PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

This article was downloaded by: [Jyvaskylan Yliopisto]On: 10 January 2011Access details: Access Details: [subscription number 931046285]Publisher RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Educational PsychologyPublication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/title~content=t713415498

Kindergarten teachers adjust their teaching practices in accordance withchildren's academic pre-skillsEija Pakarinena; Marja-Kristiina Lerkkanenb; Anna-Maija Poikkeusb; Martti Siekkinenc; Jari-ErikNurmia

a Department of Psychology, University of Jyväskylä, Jyväskylä, Finland b Department of TeacherEducation, University of Jyväskylä, Jyväskylä, Finland c Philosophical Faculty, School of AppliedEducational Sciences and Teacher Education, University of Eastern Finland, Joensuu, Finland

First published on: 14 October 2010

To cite this Article Pakarinen, Eija , Lerkkanen, Marja-Kristiina , Poikkeus, Anna-Maija , Siekkinen, Martti and Nurmi,Jari-Erik(2011) 'Kindergarten teachers adjust their teaching practices in accordance with children's academic pre-skills',Educational Psychology, 31: 1, 37 — 53, First published on: 14 October 2010 (iFirst)To link to this Article: DOI: 10.1080/01443410.2010.517906URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01443410.2010.517906

Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.informaworld.com/terms-and-conditions-of-access.pdf

This article may be used for research, teaching and private study purposes. Any substantial orsystematic reproduction, re-distribution, re-selling, loan or sub-licensing, systematic supply ordistribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden.

The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contentswill be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae and drug dosesshould be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss,actions, claims, proceedings, demand or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directlyor indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.

Educational PsychologyVol. 31, No. 1, January 2011, 37–53

ISSN 0144-3410 print/ISSN 1469-5820 online© 2011 Taylor & FrancisDOI: 10.1080/01443410.2010.517906http://www.informaworld.com

Kindergarten teachers adjust their teaching practices in accordance with children’s academic pre-skills

Eija Pakarinena*, Marja-Kristiina Lerkkanenb, Anna-Maija Poikkeusb, Martti Siekkinenc and Jari-Erik Nurmia

aDepartment of Psychology, University of Jyväskylä, Jyväskylä, Finland; bDepartment of Teacher Education,University of Jyväskylä, Jyväskylä, Finland; cPhilosophical Faculty, School of Applied Educational Sciences and Teacher Education, University of Eastern Finland, Joensuu, FinlandTaylor and Francis LtdCEDP_A_517906.sgm(Received 18 December 2009; final version received 20 August 2010)10.1080/01443410.2010.517906Educational Psychology0144-3410 (print)/1469-5820 (online)Original Article2010Taylor & Francis0000000002010Mrs. EijaPakarineneija.k.pakarinen@jyu.fi

This study examined the extent to which kindergarten children’s academic pre-skillsare associated with their teachers’ subsequent teaching practices. The pre-skills inreading and math of 1268 children (655 boys, 613 girls) were measured inkindergarten in the fall. A pair of trained observers used the Classroom AssessmentScoring System instrument to observe 49 kindergarten teachers on their emotionalsupport, classroom organisation and instructional support in kindergarten in thespring. The results of the multilevel modelling showed that low levels of academicpre-skills in kindergarten classrooms in the fall predicted high classroom qualityin the classrooms later on. The results suggest that the overall level of children’sacademic pre-skills in the classroom plays an important role in the ways in whichteachers adapt their instructional practices to the needs of a particular classroom.

