ED 211 176

AUTPORTITLE

INSTITUTION

SPCNS AGENCYPUP DATECONTRACT 4 .

NOTE

AVAILABLE FROM

EDFS FRICEDESCRIPTORS

` DOCUMENT RESUME

PS 011 914

Phyfe-Perkins, ElizabethEffects of Teacher Behavior on Preschool Children: AReview of Research.ERIC Clearinghouse on Elementary and Early ChildhoodEducation, Urbana, Ill.National Inst. of Education (ED), Washington, D.C.81

400-78-000861p.: ED 168 7.22 is an earls, version of. thispaper.ERIC Clearinghouse on Elementary and Early ChildhoodEducation, College of Education, University cfIllinois, 805 Nest ,Pennsylvania Avenue, Urbana, IL61801-4897 (Catalog No. 194, 13.00).

MF01/PC03 Plus Postage.Classroom Environment; Classroom Techniques:*Environmental Influences; Literature Reviews:.*Outcomes of Education; *Preschool Children:Preschool Curriculum; Preschool Education: *StudentBehavior:.*Teacher Behavior: *Teacher Influence;Teachet Pole: Verbal Communication

ABSTRACTThrough a selective 'review of the research literature

this paper explores the relationship 'between teacher behaviors andchildren's behaviors. Both direct and indirect teacher effects onchildren's behaviors are reviewed. Pirst, studies of verbal behavior,instructional role, management techniques, classroom Structure andteacher behavior, participatory teacher role, and adult effects onantisocial behavior as well as comprehensive studies of teacherbehavior are reviewed in the section focusing on direct teachereffects. Studies of indirect teacher effects related tc classroomorganization and space, initiation cf contacta with children,activity settings and scheduling, access to materials and toys, andclosed versus open structure settings are reviewed in the secondsection. The concluding section of the paper indicates in summaryform the types of teacher behaviors which appear to be associatedwith specific child outcomes./(Author/RH)

************************************************************************ Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made ** . from the original dome:Ito. *

*1111001141101141**************10114141******************410*.*****04*****4******41#41

UAL DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATIONNATIONAL INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION

EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION

CENTER leRIC)11X6covidThe document has Dean faDroducisd as

from the person or organizationonclausting It

i= Minor changes have been made to improveisProduction quality

Fiomts of view or opinsonsstated In the docu

merit do not necessarily represent official NIEposition or policy

EFFECTS OF TEACHER BEHAVIOR_ON PRESCHOOL CHILDREN:A REVIgW OF RESEARCH

4

byElizabeth Phyfe-Perkins

University of Massachusetts

Available from:ERIC Clearinghouse on Elementary and

Early Childhood EducationCollege of EducaZionUniversity of Illinois805 West Pennsylvania Ave.Urbana, IL 61801-4897

Price: $3.00 ,Catalog #194

2 ..

Printed in the United Stat, -1' America 1981

The NationalInstitute ofEducationI

114-Alth hi. At,. Ad NAM..%A A...... Ii.

This publication was prepared with fundingfrom the National institute of Education,U.S. Depertment 6f Education, under con-tract no. 400-78-0008. Contractors under-taking such projects under governmentsponsorship are encouraged to expressfreely their judgment in professional andtechnical matters. The opinions expressedin this volume do not necessarily reflect thepositions or policies of NIE or the Depart-ment of Education.

3

CONTENTS

Page

Direct Teacher Effects 3

Indirect Teacher Effects 23,

Conclusions 35

References 40

How to Obtain ERIC Documents 51

The ERIC System 'and ERIC/EECE . .53

The ERIC Clearinghouses 55

4

The role of the teacher in early child:hood settings is a complex one involvingdirect interactions ,with- children as well asindirect influences on children througharrangement of the learning environment.*In an effort to categorize the influence ofadults in classrooms, Jersild and Fite (1939)define direct teacher effects as "the per-sonal contact which [teachers) have withthe children and the techniques they use inhandling (or leaving alone) the variousdifficulties which arise." Indirect teachereffects include scheduling the progression'and content of activities, arranging thephysical environment, setting the tone ofthe classroom, and determining thesize ofgroups and degree of choice available tochildren. It is often difficult to separateone kind of teacher effect from the other.As Prescott, Jones, and Kritchevsky (1967)'have noted, friendly encouraging teacherstend to have high-quality space and inter-ested children.

The relationship between adult, behav-iors and the child's behaviors has beenexamined in many studies. The findingsare sometimes contradictory, but in generalthey support the concept that effective pre-school teachers are encouraging (Anderson,1943; Prescott et al., 1967; Reichenberg-

*This paper was originally presentedat the annual meeting of the AmericanEducational Re'earch Association in Boston,Massachusetts, April 1980.

1

.,

1

tHackett, 1962), use positive types of in-struction (Johnson, 1938; McClure, 1936;Moore, 1938; Rosen, 1974; Smiiansky, 1971;Wylie, 1930), are involved with children'sactivities (Salisbury & Ivey, 1949; Swift,1964; Stallings-, 1975; Thompson, 1944)rather than using direct leadership ofgroups (Anderson, 1943; Fagot, ,1973;Huston-Stein, Friedrich-Coffvr, & Susnan,1977; Muste & Sharpe, 194ZL Prescott etal., 1967), and are..child-centered in theirapproach (Anderson, 1943; Landreth,Gardner, Eckhardt, & Prugh, 1943;Prescott Jones, Kritchevsky, Milich, &

Haselhoef, 1975; Reichenberg-Hackett,1962).

It is the purpose of this paper toexplore the relationship of teacher behav-ior--the human environment in early child-hood classrooms --to the dependent variableof children's behavior. This criterion,rather than gains in intelligence or achieve-ment, was selected because of a belief inthe importance of the child's interactionwith the world as the major means of childgrowth and development (Hunt, 1969). Thepaper is intended to support the positionthat at least some of the variability in-

children's behavior in the preschool is

linked to the classroom environment.Adopting such a point of view may encour-age teachers and administrators to look forsources of desired and undesired childbehavior in an area they can affect, namelyteacher behavior and .the educational set-/ tine.

2

G

OIRECT--TSACHER EFFECTS

Among the aspects of direct teachereffects investigated in the literature are thetype and amount of adult verbalization,quality of adult-child interaction, instruc-tional mode, management techniques, andcurriculum models.

Verbal Behavior

Teacher verbal behavior has beenstudied in naturalistic and laboratory set-tings. Johnson (1935) concluded thatpositive, unhurried, specific, and encour-aging types of instructions are more oftencarried out by children. Wylie (1930)found that a majority of preschool children(74 %) resisted negative commands but com-plied with positive ones. McClure (1936)concluded that encouragement and emphasison success are more effective but that achild's response to instructions may bedetermined less by the type of commandthan by the ease and desirability of thetask. Moore (1938) looked at the distribu-tion of commands, suggestions, and re-quests in a nursery and ki9dergarten. Shefound that the number of commands de-creased but that teacher suggestions andrequests increased with the age of thechildren. Children's response to sugges-tions was faster than to commands, but theauthor does not describe the type of situa-tion in whith .teacher s resorted to com-mands,. a vfactor that could easily influencechildren's response time. It would be inter-

3

...

i

esting to know what percentage of all

teacher utterances were instructions, as

opposed to conversations, and what situa-tions,:were associated with what types of in-

struction. Meyers (1940) looked at the

effect of adult conflict in giving commands

on the leyel of children's constructive play.When two adults gave contradictory com-mands forbidding a child to play with acertain "toy, significant decreases resultedin' the constructive aspects of the child'splay with other toys.

Stallings 1975), in a complex study offour early childhood education models,

found that children's task persistence waspositively correlated with individual instruc-tions by adults. In addition, she fthat cooperative activity betren tw chil-dren was positively related the in idenceof adult involvement with the children.Individual attention of adults to childrenand higher' ratings of adult frieQdliness and

responsiveness toward children were bothpositively related to more independentactivity by children. However, the less

adults praised or acknowledged the chil-dren's work, the more independent thechildren were. The author suggests that

if teachers want to hele,children.become independent, they shoulduse praise sparingly and specific-ally; that is, they should helpthe child find reward in the workitself rather than in their adult

......approval. (p. 57)

--...,j,4

3

Children's v erb al initiative and observedself-esteyx were positively correlated,resp ively. with the presence of respon-

e adults who asked few direct academicquestions and with the presence of adultswho addressed children in small groups andasked them lots of open-ended questions.

