在不同的早期护理和教育政策背景下测试结构-过程-结果模型。

IF 3.1 2区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, DEVELOPMENTAL
Cara L Kelly, Anamarie A Whitaker, Margaret Burchinal, Jade M Jenkins, Deborah L Vandell
{"title":"在不同的早期护理和教育政策背景下测试结构-过程-结果模型。","authors":"Cara L Kelly, Anamarie A Whitaker, Margaret Burchinal, Jade M Jenkins, Deborah L Vandell","doi":"10.1037/dev0002018","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Regulations and policy in early care and education (ECE) is based largely on the idea that structural elements of ECE, such as child-adult ratio, predict teacher-child interactions that then predict child developmental outcomes. This structure-process-outcome model was initially proposed when many states had minimal ECE quality standards. Our study tested the structure-process-outcome model using four large early childhood data sets that were collected over a 30-year period. Data from the Study of Early Child Care and Youth Development (<i>n</i> = 606, 24% non-White), the Early Childhood Longitudinal Study's Birth Cohort (<i>n</i> = 1,420, 56% non-White), the Head Start Family and Child Experiences Survey 2014 Cohort (<i>n</i> = 2,105, 76% non-White), and the University of North Carolina's Early Learning Network (<i>n</i> = 455, 75% non-White) were analyzed. Child-adult ratios and teachers' highest level of education were associated with measures of observed classroom quality during the historical period when there were minimal regulations and classroom ratios were higher and teacher education was lower; relations were not found when regulations required higher levels of structural quality. Notably, we also did not find significant relations between process quality measured by commonly used quality assessments and children's academic and behavioral outcomes in the preschool year. These findings suggest that as policies have improved structural quality, there is a need to refine the structure-process-outcome theoretical model. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":48464,"journal":{"name":"Developmental Psychology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Testing the structure-process-outcome model across different early care and education policy contexts.\",\"authors\":\"Cara L Kelly, Anamarie A Whitaker, Margaret Burchinal, Jade M Jenkins, Deborah L Vandell\",\"doi\":\"10.1037/dev0002018\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Regulations and policy in early care and education (ECE) is based largely on the idea that structural elements of ECE, such as child-adult ratio, predict teacher-child interactions that then predict child developmental outcomes. This structure-process-outcome model was initially proposed when many states had minimal ECE quality standards. Our study tested the structure-process-outcome model using four large early childhood data sets that were collected over a 30-year period. Data from the Study of Early Child Care and Youth Development (<i>n</i> = 606, 24% non-White), the Early Childhood Longitudinal Study's Birth Cohort (<i>n</i> = 1,420, 56% non-White), the Head Start Family and Child Experiences Survey 2014 Cohort (<i>n</i> = 2,105, 76% non-White), and the University of North Carolina's Early Learning Network (<i>n</i> = 455, 75% non-White) were analyzed. Child-adult ratios and teachers' highest level of education were associated with measures of observed classroom quality during the historical period when there were minimal regulations and classroom ratios were higher and teacher education was lower; relations were not found when regulations required higher levels of structural quality. Notably, we also did not find significant relations between process quality measured by commonly used quality assessments and children's academic and behavioral outcomes in the preschool year. These findings suggest that as policies have improved structural quality, there is a need to refine the structure-process-outcome theoretical model. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48464,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Developmental Psychology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Developmental Psychology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1037/dev0002018\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, DEVELOPMENTAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Developmental Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/dev0002018","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, DEVELOPMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

早期护理和教育(ECE)的法规和政策主要基于这样一种观点,即ECE的结构要素,如儿童-成人比例,预测教师-儿童的互动,然后预测儿童的发展结果。这种结构-过程-结果模型最初是在许多州实行最低ECE质量标准时提出的。我们的研究测试了结构-过程-结果模型,使用了在30年期间收集的四个大型幼儿数据集。分析了来自早期儿童保育和青少年发展研究(n = 606, 24%非白人)、早期儿童纵向研究的出生队列(n = 1420, 56%非白人)、2014年启事家庭和儿童经历调查队列(n = 2105, 76%非白人)和北卡罗来纳大学早期学习网络(n = 4555, 75%非白人)的数据。在监管最少、课堂比例较高、教师教育水平较低的历史时期,儿童-成人比例和教师的最高教育水平与观察到的课堂质量指标相关;当法规要求更高的结构质量水平时,没有发现关系。值得注意的是,我们也没有发现通常使用的质量评估所测量的过程质量与学龄前儿童的学业和行为结果之间有显著的关系。这些发现表明,由于政策提高了结构质量,有必要完善结构-过程-结果的理论模型。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA,版权所有)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Testing the structure-process-outcome model across different early care and education policy contexts.

Regulations and policy in early care and education (ECE) is based largely on the idea that structural elements of ECE, such as child-adult ratio, predict teacher-child interactions that then predict child developmental outcomes. This structure-process-outcome model was initially proposed when many states had minimal ECE quality standards. Our study tested the structure-process-outcome model using four large early childhood data sets that were collected over a 30-year period. Data from the Study of Early Child Care and Youth Development (n = 606, 24% non-White), the Early Childhood Longitudinal Study's Birth Cohort (n = 1,420, 56% non-White), the Head Start Family and Child Experiences Survey 2014 Cohort (n = 2,105, 76% non-White), and the University of North Carolina's Early Learning Network (n = 455, 75% non-White) were analyzed. Child-adult ratios and teachers' highest level of education were associated with measures of observed classroom quality during the historical period when there were minimal regulations and classroom ratios were higher and teacher education was lower; relations were not found when regulations required higher levels of structural quality. Notably, we also did not find significant relations between process quality measured by commonly used quality assessments and children's academic and behavioral outcomes in the preschool year. These findings suggest that as policies have improved structural quality, there is a need to refine the structure-process-outcome theoretical model. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Developmental Psychology
Developmental Psychology PSYCHOLOGY, DEVELOPMENTAL-
CiteScore
5.80
自引率
2.50%
发文量
329
期刊介绍: Developmental Psychology ® publishes articles that significantly advance knowledge and theory about development across the life span. The journal focuses on seminal empirical contributions. The journal occasionally publishes exceptionally strong scholarly reviews and theoretical or methodological articles. Studies of any aspect of psychological development are appropriate, as are studies of the biological, social, and cultural factors that affect development. The journal welcomes not only laboratory-based experimental studies but studies employing other rigorous methodologies, such as ethnographies, field research, and secondary analyses of large data sets. We especially seek submissions in new areas of inquiry and submissions that will address contradictory findings or controversies in the field as well as the generalizability of extant findings in new populations. Although most articles in this journal address human development, studies of other species are appropriate if they have important implications for human development. Submissions can consist of single manuscripts, proposed sections, or short reports.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信