Keywords: adaptive teaching; teaching practices; classroom observations; pre-reading skills; pre-math skills; kindergarten

Prior research on classroom interaction has predominantly focused on investigatingthe role of teachers and classroom quality in children’s academic performance (e.g.Hamre & Pianta, 2001, 2005; for reviews, see Davis, 2003; Perry & Weinstein, 1998;Rutter, 1983; Turner & Meyer, 2000). However, many researchers have also discussedthe possibility that students’ characteristics may affect the ways in which teachers dealwith them (Babad, 1998; Cooper, 1979; Doyle, 1979b, 1981; Martin, 2004; Pianta,Nimetz, & Bennett, 1997; Skinner & Belmont, 1993; Yarrow, Waxler, & Scott, 1971)and influence the organisation of classroom instruction (Corno, 2008; Pianta, 2006;Pressley, Gaskins, Solic, & Collins, 2006). Some studies have also shown thatstudents’ academic skills are associated with the ways in which teachers instructdifferent students (Allington, 1980; Babad, 1990, 1998; Babad, Bernieri, & Rosenthal,1989; Good, Cooper, & Blakey, 1980; Sinclair & Vealey, 1989; Solomon et al., 1996).However, to our knowledge, no previous research has been published on the role thatchildren’s previous academic performance plays in their teachers’ observed teachingpractices. Consequently, the present study investigated whether children’s pre-readingand pre-math skills typical of the kindergarten classroom predict the observedclassroom quality later on.

*Corresponding author. Email: eija.k.pakarinen@jyu.fi

Downloaded By: [Jyvaskylan Yliopisto] At: 08:00 10 January 2011

38 E. Pakarinen et al.

The role of students’ performance in teachers’ classroom practices

Students and their characteristics can be assumed to contribute to teachers’ instruc-tion and classroom practices by creating an important environment for teachers’behaviour. For example, students’ level of academic performance plays a crucial rolein the ways in which teachers plan their instruction and classroom practices(Cronbach & Snow, 1977; Doyle, 1979b). This includes tailoring instruction forstudents and grouping students according to their level of academic performance(Corno, 2008). The importance of students’ characteristics in teachers’ behaviour andinstruction can be explained in the light of psychological mechanisms. First, manycognitive mechanisms are involved. Besides having general pedagogical knowledgeand beliefs about classroom management, instructional strategies and subject matter,teachers also construct knowledge and beliefs about particular students and class-rooms (Borko & Putnam, 1996; Calderhead, 1996; Doyle, 1979a, 1979b). Suchknowledge and beliefs then become critical components of the methods teachers useto deal with these students (Calderhead, 1996). Second, alongside teachers’cognitions, students and their characteristics also activate affective reactions amongteachers that are then reflected in their patterns of instruction and classroom manage-ment. Some studies suggest that the major source of teachers’ positive emotions,such as satisfaction, is children’s good learning outcomes and progress (Emmer,Oakland, & Good, 1974; Hargreaves, 1998). Teachers’ emotions may also haveimportant consequences for their instruction and classroom practice (Sutton &Wheatley, 2003). The idea that children’s characteristics influence adults is, in fact,not new. For example, Bell (Bell, 1968; Bell & Harper, 1977) suggested quite sometime ago that child–adult interactions are bidirectional and a child is an importantpart of the environment of parents.

Research on the ways in which students’ academic skills contribute to teachers’instruction rests largely on the assumption that success in education depends on adapt-ing teaching to the needs of individual students (Connor et al., 2009; Corno & Snow,1986; Pressley, Hogan, Wharton-McDonald, Mistretta, & Ettenberg, 1996; Sinatra &Mason, 2008). From this point of view, children’s academic performance and skillsare particularly important in activating teacher instruction (Corno, 2008). Forexample, Pressley et al. (2006) suggested that successful instruction entails adjustingindividual and group level instruction to students’ level of performance. This oftenmeans that teachers give more attention and support to poorly performing studentsthan to other students, simply because they are more in need of such support.

