SELF-REGULATION, EMOTION EXPRESSION & CLASSROOM ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

assessment consists of a structured battery of age appropriate tasks and paired with a more global assessor report of children’s behavior to be completed by the assessor subsequent to the battery (Smith-Donald et al., 2007). This assessment stems from laboratory findings that suggest that when children are expected to exert self-control they are able to actively utilize adaptive behavioral strategies such as self-distraction and soothing to alleviate the desire de-regulate and attend to a desirable stimulus (Blair, 2002; Murray & Kochanska. 2002). The assessment consists of seven tasks to tap two components of children’s self-regulation, Cool and Hot executive control (see Appendix 1; Denham, Warren, Bassett, Wyatt, & Perna, 2010; Basset et al., in press; Smith-Donald et al., 2007). For purposes of this investigation, cool executive control includes the balance beam, pencil tap and tower turn-taking, all of which originate from a previous investigation by Murray and Kochanska (2002). The tasks included to asses hot executive control are the toy wrap (peek & wait), snack delay and tongue task (Denham et al., 2010). The PSRA was administered by 12 trained and certified research assistants who live coded performance on each of the seven tasks. As the PSRA begins, the trained adult assessor suggests to the child the following: "let's stretch, take a little break, and play some extra games" before returning to class. To assess cool executive control, the child is first asked to complete three rounds of pretending to walk on the “balance beam" (which is simply masking tape placed on the floor; The child is asked to walk the beam once and then asked to walk the beam, but slowly (Murray & Kochanska, 2002). In the balance beam task, the child is assessed by 39
the difference between the slow and regular trials. Once that task is completed the child is then asked to return to the table to complete several other "games”, which include a "tapping" game with unsharpened pencils, where the child is given instructions to tap their pencil once when the assessor tapped twice, and tap twice when the assessor tapped once (Blair, 2002). This task is measured by the percent of correct of responses, and inhibitory control. Once the pencil task is completed the child is handed a variety of multi-colored wooden blocks and asked to take turns with the assessor to build a tower, measuring the level of turn-sharing. Next, the child is asked to pick up all of the blocks and put them in a bag (Murray & Kochanska, 2002). To assess hot executive control at time 1, the preschool child is asked to perform a variety of tasks that involve non-affective, rote control of behavior. First, the child remains seated and asked not to peek while the assessor noisily wraps a toy in tissue paper for 2 minutes, and this "gift wrap" task is simply assessed by a measure of the child’s latency to their first peek. The wrapped gift is then placed in front of them and they are asked to wait for a period of 1 minute before opening the gift, which is measured by the child’s latency to touching the surprise (Murray & Kochanska, 2002). Continuing the assessment, the child is next asked to play several "waiting" games with treat of Skittles ® (or Goldfish ® crackers, if the child is allergic to the candy, and/or not allowed by parents to have the candy for other health or religious reasons). The child is asked to hold the treat on their tongue to see how well children can handle their emotions and behaviors during the brief delays (10, 20, 30 and 60 seconds of delay; 40
Page 1 and 2: SELF-REGULATION IN PRESCHOOL CHILDR
Page 3 and 4: This work is licensed under a Creat
Page 5 and 6: Acknowledgements I would like to ac
Page 7 and 8: List of Tables Table Page 1 Summary
Page 9 and 10: List of Abbreviations AP ATL AVE CM
Page 11 and 12: child’s on-task involvement, gend
Page 13 and 14: Shields, 2004) and exhibit more pos
Page 15 and 16: support and caregiving may serve as
Page 17 and 18: care - which will be used as a prox
Page 19 and 20: these self-regulatory functions (Ca
Page 21 and 22: Kaufmann et al., 2000). In fact, re
Page 23 and 24: “activated”. The current framew
Page 25 and 26: eginning of preschool or child care
Page 27 and 28: such as family problems, lower pare
Page 29 and 30: Schiefele, Roeser, & Davis-Kean, 20
Page 31 and 32: significantly behind their peers in
Page 33 and 34: environments, which may be further
Page 35 and 36: to suggest that there is noted soci
Page 37 and 38: Chapter 3: Statement of Problem Ove
Page 39 and 40: potential gender and socioeconomic
Page 41 and 42: Chapter 4: Research Questions Resea
Page 43 and 44: children’s demonstration of learn
Page 45 and 46: Kochanska and colleagues (2000) sug
Page 47 and 48: in poverty are more likely than the
Page 49: Miller et al., 2004). I am confiden
Page 53 and 54: when other kids are absent, seeks c
Page 55 and 56: The measure yields three reliable l
Page 57 and 58: analysis, and principal components
Page 59 and 60: Vinzi, et al., 2010). Without satis
Page 61 and 62: ehaviors. However, cool executive c
Page 63 and 64: diminished, where on-task involveme
Page 65 and 66: that although self-regulation is im
Page 67 and 68: from the current model. Although th
Page 69 and 70: In addition to the moderation of ge
Page 71 and 72: child no longer being affiliated wi
Page 73 and 74: produced a model linking self-regul
Page 75 and 76: demonstrate difficulty with self-re
Page 77 and 78: academic success, but to demand tha
Page 79 and 80: Table 2 Outer Model and Final R 2 s
Page 81 and 82: Table 3 Inner Model LV Correlations
Page 83 and 84: Table 5 Significance of Moderating
Page 85 and 86: Figure 2: Final partial least squar
Page 87 and 88: Figure 3b: Moderated Model - Female
Page 89 and 90: Figure 4b: Moderated Model - Head S
Page 91 and 92: Once the child is in position: “R
Page 93 and 94: 4) 2 taps 8) 2 taps 12) 1 tap 16) 1
Page 95 and 96: “Okay, now let’s build a really
Page 97 and 98: If the child asks if s/he is sortin
Page 99 and 100: If child offers you a turn: “Than
Page 101 and 102:
If child waits for the timer, “Ni
Page 103 and 104:
** ** TIMER/COUNTDOWN: Set the time
Page 105 and 106:
If child waits the full length of t
Page 107 and 108:
2= Certainly Applies adjust7 Is eas
Page 109 and 110:
adjust23 Accepts teacher’s author
Page 111 and 112:
1= Applies Sometimes 2= Certainly A
Page 113 and 114:
Appendix 3: Preschool Learning Beha
Page 115 and 116:
Attitude Towards Learning Attention
Page 117 and 118:
N/A Invents silly ways of doing thi
Page 119 and 120:
References Adelman, H.S., & Taylor,
Page 121 and 122:
Bronson, M.B., Tivnan, T., & Seppan
Page 123 and 124:
Denham, S.A., Blair, K.A., & DeMuld
Page 125 and 126:
Fabes, R.A., Martin, C.L. Hanish, L
Page 127 and 128:
Hu, L., & Bentler, P.M. (1999). Cut
Page 129 and 130:
Lin, H., Lawrence, F.R., & Gorrell,
Page 131 and 132:
Normandeau, S., & Guay, F. (1998).
Page 133 and 134:
Rothbart, M.K., Ahadi, S.A., & Hers
Page 135 and 136:
Swanson, H.L. (1999). Reading compr
Page 137:
Curriculum Vitae Todd M. Wyatt grad
show all

SELF-REGULATION, EMOTION EXPRESSION & CLASSROOM ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?