownell, C. A., Campbell, S. B. (2010). Positive and negative peer interactionin 3- and 4-year-olds in relation to regulation and dysregulation. Journal of Genetic Psychol-ogy, 171, 2010, 218–250. DOI: 10.1080/00221320903300353

Raver, C. C. (2002). Emotions matter: Making the case for the role of young children’s emo-tional development for early school readiness. Social Policy Report, 16, 3–18. Ann Arbor,MI: Society for Research in Child Development.

Raver, C. C. (2004). Placing emotional self-regulation in sociocultural and socioeconomiccontexts. Child Development, 75, 346–353. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-8624.2004.00676.x

Raver, C. C., Jones, S. M., Li-Grining, C., Zhai, F., Bub, K., & Pressler, E. (2011). CRSP’s im-pact on low-income preschoolers’ preacademic skills: Self-regulation as a mediatingmechanism. Child Development, 82, 362–378. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-8624.2010.01561.x

Rimm-Kaufman, S. E., Pianta, R. C., & Cox, M. J. (2000). Teachers’ judgments of problems inthe transition to kindergarten. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 15, 147–166.DOI:10.1016/S0885-2006(00)00049-1

Ringle, C. M., Wende, S., & Will, A. (2005). SmartPLS release: 2.0 (beta). http://www.smartpls.de. University of Hamburg: Hamburg, Germany.

Romano, E., Babchishin, L., Pagani, L. S., & Kohen, D. (2010). School readiness and laterachievement: Replication and extension using a nationwide Canadian survey. Develop-mental Psychology, 46, 995–1007. DOI: 10.1037/a0018880

Rose-Krasnor, L. (1997). The nature of social competence: A theoretical review. Social Devel-opment,6, 111–135.

Rydell, A.-M., Berlin, L., & Bohlin, G. (2003). Emotionality, emotion regulation, and adapta-tion among 5- to 8-year-old children. Emotion 3, 30–47. DOI: 10.1037/1528-3542.3.1.30

Sattler, H., Völckner, F., Riediger, C., & Ringle, C. M. (2010). The impact of brand extensionsuccess drivers on brand extension price premiums. International Journal of Research inMarketing, 27(4), 319–328. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijresmar.2010.08.005



Schultz, D., Ambike, A., Logie, K. S., Bohner, K. E., Stapleton, L. M., VanderWalde, H., …Betkowski, J. A. (2010). Assessment of social information processing in early childhood: Devel-opment and initial validation of the Schultz Test of Emotion Processing—Preliminary version.Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 38, 601–613. DOI: 10.1007/s10802-010-9390-5

Schultz, D., Izard, C. E., Ackerman, B. P., & Youngstrom, E. A. (2001). Emotion knowledgein economically disadvantaged children: Self-regulatory antecedents and relations to so-cial difficulties and withdrawal. Development and Psychopathology, 13, 53–67. DOI:10.1017/S0954579401001043

Scott-Little, C., Kagan, S. L., & Frelow, V. S. (2006). Conceptualization of readiness and thecontent of early learning standards: The intersection of policy and research? Early Child-hood Research Quarterly, 21, 153–173. DOI: 10.1016/j.ecresq.2006.04.003

Shields, A., Dickstein, S., Seifer, R., Giusti, L., Magee, K. D., & Spritz, B. (2001). Emotionalcompetence and early school adjustment: A study of preschoolers at risk. Early Education& Development, 12, 73–96. DOI: 10.1207/s15566935eed1201_5

Shin, N., Vaughn, B. E., Akers, V., Kim, M., Stevens, S., Krzysik, L., … Korth, B. (2011). Arehappy children socially successful? Testing a central premise of positive psychology in asample of preschool children. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 6, 355–367. DOI: 10.1080/17439760.2011.584549

Smith-Donald, R., Raver, C. C., Hayes, T., & Richardson, B. (2007). Preliminary construct andconcurrent validity of the Preschool Self-regulation Assessment (PSRA) for field-based re-search. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 22, 173–187. DOI: 10.1016/j.ecresq.2007.01.002

Soper, D. S. (2013). Sobel test calculator for the significance of mediation [software]. Avail-able from http://www.danielsoper.com/statcalc

Spiliotopoulou, G. (2009). Cronbach’s alpha and paediatric assessment in occupational therapy.Australian Occupational Therapy Journal 56, 150–155. DOI: 10.1111/j.1440-1630.2009.00785.x

Squires, J., Bricker, D., & Twombly, E. (2002). Ages and stages questionnaires: Social–emotional. Baltimore: Brookes.