Although the Stallings study confoundsprogram content with teacher verb-al behair-ior,. the -results indicAte---that verballyresponsive, non-didactic teachers who askopen-ended questions and interact frequent-ly with one-or two children (as opposed toaddressing the entire group) are associatedwith task persistence, independence, verbal-izations, cooperation, and self-eiteem onthe part of the children.

In a laboratory study of the effects ofteacher praise on 5-year-old children.'s taskpersistence, Wolf (1938) found that adultpraise increased children's engagement witha novel toy. However, competition amongchildren kept them involved the longest.

Type of teacher verbalization provedto be important in a study by Tizzard,.Philps, and Plewis (1976), who looked fordifferences among three types of nurseryprograms in England: traditional nurseries,language-emphasis nurseries, and pre-schools staffed with untrained personnel.They found that the cognitive content ofteacher talk was greater in language-empha-sis preschools than in either traditionalnurseries employing trained staff or innurseries with no professed educational aimsstaffed by untrained personnel. The chil-

5

9

dren's Reynell Verbal Comprehension Scalescores revealed that working-class childrenbenefited most from the language-emphasisprograms. The teachers in these schoolsgave the most information to children, whileexhibiting little use of negative control andsupervision. In the nurseries which had nostated educational goals, the staff talked toandinteracted with the children less.

Bemis and Luft (1970) looked at kin-dergarten and first grade pupils' behaviorand achievement gain scores in relationshipto teacher behaviors. They found thatexcessively talkative teachers have signifi-cantly more shy pupils; that nurturantteachers have significantly more affiliativestudents;- and that uncooperative teachers(those who do not help pupils) hive signifi-

hyper -at theccom-ut by

uthorsve gains

operative"ents.

cantly more disruptive, bo-ed,active pupils. The authors arguechildren may have already learned tomodate their behavior to cues giventhe teacher. Unexplained by thewas the fact that significant cognioccurred in classrooms with "unteachers and hyperactive s

Instructional Role

Severcategories(1943) inand inte

stuof teacher

estigat d therative

have looked at largerbehavior. Andersonnotion of domihative

f adults in rela-rs irt chil-

olves a rigidity ofmpt to impose one's

tion to the same Setdren. Dominationreponses and the at

6

1!

i

will on another. Integrative behavior isdefined to include flexibility, the ability tofind the commonality among different viewsand the inclination to consider the wishes ofanother in working toward' a goal. Theresults of this complex study generallysupport the idea that higher levels ofdominative behavior in adults are associatedWith high domination in preschool children.Similarly, they suggest that the more ateacher works with a child in an integrativemanner, the more the child will seek help,answer spontaneously, and volunteer socialcontributions.

Thompson (1944) compared two matchedgroups of children who were taught by thesame teachers. The teachers adopteddifferent instructional roles, but the groupsof children used the same equipment, room,and basic curriculum. With one group, theteachers were asked to maintain a restric-tive attitude: being impersonal and becom-ing involved with children only when neces-sary or when specifically requested. In theother group, the teachers wert, instructedto operate in an "extensive" fashion: todevelop a personal friendship with eachchildband to become involved in the .child's*use of .equipment and relationships withother children in a manner appropriate toeach child's individual needs. Observationsof the children's behavior indicated signifi-cant differences between the two groups,favoring the greater involvement .of theteacher. Increases in children's behaviorwere noted for the following variables:social participation, leadership, and con-

7

11

structiveness. Differences in intejtectual.groWth or in. the incidence of nervoushabits were not found.

..

- , Utilizing Thompson's (194) differentia-tion between teacher styles as an index of .***-teacher-child interaction, Schuckert andTouchton (19685 observed day care childrenages 2 to 5 for signs of fatigue. One setof preschool teachers was instructed to.adopt a child-centered, warm approach,referred to as the " guided" condition. The"non-guided," more impersonal, conditionwas interpreted as being representative of acustodial level of group child care. Theauthors found a significant effect for young-'er girls, who evidenced fewer symptoms offatigue in the guided" condition. A similartrend of less fatigue was found for allchildren in this, condition. Thus, thedegree of teacher involvement with childrenin day cafe appears to be an importantfactor in the children's day-to-day behav-ior.

These studies of Reichenberg-Hackett(1956), Anderson (1943), and Thompson(1944) are important because they useobservational techniques in order to relateobservable independent variables in thepreschool t3 observable behaviors in chil-dren. It is interesting to note thatThompson found no significant intellectualtest differences, although . he did finddifferences in observable behaviors. Asimilar situation was reported by Shapiro(1973) in a Comparison of,, Bank Street

!low Through classes and traditionalelk

8

12

classes. Although the children were clearlyreceiving different treatments and wereexhibiting very dissimilar patterns of class-room behavior, there were minimal differ-ences found in the test scores of the twogroUps. Shapiro hypothesized that thetraditional teacher-directed curriculumfostering convergent thinking may evenha;./e favored the control group in thetest-taking situation.

Management Techniques

.Several recent studies (Fagot, 1973;Kounin, 1977; LeLaurin & Risley,, 1972)have looked at specific teaching stitat,giesand child outcomes.. Kounin observedchildren in first,. second, third, and fourthgrade classrooms, assessing two dependentvariables: the degree of involvement inassigned work and the occurrence of misbe-havior (e.g., deviancy', . 'He found fourcategories of teacher management behaviorthat correlated with high pupil-task involve-ment and low deviancy rates. One behav-ior, which he termed "withitness," heappl!zd to teachers who demOnstrated thatthey knew what was Sing on_throughoutthe classroom. The second, "overlapping,"occurred when the teacher attended to twoevents simultaneously without losing `theflow of either one. Transition smoothnessand planning for learning variety in as-signed seat work were other indicators ofeffective management.

andWithitness, overlap-ping, and ransition smoothness are proba-bly the st relevant to studies of early

9

childhood education, especially since Berk(1976) 'found that preschool hildren spent

" from 20 to 35% of their time transitions.

Given such a statistic, it is importantto note a study by Le Laurin and Risley(1972) which examined adult and childbehavior during planned transitions in a

day care center. These authors found that"zone" staffing (in which an adult super-vises an area) as opposed to "man-to-man"staffing (in which an adult is responsiblefor several children) increased the chil-dren's level of' engagement with plannedactivities.

Reichenberg-Hackett (1956) found thatdifferences in children's happiness (asmeasured by leve!s of cooperation, sociabil-ity, spontaneity, self-expression, creativ-ity, mood, and enjoyment of achievement)were related to differences in teacherbehavior, especially management techniques.in 1962, the same author reported anotherstudy in which teachers in 10 nurserygroups were ,observed and their behaviorcategorized according to levels of encourage -ment-discouragement, type of activity thatthe teacheeb joined or .watched, type ofteacher approach to child, contgot of les-sons taught, and values communicatedeither formally or informa4. Reichenb-rg-Hackett found a wide variation in all thevariables among tl-- 10 teachers. The ratioof teacher enco, q to discouragiffgbehavior ranged fro,,. 9.. to less than 2:1.Children in the classes ranking high inencouragement versus discouragement car-

vied through on activities longer and demon-strated more independent behavior thanlower-ranking classes. The author reportedthat the high-encouragement classes had ahigher level of adult-child verbal interactionon a wide range of topics and that childrenwere presented with more alternative activi-ties. The ratio of hostile to sympatheticbehaviors of children varied inversely withthe encouragement-discouragement ratio ofthe teacher's behavior, echoing the findingof Anderson (1943). In brief, the authorconcluded that the teacher is the mostpotent force in determining the nature ofthe 'preschool experience for children.

Comprehensive Studies of Teacher Behavior

Following some of the ideas ofReichenberg-Hackett (1956), Prescott et al.(1967) carried, out a descriptive study ofteacher behavior in relationship to centerfacilities, administrative philosophy, andprogram goals. They found that teacherswho ranked high in encouragement and lowin guidance and restriction were also ratedas sensitive and friendly. In these tea-chers' centers free-choice format was com-mon, the environment offered a range ofappropriate opportunities, and the admini-stration permitted the staff flexibility inprogramming. Ch ldren enrolled in thesecenters were rated higher in interest in andinvolvement with the curriculum than werechildren in other centers.