Although the influence of children’s academic performance on teachers’ instruc-tion and teaching practices is widely acknowledged (Babad, 1998; Cooper, 1979;Corno, 2008; Doyle, 1981; Martin, 2004; Pianta, 2006; Pianta et al., 1997; Skinner &Belmont, 1993; Yarrow et al., 1971), this particular issue has rarely been analysedempirically, and the findings are mixed. Some studies have shown that teachers givemore praise, support and encouragent to students of whom they have low expectationsthan to high-expectation students (Babad, 1990). Some other studies, in turn, haveindicated that teachers give more praise (Brophy & Good, 1970; Good et al., 1980)and feedback to (Solomon et al., 1996), and set higher performance demands (Brophy& Good, 1970) on, students of whom they have high expectations. A recent findingalso indicated that the poorer the performance in reading at the end of the kindergartena student showed, the higher the amount of support and attention in reading the first-grade teacher provided for a particular student (Nurmi, Kiuru, et al., submitted). The

Downloaded By: [Jyvaskylan Yliopisto] At: 08:00 10 January 2011

Educational Psychology 39

first-grade students’ poor level of performance in mathematics has also been found toinfluence the higher amount of active instruction given by teacher (Nurmi, Viljaranta,& Aunola, submitted). Based on previous studies suggesting that children’s skill levelhave consequences for how teachers instruct a particular child (Babad, 1990; Babadet al., 1989; Solomon et al., 1996), there is a good reason to assume that students’overall skill level in the classroom may also influence teacher classroom practices.Consequently, the aim of the present study was to investigate whether children’sacademic pre-skills, typical of the kindergarten classroom, would predict their teach-ers’ teaching practices in the classrooms (i.e. overall classroom quality).

Observed classroom quality

Classroom observations have been recently shown to provide a valid instrument formeasuring teaching practices and classroom interactions. The present study used theClassroom Assessment Scoring System (CLASS; Pianta, La Paro, & Hamre, 2008) toexamine the classroom quality in learning situations. This instrument measures threedomains of classroom interaction, that is, emotional support, classroom organisationand instructional support. The reason for choosing this instrument was that it assessesthree well-defined aspects of classroom quality by covering the emotional, instruc-tional and organisational aspects of instruction. In high-quality classrooms, teachersprovide emotional support: they are warm, responsive and sensitive to children’sneeds and interests (Pianta et al., 2008). In classrooms with high-quality classroomorganisation, teachers use proactive rather than reactive approaches to discipline,establish clear and stable routines, monitor their students carefully to keep theminvolved in academic tasks and provide activities that are interesting to children(Emmer & Stough, 2001; Pianta et al., 2008). In classrooms with high-quality instruc-tional support, teachers provide scaffolding and support (Yates & Yates, 1990), createopportunities for conceptual development and employ appropriate questioning andfeedback (La Paro, Pianta, & Stuhlman, 2004; Pianta et al., 2008).

The results obtained from previous studies suggest that teaching practices and class-room quality are important contributors to children’s emergent and subsequentacademic performance (e.g. Hamre & Pianta, 2001, 2005). However, little is knownabout the role that students’ academic skills play in their teachers’ teaching practicesand classroom quality at classroom level (Pianta et al., 1997). There are some studiesindicating that child characteristics contribute to teacher–child relationship quality (e.g.Justice, Cottone, Mashburn, & Rimm-Kauffman, 2008; Rudasill & Rimm-Kaufman,2009). The aim of the present study was to investigate whether children’s pre-readingand pre-math skills, typical of the kindergarten classroom, would predict the observedclassroom quality in those particular classrooms.

Kindergarten education in Finland

In Finland compulsory education begins in the year in which the child turns sevenyears of age and ends when he/she is 16. Kindergarten education is provided in theyear preceding entrance into primary school, that is, at the age of six. Although kinder-garten education is not compulsory, almost the whole age cohort (98%) attendskindergarten, which is organised either in day care centres (78%) or in schools (22%)(Rautanen, 2007). Kindergarten teachers in Finland are required to have at least abachelor’s degree in education.

Downloaded By: [Jyvaskylan Yliopisto] At: 08:00 10 January 2011

40 E. Pakarinen et al.

The core curriculum for kindergarten education in Finland is regulated by theMinistry of Education (Finnish National Board of Education, 2000). Kindergarteneducation is closely integrated with early childhood education in general and in partic-ular with the first two years of primary school. The kindergarten curriculum includesvarious subject areas (language and interaction, mathematics, environmental studiesand natural science, ethics, health, physical and motor development, and art andculture) but instruction is not divided into lessons on specific subjects. Instead, theactivities in kindergarten are an integrated part of thematic learning throughout theday. Children’s skill development is promoted through various play-related methods,together with child-initiated and small group activities. The assumption is that chil-dren learn at their own speed, in accordance with their own capabilities and interests.