Sroufe, L. A., Schork, E., Motti, F., Lawroski, N., & LaFreniere, P. (1984). The role of affect insocial competence. In C. E. Izard, J. Kagan, & R. B. Zajonc (Eds.), Emotions, cognition, &behavior (pp. 289–319). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Tominey, S. L., &McClelland, M. M. (2011). Red light, purple light: Findings from a random-ized trial using circle time games to improve behavioral self-regulation in preschool. EarlyEducation and Development, 22, 489–519. DOI: 10.1080/10409289.2011.574258

Trentacosta, C. J., & Izard, C. E. (2007). Kindergarten children’s emotion competence as apredictor of their academic competence in first grade. Emotion, 7, 77–88. DOI:10.1037/1528-3542.7.1.77

Tsethlikai, M. (2010). The influence of a friend’s perspective on American Indian children’srecall of previously misconstrued events. Developmental Psychology, 46, 1481–1496. DOI:10.1037/a0020725

Tsethlikai, M. (2011). An exploratory analysis of American Indian children’s cultural en-gagement, fluid cognitive skills, and standardized verbal IQ scores. Developmental Psy-chology, 47, 192–202. DOI: 10.1037/a0020803

U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. (2002–2005). EarlyChildhood Longitudinal Study—Kindergarten Class of 1998–99 (ECLS-K), Psychometric re-port for kindergarten through first grade, NCES 2002–05, by Donald A. Rock and Judith M.Pollack, Educational Testing Service, Elvira Germino Hausken, project officer. Washington,DC: 2002.

Waters, E., & Sroufe, L. A. (1983). Social competence as a developmental construct. Develop-mental Review, 3, 79–97.

Webster-Stratton, C., Reid, M. J., & Stoolmiller, M. (2008). Preventing conduct problems andimproving school readiness: Evaluation of the Incredible Years Teacher and Child Train-ing Programs in high-risk schools. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 49(5),471–488. DOI: 10.1111/j.1469-7610.2007.01861.x

Weissberg, R. P., & Greenberg, M. T. (1998). School and community competence-enhancement and prevention programs. In W. Damon, I. E. Sigel, & K. A. Renninger,(Eds.) Handbook of child psychology, vol. 4, 5th edn. (pp. 877–954).New York, NY: JohnWiley and Sons.



Welsh, J. A., Nix, R. L., Blair, C., Bierman, K. L., & Nelson, K. E. (2010). The development ofcognitive skills and gains in academic school readiness for children from low-income fam-ilies. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102, 43–53. DOI: 10.1037/a0016738

Wesley, P. W., & Buysse, V. (2003). Making meaning of school readiness in schools and commu-nities. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 18, 351–375. DOI: 10.1016/S0885-2006(03)00044-9

Willoughby, M. T., Kupersmidt, J., Voegler-Lee, M., & Bryant, D. (2011). Contributions of hotand cool self-regulation to preschool disruptive behavior and academic achievement. De-velopmental Neuropsychology, 36, 161–180. DOI: 10.1080/87565641.2010.549980

Wilson, S. J., & Farran, D. C. (2012, March). Experimental evaluation of the Tools of the Mindcurriculum. Paper presented in Enhancing executive function and achievement in prekin-dergarten classrooms: The effectiveness of Tools of the Mind. Society for Research Effective-ness in Education.

Zahn-Waxler, C., Cole, P. M., Richardson, D. T., Friedman, R. J., Michel, M. K., & Belouad, F.(1994). Social problem-solving in disruptive preschool children: Reactions to hypotheticalsituations of conflict and distress. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 40, 98–119.

Zins, J. E., Bloodworth, M. R., Weissberg, R. P., & Walberg, H. J. (2007). The scientific baselinking social and emotional learning to school success. Journal of Educational and Psycho-logical Consultation, 17, 191–210.



Copyright of Infant & Child Development is the property of John Wiley & Sons, Inc. and itscontent may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without thecopyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or emailarticles for individual use.

how preschoolers' social–emotional learning predicts their ... · we view sel through an...

Documents