11

15

Tizzard, Cooperman, Joseph, andTizzard (1972) and Tizzard et al. (1976)mounted a corr.-;;ex study of residentialnurseries similar to the one by Prescott etal. (1967). The authors found relationshipsamong restrictive administrative structures,the role of adults, the quality of staff-childinteraction, and children's activity andverbal comprehension scores. In brief,tpey found that in relatively nonhierarchical&iild care institutions which allowed staff tobe more flexible and to make more pro-grammatic decisions, adults conversed withchildren on more diverse topics; displayedhigher mean sentence lengths (2 < .02);engaged in significantly more social activi-ties, such as reading, playing, and talkingwith children; made more informative re-marks (2 < .01); gave more explanationswith commands (2 < .05); used fewer nega-tiVe commands (2 < .05); and answeredmore remarks made by the children (2 <.05). Finally, the children in these centerswere assigned more active roles duringadult-child social interactions (2 < .05),and they answered more remarks made bystaff (2 < .05). In terms of the ReynellVerbal Comprehension Scale., which assessesthe child's understanding of languagewithout requiring production, the authorsfound significant positive correlations- be=tween the group score and the frequency ofstaff's informative talk, social activity withchildren, and answering of children's re-marks, as well as with the amount of timethe child was in active rather than passiveplay. Individual comprehension scores

17

_ -

showed a positive correlation at the .001level . with the amount of adult informativetalk directed to children. Other resultsincluded the facts that the amounts of adultinformative talk, all talk, and adult-childsocial interactions were highest when onlyone- adult (as opposed to two) was presentand that these interactions were not affect-ed by increases , in child-staff ratio. Theauthors found that the addition of anotheradult lowered the incidence of these positivestaff behaviors because the staff tended totalk to each other instead of interactingwith the children. Trained child care stafftalked to children significantly more thanuntrained adults (e < .001), and regardlessof training, whoever was in charge for theday talked more, used more informativetalk, and played more with the Children (all2 c-.001) than other staff present.

The work of Tizzard et al. (1972,1978) supports the conclusion that institu-tionalization of children, per se, does notresult in intellectual retardation (Kagan,Kearsley, & Zelago, 1978). However, theseaUthors make a strong case for asserting

'that the level of language development isdependent on the quality of staff talk andthe quality of staff-child interaction.These factors, in turn, tend to be high inautonomous child care centers. The factthat this study was carried out in residen-tial day nurseries, where home effects couldnot be expected to interact with caregivereffects, has perhaps isolated or highlightedthe potency of the adult role. If the study

131 7

.y"

were replicated in a range of day careprograms, it is uncertain whether suchclear-cut effects -would be obtained.

Another study that compared teacher-child interaction was an investigation ofcompensatory preschoolers' tendencies toregress cognitively in public school.McKinney (1978) looked at differences inteacher-child interaction in the preschoolsand in the receiving kindergartens. Hefound that the nature of adult-child rela-tions was very different in the two set-tings. Preschool children were more likelythan kindergarteners to initiate interactionand to receive !ndividual attention fromadults, and black children received muchmore individual attention in preschool thanin kindergarten. Adults gave significantlyfewer "positive strokes" to low-achievingchildren in preschool than to those inkindergarten. Kindergarten teachers spentmore . time in formal, teacher-led activitiesthan did preschool personnel, whereaspreschool teachers were more likely to dothings for the children and spend more timein physical contact with children. Teacher-child interaction was most likely to bemediated by materials in preschools and bywords in kindergarten. This study illus-trated differences in children's educationalexperiences that are directly the result ofadult behavior rather than of grade level orcurriculum materials.

14

1s

1

Classroom Structure and Teacher Behavior

Huston-Stein et al. (1977) looked atthe relationship between classroom structureand the naturally occurring behaviors ofchildren in 13 Head Start classrooms. Theindex of classroom structure was an obser-vation instrument that measured the inci-dence of child participation in teacher-ledinstruction. The following child behaviorswere found to be significantly correlatedwith a low level of direct instructicn:prosocial behavior to peers (2 < .10),helping of oeers (2 < .05), imaginative play(2 < .05), total aggression (2 < .05), andattention at circle time and responsibilityfor cleanup time (both 2 < .05). Thisstudy echoes that of Muste and Sharpe(1947), in which the authors found moreprosocial anJ aggressive behayior in theless-structured university laboritory schoolthan in a highly regimented day care situa-tion. it seems that allowing children thefreedom to interact and to make choices canincrease some positive behaviors but canalso leave children open to more conflictsover materials and with each other.

Jackson and Wolfson (1968), in a studyof conflict in the nursery school, foundthat 25$ of such problem incidents involvedconflicts between children's desires andteachers' expectations and that 13% occurredwhen teachers overlooked a child who wasseeking assistance. The authors noted thatconflict situations such as these fostercompliance on the child's part, -whereasconflicts between a child's desire and his or

15

19

her inability result in persistence on thechild's part.

Returning to the issue of teaCROPdirection, Stallings (1975) found that highlevels of ,_direct instruction and askingdirect quesTions regarding academic subjectswere negatively correlated with' observedlevels of children's cooperativeness, inde-pendence, and verbal initiation. In addi-tion, the number of days children wereabsent correlated highly with the incidenceof adults holding large-group activities,asking direct academic questions, and beingless involved with the children.

Fagot (1973) used task-involvementasa dependent measure and found" that hightask-involvement occurred in the preichoolin which the teacher offered more praise,gave less criticism, and directed children'sbehavior less often. In two related stud-ies, Fagot fourid that high task-involvementoccurred in the classes in which the teacher.criticized less, gave fewer directions,showed less physical affection, and re-sponded more to children's questions. Inaddition, the involvement-promoting tea-chers set up a program in which there wasa new activity introduced every day.

Miller and Dyer (1975), in a cornpari-son of four preschool education models,explored the ability of teacher behavior, todifferentiate among program types. Thefollowing dimensions of teacher behavioremerged from the analysis: (1) teacher-directed, fast-paced versus childcentered,

16

2f)

slow-paced forpato; (2)_ the relative propor-tion of large group to individual activitiesconducted by teachers; and (3) the relativeproportion of teachers asking for, ratherthan giving, information.

The classrooms charactc-ized by ateacher-directed, fast-paced format, withlarge-group activities predominating andteachers asking for (rather than giving)information, had children who engaged inlarge amounts of verbal' recitation and fewincidents of fantasy play. An interestingoutcome of the study was the fact thattraditional- Head Start teachers (without aprogram model to follow) exerted morecontrolling behavior than di& preschoolteachers who implemented specific curricularmodels. This echoed the finding of Soarand Soar (1972) that teachers in programswith a low degree of structure tend toutilize more controlling behaviors than dotheir colleagues.

In a comprehensive study including themeasurement of classroom structure, Berk(1976) compared teacher& expectations fortheir own an4 children's behavior with theobserved frequencies of certain behaviors infive different kinds of preschool programs.Adult behavior was coded ,as being thefollowing: not in the activity, watcher-helper, participator, or active leader.Berk found , a wide range of discrepanciesbetween actual classroom practices andteacher expectations. In addition, sherelated aspects of the educational programto the variables of passive and active child

1721

behavior, teacher leaderihip pattern, andchild-initiated activity.

The Montessori program was the onlyone in which child-initiated activities pre-dominated over teacher-initiated ones.Children were often manipulating (28%),readying (16.6%), exploring-wandering(15%),, and working-listening (12.7%). Thepredominant Montessori teacher-roli wascoded as not in activity (54%). The char-acteristic behavior of adults in the fran-chise day care program was found to beactive leadership (35%), while the childrenengaged mainly in the passive behavior ofwatching-listening (33.2%).

In all five centers the role of theteacher as participator was extremely low,from 0 to 1.5% of all teacher activity. Inthe classroom with the highest profile of

.adult active leadership, children wereobserved in large-group activities more than80% of the time and were engaged in ready-.ing (28%) or eating (28%). behaviors forsmore than half the day.

Given the high percentage of activeadult leadership behavior found in the

/majority of Berk's classrooms, one needs toconsider the influence of a predominantlydirective style on children in early child-hood programs. Several studies point tothe negative aspects of directive behavior.Fagot (1973) and Stallings (1975), as men-tioned elsewhere in 'this review, have founddirective teacher behavior linked with lessdesirable child outcomes. Doke and Risley

18

(1975) compared day core students' involve-ment in planned activities during 15 minutesof "formal" teacher-directed act ties inwhich alt children were required partici-pate and in 15 minutes of "informal" free-choice periods. The authors found thatchildren were consistently more involved in"informal" activities. They suggest thataspects of "formal" activities which discour-age task involvement include waiting whilethe teacher talks to one child or, while theteacher distributes the same materials to allstudents. In contrast, informal activitiesallow the children to choose among availablematerials and to proceed at their own pace,and permit adults to interact with childrenindividually according to need. Unfortu-nately, Doke and 'Risley's findings wereconfounded by differences in the 'inherentattractiveness of the content of the twotypes of activity se nts.