Finnish is an orthographically transparent language (similar to Italian or Greek),and the process of learning to read differs substantially from learning to read in anorthographically opaque language (e.g. English; see, Seymour, Aro, & Erskine, 2003).Finnish is also relatively easy to learn to read as it has a highly regular orthographyand simple syllabic structure (Seymour et al., 2003): about 25% of Finnish childrencan read before they enter formal education at the age of seven and most of them haveat least some pre-reading skills (Lerkkanen, Rasku-Puttonen, Aunola, & Nurmi,2004). Similarly, around one-third of children know also some basic arithmetic withsmall numbers when they enter to elementary school (Aunola, Leskinen, Lerkkanen,& Nurmi, 2004). However, as has been shown previously, learning to read (Leppänen,Niemi, Aunola, & Nurmi, 2004) and learning mathematics (Aunola et al., 2004)follow a different pattern of developmental dynamics, the former showing decrease inindividual differences in first grade and the latter showing increasing individual differ-ences. Consequently, in the present study the pre-skills in reading and those in math-ematics were investigated as separate variables at the level of individual children.

Research questions and hypotheses

The present study examined the following research questions:

(1) Do kindergarten classrooms differ in terms of children’s pre-reading andpre-math skills? We expected, as reported previously in secondary schoolclassrooms (De Fraine, Van Damme, Van Landeghem, Opdenakker, &Onghena, 2003), to find between-classroom differences in children’s pre-reading skills (Hypothesis 1a), and in their pre-math skills (Hypothesis 1b)(Opdenakker, Van Damme, De Fraine, Van Landeghem, & Onghena, 2002;Perry, Donohue, & Weinstein, 2007).

(2) Do between-classroom differences in children’s academic pre-skills predictobserved classroom quality, that is, emotional support, classroom organisationand instructional support given by teachers?

As teachers of low ability or low-track classes have been reported to use a higherlevel of management strategies (Eder, 1981), and low-achieving students have beenshown to receive more support and active instruction from them (Babad, 1990, 1998;Babad et al., 1989), we expected that the lower the academic pre-skills (Hypothesis 2)the children in a classroom show, the more emotional and instructional support, andclassroom organisation kindergarten teachers would give the children. In order tocontrol for children’s socio-economical background, mothers’ level of education was

Downloaded By: [Jyvaskylan Yliopisto] At: 08:00 10 January 2011

Educational Psychology 41

included in the analyses. Similarly, group size and professional experience of thekindergarten teachers were controlled for.

Method

Participants

Children

The present study is part of the larger ongoing longitudinal First Steps Study(Lerkkanen et al., 2006). In the study, 1268 (655 boys, 613 girls) kindergarteners(mostly six-year-old children; M = 73.58 months old, SD = 3.40 months), 137 kinder-garten teachers (130 female, seven male) and 1028 mothers were investigated. Thekindergartens were situated in three municipalities, two of these education authoritieswere located in Central Finland and one in Eastern Finland. Some kindergartens werein semi-rural and some in urban areas. The size of the kindergarten classroom rangedfrom three to 24 children (M = 13.85; SD = 5.92). Of the observed classrooms 36(73.5%) were situated in day care centres and 13 (26.5 %) in elementary schools. Allthe groups were Finnish-speaking. Although most of the groups were composedexclusively of kindergarten-age children (six-year-olds), the age composition waswider in some groups: some of the groups situated in day care centres also enrolledyounger children (most often five-year-olds), and some of the groups situated inelementary schools also enrolled first and/or second graders.

The representativeness of the children’s family background with respect to thegeneral Finnish population was high. The vast majority of the children, 61.2%, camefrom nuclear families, 10.7% were from single parent families, 7.0% from blendedfamilies and 1.2% from families where the parents had been divorced and had sharedparenthood. One-hundred and three (20%) mothers did not report their family structure.