Two somewhatteacher direction are important to note

specialized cases of

because they demonstrate the importance ofthe context of adult leadership. Shores,Hester, and Strain (1976) found that tea-cher-structured dramatic play significantlyincreased child-child interaction in a groupof handicapped youngsters, as opposed tothe-- teacher's adopting a role and interact-ing with the children or remaining unin-voliied during dramatic play time. In theteacher-structured condition the adultassigned dramatic, play roles to children,who then carried out their play withoutadult involvement. Featherstone .(1974)

1923

found that certain children sought outsmall-group activities (such as group cook- ting or reading) in which the adult directedtheir contributions and remained stationary.These children appeared to need the secur-ity of such settings.

Participatdry Teacher Role

The work of Smilansky (1971) on adultintervention for the purpose of teachingrole-play skills to disadvantaged pre-schoolers supports the concept of thepartic;patory adult. Smilansky distinguish-ed between didactic teaching and facilitat-ing. (An-adult facilitated dramattt play byassuming an attitude of "realness," asopposed to self-conscious or fake roleplaying, and employed 'empathic listening sothat the children initiated their own growthand learning.) She reported that childrenwhose sociodramatic play was facilitated inthis manner improved their f bility to takeinteractive roles in fantasy play. In afollow-up study, Rosen (1974) had teachersact as role models a!Icl ask leading questionsof youngsters engaged in sociodramaticplay. After 40 days, these experimentalchildren exceeded the controls on measuresof group problem-solving behavior, oneffective cooperation in solving problems asa group, and on an index of role-takingskills. The literature' appears to supportpositive outcomes for children when adultsinteract with them in a child-centered,non-directive manner.

20

In an ecological study of two separateday care environments, Perkins (1980)found that the classroom in which adultsparticipated more often with children andwere less directive had children who ex-hibited significantly higher levels of cogniltive play, task involvement, and verbalinteraction, and who showed lower levels ofpassive negative behavior. This study didnot isolate adult behavior from environmen-tal variables and thus, to some extent,replicated the findings of Prescott et al.(1967) that friendly, involved teachers hadhigh-i. quality space and involved children.

Adult Effect on Antisocial Behavior

Another aspect of the direct influenceof teachers invo eir effect on suchchild behavior as aggression and atten-tion-seeking. It seems that the behavior ofan attending adult is significant in deter-mining the amount of aggression in a groupof young children (Siegel & Kohn, 1959).In an experimental play situation, childrenengaged in more aggressive acts in thepresence of a permissive adult than theydid when. no adult was present. It seemedthat lack of intervention on the part of theadult was not seen as nputral behavior butrather was interpreted gas permission toengage in such aggression. When the adultdoes mediate in an aggressive situation,certain behaviors appear to be more suc-cessful, than others; Appel (1942) foundthe,. directing and separating children,

21

25

--------,,-. interpre the feelings of one 'child to

J---another xplaining property rights, andsuggest s.olutions were among the mostsuccessf nother aspect of the Appelstudy ',1was at, in the absence of adultinter ntion ti.tn an aggressive encounter,the itiator was likely to be successful 641,of e time. When the adult intervened,however, the percentage fell to 26 %. Thus,adult intervention hvi a highly significantimpact on the outcome of aggressive encoun-ters in nursery schools (p < .001), and inday nurseries and play groups (both 2. <.01). A laboratory study by Hartup andHimeno (1959) found that preschool childrenleft /alone in a room with toys exhibitedmore aggression in subsequent doll playthan did children with whom an adult re-mained and interacted.

Perkins (1980) found that the anti-social behavior gr children was significantlyhigher in the dlydcare center characterizedby predominantly uninvolved and directiveadults. Gewirtz, Baer, and Roth (1958)contrasted preschool children's behaviorduring easel painting in the presence of anadult. When the adult sat nearby, pa-sively watching the child (a high-availabil-ity condition), the children emitted a meanfrequency of attention-seeking behavior thatwas lower than when the adult was en-

- grossed in paper work, athough seatednearby (a low-availability condition). All ofthese studies point to the negative aspectsof the isolation of children from adultcontact.

22

41,

Reuter and Yunik (1973) found thatchildren in a nursery school with a highadult-child ratio (1:12) scored higher onsociability with peers and duration of socialcontacts; but the reseirchers did notinvestigate the adults' behavior. Thus, wedo not know whether or not the high adult-child ratio represented a lack of involve-ment of adults.

Overview

A review of studies discussed in thissection presents a picture of the successfulteacher--one who erzourages independentactivity, plans a variety of activities, andis involved with the children, but who doesnot need to direct their behavior. He orshe uses criticism and negative commandssparingly, is aware of several activities atonce, can maintain two activities simulta-neously, and effects smooth transitions. Inaddition, such a teacher tends to arrangeclassroom space well and maintain a rela-tively high le -I of teacher-child verbalinteraction.

INDIRECT TEACWR EFFECTS

Evidence of tne effects of behaviorsettings on children's behavior has beenoffered by Emmerich (1977), -Gump (1964,1969), Gump and Sutton-Smith (1955);Kounin and Gump (1974), Morrison andOxford (1978), and Kounin end Doyle

23

27

(1975), as well as by many of the studiesmentioned earlier. These indirect teachereffects are related to the teacher4s prefer-ence for directive versus free play periods,the mediating effect of the activity settingon teacher and child behavior, the arrange-ment of space, anti the scheduling of activ-ity segments.

Classroom Organization and Space

1- Other studies have related positiver aspects of teacher behavior to environmentalvariables. Pollowy (1974) found that thesupervisory involimment of adults increasedwherever gquipment distribution restrictedthe child's activity or access. Zifferblatt(1972), in a comparison of a successful andan unsuccessful integrated-day third gradeclassroom, found that task attention spanvas longer, that the . number of correctproblems was larger, and that non-tasktalking and non-task movement were lowerin the successful room. The correspondingteacher remained at her desk only one-fiftliof the time, emitted considerably fewerbehavior restrictions than her less success-ful counterpar , had arranged desks insmall clusters creened by dividers, had setup an infor conversation area, and hadprovided a private, cozy nook where chil,dren could spend time alone. Not only wasthe teacher behavior different, but anotheraspect of the teacher role, that of design-ing the environment to promote programgoals, was a factor in this study. Inaddition, Landreth et al. (1943) looked at

24

variations in teacher behavior in relation tolocation and age of the child. The studyconfirmed the author's expectation thatteachers would vary the type of contact(physical versus verbal, negative versuspositive) depending on whether childrenwere younger or older and whether theywere in the play yard, the patio, or thebathroom locker area.

An unusual study by Perry (1977)looked at the effect of usable space onpreschool teachers' behavior. She foundthat Head Start classrooms with less than 30scare feet per child, as compared withclassrooms characterized by more than 49square feet per child, had teachers whoexhibited significantly more controllingbehaviors, both verbal and nonverbal. Inaddition, the teachers in the smaller spacesrestricted free play to the manipulation oftable-top toys.

Teacher Initiation

Foster (1930) measured the distributionof teacher time among children in a nurseryand two kindergarten classes. The inci-dence of physical-care, play-related, social7emotional, and conversation behaviors ofteachers was recorded for both groups. Ascould be expected, younger children tookmore of the teacher's time, including moreof both child- and teacher-initiated time.In kindergarten, children without previouspreschool experience took up more time than

those who had already had preschool experi-ence. And as children grew older theyexperienced a steady growth in child-initi-ated teacher time and decrease in tea-cher-initiated time. There' were clearecological effects on teacher behavior.During naptime, practical'; all attention wasteacher-initiated. Settling children downfor naps required more time for boys thanit did for girls, but girls attracted theteacher's attention more during lunch.During free play, girls occupied morechild-initiated teacher time and boys moreteacher-initiated time. Foster concludedthat as children matured teachers needed toinitiate fewer contacts because the childrenwere better able to ask for help and that,overall, boys required more teacher-initi-ated time than girls.

Preschool Activity Segments

Taking a careful look at the creationof educational activity settings by preschoolteachers, Kounin and Gump (1974) studied596 videotaped lessons taught by 36 tea-chers. The lesson was conceived of as asignal system that varied in terms of con-tinuity, intrusiveness, and insulation.Children's on-task behavior constituted thedependent variable,. The most successfullessons had a single continuous signalsystem that was "insulated" from distrac-tions (for example, a fast-paced, teacher-led exercise or recitation activity, or awell-planned collage ectivityT.----The lessons

26

4,

with then highest off-task scores includedteacher-led recitation; role play, groupconstruction, and group discussion (charac-terized by multiple and shifting signals fromchildren); and singing and body movement(characterized by high intrusiveness ofprops). Although some teachers'can handleactivities like group discussions or singingbetter than others, Kodnin and Gump'sresearch begins to analyze why these activ-ities are difficult for teachers to Manage ifthe goal is onjask behavior.

Following upon this inquiry, Kouninand Doyle (1975) looked at pairs of highand low task-involvement lessons in theKounin and Gump videotapes; segmentswere taught by the same school teachers

'1 within the tame'signal system format (e.g.,,teacher reading, teacher demonstration, andiqdividual construction). In the analysis,the degree of signal continuity discriminatedsignificantly between high and low task-involvement of children in the same type oflesson taught by the same teacher. How-ever, teacher reading and teacher demon-stration formats involved a different signalsystem from that of individual construction.In the former, the continuity of the tea-cher's signal emission was paramount,_ andthe amount of child recitation aildWed sig-nificantly discriminated high and low task-involvement lessons. This study concludedthat teachers 'must attend to differentaspects of their roles in order to enhancevarious activities. In individual construc-tion, teachers need to provide sufficjent

27

32

materials and be sure .each step calls forththe next step in the project. In teacher-led formats, teachers must employ a fast-paced signal emission syStem in order toavoid the situation in which' children becomebored during repeated or lengthy inter-ruptions by other children.

Morrison and Oxford (1978) looked at akindergarten class in order to see if contin-uous central signal emission (such as ateacher reading or explaining a game to afew children) and individual projects wouldproduce more task-oriented behavior thanwhole-class recitation. They found thatstudents were significantly more passive,distractible and non-task involved in classrecitation than in the other two conditions.This finding was interpreted as supportingKounin and Gump's theory that continuoussignal emission, whether from teachers or.well-organized materials in individual pro-jects, produces more on-task behavior.

Sherman (1975), in an examination ofthe Kounin and Gump videotaped lessons,analyzed the unexpected occurrence ofgroup glee in different preschool activi-ties. Such outbursts involving three ormore children were most often precipitatedby teacher requests for volunteers, un-structured lags in teacher-directed les-sons, gross motor activities, and cognitiveincongruities. The rate of glee was threetimes higher in formal lessons than in freeplay. Teachers tended to ignore glee epi-sodes except when they lasted more than 10

28

3

seconds or threatened to disrupt the les-son.

Effect of Restriction and Activity Settings

Wright (1943) looked at the effect onchildren's behavior 'of interrupting a freeplay seosion which included many desirable

.toys by interposing a wire fence and lettingthe children play only with a standard setof toys. He found that the level of con-structive play decreased significantly whenchildren were in the restricted situation.Although teachers do not roll out wirefences in, normal day care centers, they doend activities and begin others. Some ofthese transitions may appear as frustratingto the children as Wright's manipulationseems to have been. The timing and natureof a shift from one activity to another is animportant aspect of the indirect influence ofthe early childhood teacher. In analyzingthe difference in children's behaviors invarious summer camp activities, Gump,Schoggen, and Redl (1957) assert thefollowing:

Certain features of the activity-setting which support or provokethe behaviors and experiencesthat occur within it are clear.When props and performances areso organized that the valuedactions are delayed or in shortsupply, an activity setting islikely to produce competitiveness

29

whether it, is in cookouts orboating. And a setting whichrequires performances directed atindividual tasks is likely to-pro-duce lowered interaction whetherit- is crafts or library readingtime. (p. 43)

Not only do settings channel children'sbehavior but they elicit certain behaviorsfrom teachers as well (Gump & Sutton-Smith, 1955). Adults are characteristicallycalled upon to give individual assistancewith materials during collage and art time,yet group recitation requires a different setof adult behaviors (Kounin & Gump, 1974),and outdoor free play may have childreneliciting praise or conflict mediation fromadults.

Emmerich (1977) compared teacher-directed small group time (similar_toRisley's [1975) "format " activities) and freeplay_tsimilar---- o the "informal" condition).He found initial differences and changesover time in children's personal-socialbehavior associated with each condition.Free play elicited significantly more cooper-ation, compliance, and affiliation with peersthan did small-group time. In addition,there was significant growth during a16-week period in the free play conditionfor the following measures: autonomousachievement. gross motor activity, andfantasy activity. These same measuresdecreased over time in the small-groupformal activity period. The author sug-

30

34

Bested that the small-group setting mayactually encourage affiliation among childrenat the same time that the format severelyrestricts child-child interactions, thussetting up a conflict that results in reducedcooperation and compliance.

Recentiy, Kounin and Sherman (1979)speculated about the qualities of preschoolactivity settings that influence the length oftime children remain involved. Settingswith the lowest indices of holding power(clothing, displays, and vehicles) "all have---a restricted range of constituent standingbehaviors that aretypically executed in arepetitive -- -fashion without yielding clearindications of something being accomplishedor altered as a result of the child's action"(pp. 3, 4). However, other settings withhigher holding power (art, role play,blocks, and sand) seen either to offer avariety of expected behaviors or to resultin a clear sense of progress or an actualproduct. Thus, teachers need to be awareof the cues for behavior in the learningenvironment which they create by theirselection of equipment and arrangement ofspace "Phyfe-Perkins, 1980). The teacher'schoice of activity settings can become amajor influence on the behavior of children.Teachers can attend to the availability ofmaterials and the sequencing of activities.By being aware of the effect of the settingon-behavior, they can intervene to preventproblems, reduce the density of children,or otherwise arrange the environment tosupport the behaviors desired.

31 35

c.

Access to Materials, and Toys -

The Learning Environments Groupheaded by Risley in Kansas has_looked atsome specific variables _directly under thecontrol of preschool teachers. Montes andRisely (1975) varied the accessibility oftoys in a _day care setting. In the limitedaccess condition, when children had torequest the use, of material from a teacherand could use only one item at a time,children engaged in more complex sociodra-matic play episodes. Except in sociodra-matic play, toy availability had little effecton such variables as the amount of timespent playing, selecting activities, orinteracting with the teacher. Pollowy(1974) found that the supervisory invoiVp-ment of adults increased wherever equip-ment distribution restricted the child'sactivity or access.

According to Hart and Risley (1975),child requests for toyg can be used tostimulate language and achieve cognitive

% goals in an informal, cOild-centered manner.Thus, limited access to toys can be utilizedto increase the instances of incidentalteaching. Another study carried out bythe-iiansas group investigated the effects ofscheduling activities' in different sequences.Krantz and Risley (1972) found that theinvolvement level of children was higherduring group story time and that transitioninto story time was shorter when the storyhad been preceded .by naptime i-a. opposedto outdoor play.

-

32 1

3G

c

A study that demonstrated the needfor adults to become aware of their owntendencies to avoid or concentrate in cer-tain activity areas was carried out byShapiro (1975). Observing the free playbehavior of 274 tows-year-old preschoolchildren, she noted a striking disparitybetween children's and teachers' prefer-ences for activity areas. She speculatedthat the difference perhaps results in a lossof spontaneous teaching-learning inter-actions. Children populated, the block anddoll _corner areas 37% of the time, but only17% of teacher-child interactions occurred inthose areas. The art areas, where childrenspent 21% of the time, averaged 35% of allteacher-child contacts. The author sug-gested that teachers r tit set up moreindependent art activii so that theywould be available for interaction andobservation in the active block and house-keeping areas.

"Closed" Versus "Open" Structure Settings

Prescott et al. (1975), in an ecological,study of day care environments, apalyzedteacher behavior in an unusual way. Theauthors proposed two major categories ofearly childhood classrooms based on thelocus of decision-making about the majorityof children's activities. "Closed structure"centers are those in which teachers, for themost part, determine what children shalldo. In "open structure" centers the chil-dren make more of these decisions.

33

37

O

Prescott et at. contend that high-qualityopen structure centers, as opposed toclosed structure preschools, are character-ized specifically by more adult-child inter-action in activity segments/ more frequentincidences of children receiving help_ fromadults, a low proportion- of unfinishedactivities, play areas with a wider varietyand greater abundance of things to do, andteachers who more frequently open up thealternatives inherent in an activity segment.According to Prescott et al., the majorcharacteristic in closed structure settings isthe imposition of restrictions on children'smovement and activity, which cannot becounterbalahced by the positive aspects ofthe curriculum. Thus, the authors advo-cate that "closed structure" teachers besomewhat "open" by relaxing some of theirrequirements for conformity to rigid behav-ioral expectations.