At the commencement of the study, the children’s parents were asked to give theirwritten consent for their own and their children’s participation. The children partici-pated in the assessments of their pre-reading and pre-math skills in October (Time 1).The tests were carried out by trained investigators. Mothers were asked to fill in abackground questionnaire in March.

Teachers

The kindergarten teachers were also asked for their written consent to participate inthe study. Teachers were asked to complete questionnaires in March (Time 2) of thekindergarten year. Questionnaires were sent to the teachers and they were returned bymail. The kindergarten teachers’ professional experience in day care ranged from lessthan a year to more than 15 years (Mode = more than 15 years). Their experience inelementary school setting ranged from not at all to more than 15 years (Mode = not atall). All the teachers had at least a BA-level education. One kindergarten teacher didnot fill out the questionnaire on education or professional experience. The teachersparticipating in the classroom observations were selected on a voluntary basis fromthe total of 137 kindergarten teachers participating in the First Steps Study. Forty-ninekindergarten teachers (47 female, two male) agreed to participate in classroom obser-vations conducted in spring (Time 2). When the 49 kindergarten teachers who partic-ipated in the observations were compared with those who chose not to participate, nostatistically significant differences were found in their professional experience and

Downloaded By: [Jyvaskylan Yliopisto] At: 08:00 10 January 2011

42 E. Pakarinen et al.

number of six-year-olds in the classrooms. Thus, missingness at random was assumedand statistical analyses were carried out using the full-information maximum likeli-hood estimation, which allows all the information available to be used withoutimputing data (Muthén & Muthén, 1998–2008).

Children’s measures

Pre-reading skills. Children’s pre-reading skills were assessed by using two subtests.Initial phoneme identification was tested using the ARMI test material (Lerkkanen,Poikkeus, & Ketonen, 2006). The child was shown 10 sets of four pictures, one at atime. The four pictures were named. The children were instructed as follows: Here arepictures of omena, sukka, reppu and lintu [apple, sock, bag, bird]. Listen carefully:which word starts with the sound/o/: omena, sukka, reppu, lintu? The test was admin-istered individually to each child by a trained tester at Time 1. The sum score wasbased on the number of correct items (maximum value of 10).

The Letter Knowledge test consisted of all 29 letters in the Finnish language. Theexperimenter showed 29 uppercase letters divided into three rows in random order.The procedure was adapted from the ARMI test material (Lerkkanen et al., 2006).The children were asked to name the letters, one row at a time, while the other rowswere masked. The test was administered individually to each child by a trained testerat Time 1. The sum score was based on the number of correct items (maximum valueof 29).

The sum scores for Initial Phoneme Identification and Letter Knowledge were firststandardised, and a mean score subsequently calculated from the two scores. TheCronbach’s alpha for the pre-reading skills was .95.

Pre-math skills. Knowledge of number sequences was assessed with four tasks inwhich the children were asked to count aloud forwards and backwards as instructed.The tasks involved (1) counting forward up to the Number 31, (2) counting back-wards five digits starting from Number 12, (3) counting backwards five digits fromNumber 23, and (4) counting forward from Number 6 to Number 13. The score wasbased on the number of correct items (maximum 2 points for each task), and thetotal maximum score for the test was 8. The split-half reliability for pre-math skillswas .63.

Teachers’ measures

Classroom observations. The kindergarten classrooms were observed using theClassroom Assessment Scoring System (CLASS Pre-K; La Paro et al., 2004; Piantaet al., 2008). The CLASS Pre-K consists of 10 items measuring three components ofclassroom quality: (1) emotional support (four items: positive climate, negativeclimate, teacher sensitivity and regard for student perspectives), (2) classroom organ-isation (three items: behaviour management, productivity and instructional learningformats), and (3) instructional support (three items: concept development, quality offeedback, and language modelling). In this study we used nine items from theCLASS based on the validation in Finnish kindergartens (see Pakarinen et al., 2010).Each item was rated on a seven-point scale: low (1, 2), moderate (3–5) and high (6,7). The manual (Pianta et al., 2008) provides detailed indicators for each item andexamples of teacher behaviours and classroom interactions for these ratings together