The concept of a teacher ability label-led "double structuring" of the environmentis also presented by Prescott. This abilityfacilitates choicemaking by children:

The teacher constantly structuresboth (1) by her input, and (2)by providing an environmentwhich facilitates getting startedbehavior and regulates intrusionby the use of insulated play areawith clear cut boundaries.(Prescott et al., 1975, p. 65)

These authors not only consider the d6ninfluence of teachers as evidenced by the

34

33

f

e

interaction, direction, mediation, assistance,or observance of children, but they alsoevaluate the indirect influence of the activ-ity settings that ,he teacher makes availableto the children.

t

CONCLUSIONS

Interpretation of research results inthis area cannot be free of values andassumptions. One's philosophy of educationdictates the significance one attaches, tovarious adult and child behaviors. thisauthor subscribes to a Piagetian. and devel-opmental interactionist view of early child-hood, in which behaviors that reveal thechild as an active learner, both mentallyand physically, are valued. Franklin andBiber (1977) describe this view:

Since learning is an active pro-cess, and, knowledge is con-structed rather than "acquired,"the child must be provided withan environment which furthers hisown natural tendency to act onand with objects, to explore,manipulate and experiment. Hemust be allowed, indeed encour-aged, to take initiative, to poseproblems, and to generate solu-tions for himself, even when theproblems may seem trivial to anadult and/or the solutions may be"wrong" from an adult point ofview. (p. 11)

3533

Teachers in a developmental interactionistcurriculum take on the role of guide And

\ stimulant, asking questions that may lead\ the children to their own solutions. In

such a preschool, the teactler is .a helper,- asource of useful information, and a personto be trusted (Franklin & Biber, 1977).Since' development itself is conceived of as afunction of organism-environment inter-

, action, adults can enhance learning byfacilitating such interaction. In the pre-school, this means a predominance of watch-ing-helping, participating, and mediatingteacher behaviors rather than direct leader-ship or lack of involvement. In order tostimulate and guide children's autonomous'learning, adults must participate with thechildren.

Adults' interactions with children,together with their management of child-child and child-environment interactions,constitute the human aspect of the environ-ment. All of the studies reviewed in thispaper support the notion that the behaviorof adults in early childhood education doeshave an impact on the children. Some ofthe crucial aspects of the immediate behav-ior of successful teachers include theirability to be encouraging, warm and friend-ly, involved with' individuals and smallgrIntps, and attentive to two issues simul-tanlously. Adults need to keep the momen-tum going, effect smooth transitions, usepositively worded instructions, minimizedirect leadership of large groups, andmaximize a child-centered approach as

36

opposed to one in which adults make mostof the decisions. Children who aretaughtby adults who possess some of these 'traitshave been found to be, variously, high on

. measures of task involvement, languagecomprehension, social- participation, con-structive use of materials, spontaneity,.creativity, sympathy, and independence,and low in dominative and hostile behavior.Although some of the prescriptions soundcontradictory, the confusion lies in ,thematter of context. Direct leadership as amajor mode of classroom organize:7.n seemsto have negative effects, such as low task-involvement ar,-1 little child-child inter-action. However, if a teacher decides tohave a group story or circle time, forexample, she or he should become a vigor-ous leader during that activity, emittingcontinuous stimuli for attention and restrict-ing frequent or lengthy child recitation.Another seeming contradiction in the reviewof the literature is the finding that closedstructure classes (in which adults makemost of the decisions) are often associatedwith low IA/els of antisocial behavior,whereas open structure (child decision-making) classes tend to have higher levelsof interpersonal conflict. This polarity canbe explained by the fact that when childrenare allowed to interact freely and choosetheir own activities, more conflicts, as wellas higner incidences of positive social, emo-tional, and cognitive behaviors, are ob-served. In contrast, !dult-dominatedcenters have low frequencies of many be-

. ,

haviors, including aggressive ones.

37 41

Taken as a whole, the studies re-viewed support the hypothesis that adultbehavior influences the behavior of children/in preschool settings. In addition, a smal-ler, more recent group of studies haveexplored the contribution of the scheduling,organization, and placement of equipmentand activity segments. Adults' arrangementof the environment, as well as their atten-tion to children, is clearly important. Whenplanning activities, adults need to considerthe cues in the setting that will be salient.to children. For example, if task invcikte-ment is to be fostered, independent ,r:on-struction activities should be organized sothat the steps are self-reinforcing andsufficient materials are available. Play,centers with many and varied materialsencourage social play among children.(Further discussion of the effects of phys-ical environments on children's behavior canbe found in ?hyfe-Perkins, 1980.) c

Elardo (1973), looking at the ecologyof day care, stresses the pre-eminence ofhigh quality adult-child interactions. Hestates that one of the most harmful earlyeducational philosophies

'1

calls for minimum interference inthe child's activities. The adult'srole becomes that of an observer,with a teaching style for thelarger part that involves beingpassive, watchful, and retiring,while allowing the child to inter-act with various materials or

38

toys. The feeling is that if anadult simply guards the childagainst emotional damage, somekind of natural growth force willtake over and assure the child'smaximum development. (p. 7)

If we are concerned with the quality of'children's interaction with a stimulatirigenvironment, then much work needs to bedone to delineate the teaching ..kills andbehaviors of adults that 'facilitate suchinteraction. Hunt (1969) has conceptualizedthe problem of the correct "match," that is,providing the child with experiences thatare neither too strange nor too familiar, sothat an optimum level of 'child-environmentinteraction occurs. The early childhoodteacher car. be the key to creating such"matches" for children. by interpretingconfusing events, suggesting further .con-nections, modeling more advanced 'social andplay behaviors, comforting, mediating,scheduling activities, and 'arranging environ-ments that encourage many and variedchild-thild, child-adult, and child-environ-ment interactions.

39

43

REFERENCES

Anderson, H. H. Domination and sociallyintegrative behavio.. In R. G. Barker,J. Kounin, & H. F. Wright (Eds.),Child Behavior and Development. NewYork: McGraw Hill, 1943.

Appel, M., H. Aggressive behavior oft nursery school children and adult

procedures in dealing with such behav-ior: Jonental Ed ca-tion; 194 , .

*Bemis, K. A., & Luft, M. Relationshipsbetwten tescher'behavior, pupil be-havior andpul achievement. Paperpresented at the annual meeting of theAmerican Educational Research Associa-tion , Minneapolis, 1970. [ED 038 189)

Berk, L. .E. Effects of variation in thenursery school setting on environ-mental constraints and children'smodels of adaptatio:,. Child Develop-ment, 1976, 43, 839-869.

*Items with ED numbers are availablethrough trio tducational Resources informa-tion Center (ERIC) in microfiche and papercopy, unless otherwise noted. (For infor-mation oil obtain'ng ERIC documents, inlibraries or by mail, see pages 51-52.)Some of these documents are also availablefrom their original source.

40

44

Doke, L. A., & Risley, T. R. The organi-zation of day care environments:Formal versus informal activities. ,

Child Care Quarterly, 1975, 4, 216-222.

Elardo, R. The ecology of day care.Day Care and Early Education, 1973,1, 5-9.

Emmerich, W. Evaluating alternative modelsof development: An illustrative studyof preschool personal-social behaviors.Child Development, 1977, 48, 1401-1410.

Fagot, B. I. Variation in density: Effecton task and social behaviors of pre-school children. Developmental Psy-chology, 1973, 13, '16F-167.

Featherstone, H. The use of settings in aheterogeneous preschool. YoungChildren, March 1974, 147-154.

Foster, J. C. Distribution of the teacherrstime among children in the nurseryschool and kindergz.rten. Journal ofEducational Research, 1930, 22, 172-183.

*Franklin,, M. B., & Biber, B. Psychol-logical perspeCtives and early child-hood education: Some relationshipsbetween theory and practice. In Katz,L. G. et al. (Eds.), Current topics inearly childhood education, Vol. 1.

41

Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Cor-poration, 1977. [ED 140 9881

Gewirtz, J. L.; Baer, D. M.; & Roth, C.H. A note on the similar effects oflow social availability of an adult sandbrief "social deprivation on youngchildren's behavior. Child Development, 1958, 29, 149-152.

Gump, P. V. Intra;setting analysis: Thethird grade classroom as a specialcase. In E. .Williams, & H,Rausch(Eds.), Naturalistic viewpoints in psy-chological research. New YOT.k: Holt,WU.

Gump, P. V. Operating environments irks

Schools of open and traditional design.School Review, August 1974, 575-593.

Gump, P. V.; Sthoggen, P.; & Redl, F.The camp mileau and its iminedjateeffects. Journal of Social Issues,1957, 13, 40-46.

Gump, P. V., & Sutton-Smith, B. 'Activitysetting and social interaction: A fieldstudy. The American Journal of Or-thopsychiatry, 1955, 25.

Hart, B., & Risley, T. B. Incidentalteaching of language in the preschool.Journal of Applied Behavioral Analysis,1975, 4, 411-420.

42

46

Hartup, W. W., & Himeno, Y. Social isola-tion versus interaction with adults inrelation to aggression in preschoolchildren. Journal of Abnormal andSocial Psychology, 1959, 64, 17-22.

Hunt, J. McV. The challenge of incompe-tence and poverty. Urbana: Uni-versity of Illinois Press, 1969.

Huston-Stein, A.; Friedrich-Coffer, L.; &Susman, E. J. The relation of class-room structure to social behavior,imaginative play, and self-regulation ofeconomically disadvantaged children.CI ild Development, 1977, 48, 908-914.

Jackson, R. W., & Wolfson, B. J. Varie-ties of constraint in a nursery school,Young_ Children, 1968, 23, 358-367.

Jersild, A. T.,' & ,Fite, M. T. The influ-ence of nursery school experience onchildren's social adjustment. Child De-velopment Monographs (No. 25).Bureau of Publications, ColumbiaUniversity, NY, 1939.

Johnson, M. W. The influence of verbaldirections on behavior. Child Develop-ment, 1935, 6, 196-204.

Kagan, J.; Kearsley, R.; & Zelaza, P.Irlfancy and its place in human devel-opment.. Cambridge: Harvard Univer-sity Press, 1978.

43

47

Kounin, J. S. Discipline and groupman-agement in classrooms. Huntington,NY: Robert E. Krieger Publishers,1977.

Kounin, J. S., & Doyle, P. H. Degree ofcontinuity of a lesson's signal systemand the task involvement of children.Journal of EckIr7g,cyWi3scholosy,1 , ___, 1 -1 4.

Kounin, J. S., & Gump, p. V. Signalsystems of lesson settings and the taskrelated behavior of preschool children.Journal of Education Psychology, 1974,66, 554 -563.

Kounin, J. S., & Sherman, L. W. Schoolenvironments as behavior settings.Theory into Practice, Spring 1579.

*Krantz, P., & Risley, T. The organiza-tion of group care environments:

/ Behavioral ecology in the classroom./ Lawrence: University of Kansas,

Landreth,

[ED 078 915]

Landreth, C.; Gardner, G. M.'; Eckhardt,B. C.; & Prugh, A. D. Teacher childcontacts in nursery schools. Journalof Experimental Education, 1943, 12,65-91.

LeLaurin, D., & Risley, T. R. The organi-zation of day care environments:"Zone'' versus "man to man" staffassignments. Journal of Applied Be-havioral Analysis, 1972, 5, 225:51

44

McClure, S. C. The effect of varyingverbal instructions on the motor re-sponses of preschool children. ChildDevelopment, 1936, 7, 276-290.

McKinney, D. An ecological comparativeanalysis of adult-child interactionbetween a compensatory preschool anda receiving kindergarten program.Paper delivered at the annual meetingof the National Association for theEducation of Young Children, New York,August 1978.

Meyers, C. E, Security and conflictingadult authority. Unpublished doctoraldissertation, University of Iowa, 1940.

Miller, L. B., & Dyer, J. L. Four pre-school programs: Their dimensionsand effects. Monographs of the Soci-ety for Research in Child Development.University of Chicago Press, 1975,

ig, Montes, F., & Risley, T. R. Evaluatingtraditional day care practices: Anempirical approach. Childcare Quar-terly, 1975, 4, 208-215.

Moore, S. B. The use of commands, sug-gestions, and requests by nurseryschool and kindergarten teachers.Child Development, 9, 1938, 184-202.

Morrison, S. B., & Oxf .' L. Class-room ecology a kinder arten stu-dents' task-related behaviors: An ex-

45

4a

ploratory study. Paper presented atthe annual meeting of the AmericanEducational Research Association,Toronto, Canada, 1978. [ED 153 744]

Muste, M. J., & Sharpe, D. F.influential factors in the determinationof aggressive behavior in preschoolchildren. Child Development, 1947,18, 11-28.

Perkins, E. Phyfe. An ecological assess-ment of two Oreschool environments.Pa er presented at the 11th annual

). me .ink o the Environmental Design &Rese h Association, Charleston,North Carolina, March 1980.

IPhyfe-Perkilts, E. Children's behavicr in

preschool setting: A review of re-search on the influence of the physicalenvironment. In L. G. Katz et al.(Eds. )* Current topics in early child-hood education, Vol. 3. Norwood, NJ:Ablex Publishing Corporation, 1980.

Pollowy, A. M. The child in the physicalenvironment: A design problem. InG. Coates (Ed.), Alternative Learn-*ing Environments. Stroudsburg, PA:

. Dowden, Hutchinson & Ross, 1974.....

%._Prescott, E. Is day. care as good as home?

Young Children, 1978, 33, 13-19.

*Prescott, E.; Jones, E.; & Kritchevsky,° E. Group day care as a child rearing

46

50

4

environment: An, observational studyof day care programs. Pasadena, CA:Pacific Oaks College, 1967. [ED 0244531

Prescott, E.; Jones, E.; Kritchevsky, E.;Milich, C.; & Haselhoef, E. Assess-ment of child environments:an ecological apProac Pts. 1 and 2.Pasadena, CA: Pacific Oaks College,1975.

Reichenberg-Hackett, W. Children's atti-tudes, happiness, and social values innursery schools. Paper presented atthe meeting of the Inter-AmeridinSociety of Psychology, San Juan,Puerto Rico, December 1956.

Reichenbert-Hackett, W. Practices,- atti-'tudes and values in nursery groupeducation. Psychological Reports,1962, 40, 279-300.

Reuter, 6., & Yunik, G. Social interactionin nursery schools. DevelopmentalPsychology, 1973, 3, 319-325.

Rosen, C. .E. The effects of sociodramaticplay on the problem solving behavioramong culturally diSadvantaged pre-school children. Child Development,

. 1974, 45, 920-927.

Salisbury, E. I., & Ivey, H. Block build-ing in the reading readiness program.

47.

Childhood Education, 1940, 16, 221-225-.

Athuckert, . R., & Touchtbn, R. M. An ex-perimental method of relating variationsin teacher participation to measures ofchild fatigue in preschool training pro-grams. Journal of, Educational Re-search, 1968, 62, 123-125.

Shapiro, E. Educational evaluation: Re-thinking the criteria of competence.School Review, November 1973,323-549.

Shapiro, S. Preschool ecology: A study ofthree environmental variables. Read-ing improvement, 1975, 12, 236r-241.

Sherman, L. W. An ecological study ofglee in small groups in preschoolchildren. Child Development, 1975,46,*5-53.

Shores, R. .E.; Hester, P.; &The effects of amountteacher-child interactioninteraction during freechsin the Schools,17-1=.175,

Strain, P. S.and type ofon child-child

play. 1!_sy-1976, 12,

Siegel, A. E., & Kohn, L. G. Permissive-ness, permission and aggression: Theeffect of adult presence or absence onaggression in children's play. ChildDevelopment, 1959, 30, 131-141.

48

52

Smilansky, S. Can adults facilitate play inchildren? 4 Theoretical and practicalconsiderations. 'In N. E. Curry & S.Arnalud, Play: "the child strivetoward self realization. , Washington,D. C.: National Association for theEducation of Young Children, 1971.

Soar, R. S., & Soar, R. M. An empiricalanalysis of selected follow-throughprograms: An example of ,a' processapproach to evaluation,, -In I. Gordon(Ed.), Early Childhood Education, 71styearbook of The National Society forthe Study of Education, Pt. 2. Uni-versity of Chicago Press, 1972. [ED103 126)

Stallings, J. Implementation and childeffects of teaching practices in follow-through classrooms. Monoprayhs ofthe Society for Research in ChildDevelopment, 1975, 40, 7-8.