Downloaded By: [Jyvaskylan Yliopisto] At: 08:00 10 January 2011

Educational Psychology 43

with reliability and validity information (see also Pakarinen et al., 2010). TheCLASS has been validated in over 4000 classrooms in a variety of educationalsettings (Hamre, Pianta, Mashburn, & Downer, 2007) and it has proven to have goodvalidity and reliability in measuring classroom quality (Hamre et al., 2007; Piantaet al., 2008).

The kindergarten classrooms were observed in spring 2007 by 17 trainedobservers, all of whom were female university students. The observers were care-fully trained in advance (see Pakarinen et al., 2010). Each kindergarten class wasobserved on two different days by a pair of observers. Observation began in themorning when instructional activity started (at 9 am) and lasted approximately threehours (until naptime in full-time programmes and until the time children left inhalf-time programs). The two observers assigned their CLASS codings indepen-dently of each other. The inter-rater reliabilities between the pairs of observersvaried mainly between .80 and .94. Correlations between the CLASS ratings for thetwo separate observation days ranged from .44 (productivity) to .80 (teacher sensi-tivity). For the further analyses, the ratings from these two observation days werecollapsed and a mean score for each item was calculated from the ratings of the twoobservers.

Summary scores were calculated taking the mean of the items belonging to eachspecific factor, namely, emotional support, classroom organisation and instructionalsupport. The Cronbach’s alpha reliabilities for the scales were as follows: emotionalsupport .93; classroom organisation .88; instructional support .90.

Professional experience. Kindergarten teachers were asked to indicate their profes-sional experience separately as kindergarten teachers and as elementary school teach-ers on a six-point scale (0 = not at all, 1 = less than a year, 2 = 1–5 years, 3 = 6–10years, 4 = 11–15 years, 5 = more than 15 years). A new variable describing kindergar-ten teachers’ total amount of professional experience was formulated by adding expe-rience in kindergarten to experience in school.

Parents’ measures

Mother’s level of education. Mothers were asked to report their post-compulsoryeducation. The results showed that 7.0% of mothers had no vocational education,32.0% had a vocational school degree, 23.0% had a vocational college degree, 12.2%had a polytechnic degree or bachelor’s degree and 25.8% had a master’s degree orhigher. Five mothers out of 1028 did not report their vocational education.

Analysis strategy

The aim of the study was to examine the extent to which kindergarten classes woulddiffer from each other with respect to children’s pre-reading and pre-math skills andthe extent to which these classroom differences in children’s previous skill levelswould predict their teachers’ observed teaching practices (i.e. classroom quality). TheMultilevel Modeling technique (Duncan et al., 1997) is an excellent tool for answeringresearch questions of these kinds. First, it enables the variance of the variables to bedivided into two components: (1) the variation that is due to the differences betweenkindergarten classes (between-kindergarten class variation), and (2) the variation thatis due to individual differences within classes (within-kindergarten class variation).

Downloaded By: [Jyvaskylan Yliopisto] At: 08:00 10 January 2011

44 E. Pakarinen et al.

Second, the Multilevel Modeling technique enables one to use the between- andwithin-level variance as predictors of other variables both at the kindergarten classlevel (between-level) and at the level of the individual children (within-level). In ourcase, we used between-level variation in children’s pre-skills to predict kindergartenteachers’ teaching practices.