Swift, J. W. Effects of early group exper-ience: The nursery school and daynursery. In M. L. Hoffman, & L. W.Hoffman (Eds.), Review of child de-velo ment research. New York:

ussell Sage Foundation, 1964. ,Thompson, G. C. The' social and emotional

,development of preschool childrenunder two types of educational pro-grams. Psychological Monographs,1944, 56, 1-20.

49

53

.e----"Tizzard, B.; Cooperman, Q.; Joseph, A.;

& Tizzard, J. Environmental effects-A . on lanctioge development: A study of

41-children in long stay residential

n rseries. Child Development, 1972,43, 337-358.

Tizzard, B., Philps, J. & Plewis, E. Playin the preschool centrei(Pt. 1--Playmeasures and their relation to age, sexand I.Q.; Pt. 2--Effects on play ofthe child's social class and of theeducational orientation of 'the centre),Journal of Child Psycho- Psychiatry,1976, 17, 251-274.

Wolf, Theta H. The effects of praise andcompetition on the persisting behaviorof kindergarten children, Minneapolis:University Institute of Child Welfare(Monograph XV), University of Minne-sota Press, 1938.

Wright, M. E. Constructiveness of play asaffected by group organization andfrustration. In R. G. Barker, J. S.Kounin, & H. I. Wright (Eds.) Childbehavior and development. New York:McGraw-Hill, 1943.

Wylie, 1,,I. Experimental study of negativ-istic 'behavior in preschool children.Criminology, 1930, 12, 89-91.

Zifferblatt, S. M. Architecture and humanbehavior: Toward increased under-standing of a functional relationship.Educational Technology, 1972, 12,54-57.

50

54

How To Obtain ERIC Documents

Complete copies of most ERIC docu-ments cited here are available in ERICmicrofiche collections at approximately 700libraries in the United States and othercountries. For a list of ERIC collections

i hear you, write ER IC/EECE, College ofEducation, University of Illinois, 1310 S.Sixth St., Champaign, L 61820.

ERIC Documents may he ordered ineither paper copy (PC), a photocopy of theoriginal, or microfiche (ME), a transparentfilm card containing up to 98 pages of text.?lease I .clude ED number and specify PC orMF. Document prices given in Rescurcesin Education ( RIE) are subject to change.The current price schedule is provided.below.

MF (number of fiche per ED #): 1-5,$.91; 6, $1.10; 7, $1.29; 8, $1.48;each additional fiche, $.19.

PC (number of pages per ED #): 1-25,$2.00; 26-50, $3.65; 51-75, $5.30;76-100, $6.C5; each additional 25pages, $1.65.

Prices shown do not include mailingcosts, which must be added to all o;ders.

First class postage (for all MF ordersup to 33 MF): MF $.18 for 13 MF; $.35for 4-8 ME; $.52 for 9-14 MF; $.69 for15-18 MF; $.86 for 19-21 MF; $1.03 for22-27 MF; $1.20 for 28-32 MF.

51

P,

UPS charges (for 33 or ;More MF and all PCorders):

1- 75 pages or 33-7576- 15u pages or

microfiche,microfiche,

$1.40;$1.75;

151- 225 pages or microfiche, ,, $2.11;226- 300 pages or microfiche, $2.46;301- 375 pages or microfiche, $2.81;376- 450 p ',As or microfiche, $3.16;451- 525 , s or microfiche, $3.52;526-1500 pc. :s or microfiche, $3.87-

I

$8.09

$1.47 for 1 16.; $.84 for 2 lbs.; $2.22 for3 lbs.; $2.58 for 4 lbs.; $2.96 for 5 lbs.;$3.33 for 6 lbs.; $3.71 for 7 lbs. Eachpound equals 75 PC pages or 75 MF.

Send .order and check to ERIC Docu-ment Reproduction Service, Computer Micro-film International, P. 0. Box 190, Arling-ton, VA' 22210.

52

5 6

The ERIC System and ER I.C/EECE

The Educational Resources InformationCenter/Elementary and Early ChildhoodEducation Clearinghouse (ER IC/EECE) ispart of a system of 16 clearinghouses spon-sored by the National Institute of Educationto provide 'information about current re-search and developments in the field ofeducation. The clearinghouses, each focus-ing on a specific area of education (such asjunior colleges, teacher education, lan-guages and linguistics), are located atuniversities and other institutions through-out the United States.

Each clearinghouse staff searchessystematically to acquire a_ -ent, signifi-cant documents relevant to education.These research studies, conference proceed-ings, curriculum guides, program descrip-tions and evaluations, and other publica-tions are abstracted and indexed in Re-sources in Education (RIE), a monthlyjournal. RIE, is ilvailable at libraries, or itmay be ordered from the Superintendent ofDocuments, United States Government

,Printing Office, Washington, DC 20402:The documents themselves are reproducedon microfiche by the ERIC Document Repro-duction Service for distribution to librariesand individuals.

Another ERIC publication is CurrentIndex to Journals in Education (CIJE), amonthly guide to periodical literature whichcites articles in more than 700 journals andmagazines in the field of education. Most

53

5?

citations include anhotations. Articles areindexed in CIJE by subject, author, andjournal contents. CIJE is available atlibraries or by -ubscription from OryxPress, 2214 North Central at Encanto,Phoenix, AZ 85004.

The Clearinghouse on Elementary andEarly Childhood Education (ER IC/EECE)publishes top:cal papers, bibliogri phies,resource lists, and a newsletter for personsinterested in child development, child care,and childhood 'education (for children frombirth to age 12). The clearinghotAse staffalso answers individual information requestsand provides computer searches of RIE andCIJE and other data bases. For moreinformation, write ERIC/EECE, College ofEducation, University of Illinois, 1310 S.Sixth St., Champaign, IL 61820.

54

53

\-,

The ERIC Clearinghouses

ADULT, CAREER, AND VOCATIONALEDUCATIONOhio State University°1960 Kenny RoadColumbus, OH 43210 /

(614) 486-3655 /,..0--.

COUNSELING AND PERSONNEL SERVICESThe University of MichiganSchool of Education BuildingRoom 2108, East Univ. & South Univ.Ann Arbor, MI 48109

(313) 764-9492

*ELEMENTARY AND EARLY CHILDHOODEDUCATIONCollege of Education .

.,

University of Illinois1310 South Sixcth St.Champaign, IL 61820

(217) 333-1386

*ER IC/EECE is respcnsible for researchdocuments on the social, psychological;physical, educational, and cultural develop-ment of children from the prenaLl periodthrough pre-adolescence (age 12). Theoret-ical and practical issues related to staffdevelopment, administration, curriculum,and parent/community factors affectingprograms for children of this age group arealso within the scope of the clearinghouse.

55

5)

EDUCATIONAL MANAGEMENTUniversity of OregonEugene, OR 97403

(5G.$) 686-5043

HANDICAPPED AND GIFTED CHILDRENThe Council for Exceptional Children1920 Association DriveReston, VA 22091

(703) 620-3660

HIGHER EDUCATION ....George Washington University1 Dupont Circle, Suite 630Washington, DC 20036

(202) 296-2597

II1FORMATION RESOURCEShoot of Education

yracuse University130 Huntington HallSyracuse, NY 13210

(315) 423-3640

JUNIOR COLLEGESUniversity of California96 Powell Library BuildingLos Angeles, CA 90024

(213) 825-3931I,-

#

.i.

LANGUAGES AND LINGUISTICSCenteryfor Applied Linguistics3520 Prospect Street, N.W.Washington, DC 20007

. (202) 298-9292

56

so

./

READING AND COMMUNICATION SKILLS. 1111 Kenyon Road .

Urbana, IL 61801(217)- 328-3870 /

RURAL EDUCATION AND SMALL SCHOOLSNew Mexico State University, Box 3APLas Cruces, NM 88003

(505) 646-2623

SCIENCE, MATHEMATICS, AND ENAIRON-MENTAL EDUCATIONOhio State University1200 Chambers Road, Third FloorColumbus, OH 43212

(614)' 422-6717

SOCIAL STUDIES/SOCIAL SCIENCEEDUCATION855 BroadwayBoulder, CO 80302

(303) 492-8434

TEACHER EDUCATION, 1 Dupont Circle N.W., Suite 610

.Washington, DC 20036(202) 393-2450

TESTS, MEASUREMENT. AND EVALUATIONEducational Testing ServicePrinceton, NJ 08540

(609) 921 -9000, Ext. 2176

URBAN EDUCATIONTeachers College,'Box 40Columbia UniversityNew York, NY 10027

(212) 678-3437

57