The analyses were carried out in the following steps. First, to examine the differ-ences between kindergarten classes in children’s academic pre-skills, intraclasscorrelations (ICCs) and the variance estimates at the between and within levels werecalculated by using the kindergarten class as a clustering variable. Next, correlationsbetween the variables were calculated at the kindergarten class level (between-level)and at the level individual children (within-level). Variables measuring observedteaching practices were treated as class-level variables. Variables with an insignifi-cant kindergarten class-level variance were treated as individual-level variables.Other variables were analysed at both levels. Next, a multilevel model was carried outfor the children’s academic pre-skills and classroom quality (see theoretical model inFigure 1). Classroom quality, that is, emotional support, classroom organisation andinstructional support observed in a kindergarten class at Time 2, was predicted bychildren’s academic pre-skills (i.e. a latent variable of pre-reading and pre-mathskills) (Time 1) typical of the kindergarten class, mothers’ education, kindergartengroup size and professional experience of the teacher. Children’s academic pre-skillswere predicted by mothers’ education typical of the kindergarten class. At the level ofindividual children, pre-math and pre-reading skills were predicted by mother’seducation and child’s gender.Figure 1. Theoretical multilevel model for academic pre-skills and classroom quality.

Figure 1. Theoretical multilevel model for academic pre-skills and classroom quality.

Downloaded By: [Jyvaskylan Yliopisto] At: 08:00 10 January 2011

Educational Psychology 45

All the analyses were performed using the Mplus statistical package (Version 5;Muthén & Muthén, 1998–2008) with the missing data method, that is, the standardMAR approach (missing at random) to missingness (Muthén & Muthén, 1998–2008).This missing data method uses all the data that are available to estimate the modelwithout imputing data. Because the variables were skewed, the parameters of themodels were estimated using maximum likelihood estimation with non-normalityrobust standard errors (MLR estimator; Muthén & Muthén, 1998–2008). Thegoodness-of-fit of the estimated models was evaluated by five indicators: χ2 test,comparative fit index (CFI), Tucker Lewis index (TLI), root mean square error ofapproximation (RMSEA) and standardized root mean square residual (SRMR).

Results

Intraclass correlations

First, to examine the differences between kindergarten classes in children’s academicpre-skills, ICCs and the variance estimates were calculated at the between and withinlevels by using the kindergarten class as a clustering variable. One-tailed test of signif-icance was used (H0: between-class variance is zero; H1: between-class variance islarger than zero). The results (Table 1) showed that the ICCs (between-class variation)in kindergarten in the fall (T1) both in pre-reading and pre-math skills were statisti-cally significant: 3% of the total variation in pre-reading skills and 5% of the totalvariation in pre-math skills was due to the kindergarten class membership. The resultsfor the background variables (see Table 1) further indicated significant kindergartenclass-level variation in mothers’ education measured in kindergarten in the spring (T2)(10% of the total variance). However, the ICC for gender (1% of the total variance)was non-significant. Consequently, gender was treated as an individual level (within-level) variable in the further analyses.

The impact of kindergarteners’ pre-skills on classroom quality

The within-level (below the diagonal) and between-level (above the diagonal)correlations, and the means and variances for the observed variables are presented inTable 2. As a next step, we ran a multilevel model to determine whether the differ-ences between kindergarten classes in children’s academic pre-skills (i.e. pre-readingand pre-math skills) would predict the observed classroom quality (i.e. emotionalsupport, classroom organisation and instructional support) later on, when controllingfor mothers’ education typical of that kindergarten class, kindergarten group size andprofessional experience of the teacher.

Table 1. Intraclass correlations (ICCs) and kindergarten classroom (between) and individuallevel (within) variances (standard errors in parentheses) teacher ID at Time 2 as a clusteringvariable.

Variables ICCBetween-variance (standard error)

Within-variance (standard error)

Pre-reading skills, Time 1 0.03* 0.02 (0.01)* 0.76 (0.03)***Pre-math skills, Time 1 0.05* 0.42 (0.18)* 7.77 (0.25)***Mothers’ education, Time 2 0.10*** 0.18 (0.05)*** 1.55 (0.06)***

*p < .05; ***p < .001.

Downloaded By: [Jyvaskylan Yliopisto] At: 08:00 10 January 2011

46 E. Pakarinen et al.

Tabl

e 2.

Wit

hin-

leve

l (b

elow

the

dia

gona

l) a

nd b

etw

een-

leve

l co

rrel

atio

ns (

abov

e th

e di

agon

al),

and

mea

ns a

nd v

aria

nces

of

obse

rved

var

iabl

es.

Var

iabl

es1

23

45

67

89

Mea

nV

arbe

twee

n

1. P

re-r

eadi

ng s

kill

s T

1a1.

00.6

4***

.82*

**—

−.15

−.39

*−.

13.2

4.1

70.

000.

022.

Pre

-mat

h sk

ills

T1a

.57*

**1.

00.5

5***

—−.

32*

−.56

***

−.46

b.1

9.0

64.

290.

423.

Mot

her’

s ed

ucat

ion

T2a

.19*

**.1

1**

1.00

—−.

16−.

20−.

14.0

0.0

33.

190.

184.

Gen

derb

−.15

***

.15*

**.0

21.

00—

——

——

1.52

—5.

Em

otio

nal

supp

ort

T2c

——

——

1.00

.86*

**.8

0***

−.14

.07

5.12

0.52

6. C

lass

room

org

aniz

atio

n T

2c—

——

——

1.00

.79*

**−.

04.2

9*5.

340.

387.

Ins

truc

tion

al s

uppo

rt T

2c—

——

——

—1.

00−.

05.1

43.

960.

728.

Kin

derg

arte

n gr

oup

size

c—

——

——

——

1.00

.02

13.8

329

.84

9. P

rofe

ssio

nal

expe

rien

cec

——

——

——

——

1.00

4.10

1.29

Var

wit

hin

0.76

7.77

1.55

0.25

——

——

—

*p <

.05;

**p

< .0

1; *

**p

< .0

01.

Not

es:

a Var

iabl

e bo

th a

t be

twee

n-le

vel

and

wit

hin-

leve

l.b W

ithi

n-le

vel

vari

able

.c B

etw

een-

leve

l va

riab

le.

(—)

not

esti

mat

ed.

Downloaded By: [Jyvaskylan Yliopisto] At: 08:00 10 January 2011

Educational Psychology 47

The final model included statistically significant paths and associations only(χ2(23, Nwithin = 1268, Nbetween = 137) = 35.97, p = 0.04; CFI = 0.99, TLI = 0.98;RMSEA = 0.02; SRMRbetween = 0.10, SRMRwithin = 0.003). The model is presentedin Figure 2 (kindergarten class level (between-level) results above the dashed line andindividual level (within-level) results below the dashed line). The results (Figure 2)showed that, at the kindergarten class level, children’s academic pre-skills negativelypredicted the observed classroom quality: the lower the academic pre-skills (T1)typical of the kindergarten class, the higher the classroom quality in that particularclass later on (T2). Mothers’ education typical of the kindergarten class also predictedthe academic pre-skills typical of the kindergarten class: the higher the mothers’education, the better the academic pre-skills of the children in a particular class.Figure 2. Multilevel model for academic pre-skills and classroom quality. The paths and associations between variables are presented as standardised estimates. Note: 1. p < .05; **p < .01; ***p < .001. 2. Gender: 1 = girl, 2 = boy.The results (Figure 2) at the individual level showed, further, that gender nega-tively predicted the level of children’s pre-reading skills and positively predicted thelevel of children’s pre-math skills: boys showed lower pre-reading skills and higherpre-math skills than girls. Mother’s education also positively predicted both of theacademic pre-skills: the higher the mother’s education, the higher the child’s pre-reading and pre-math skills.

Discussion

The present study is one of the first attempts to investigate the role that children’sacademic skills typical of a class play in the teaching practices that kindergarten teach-ers use in that particular class. The results showed that in classes where the children

Figure 2. Multilevel model for academic pre-skills and classroom quality. The pathsand associations between variables are presented as standardised estimates. Note: *p < .05;**p < .01; ***p < .001. Gender: 1 = girl, 2 = boy.

Downloaded By: [Jyvaskylan Yliopisto] At: 08:00 10 January 2011

48 E. Pakarinen et al.

typically had low academic pre-skills there was higher observed classroom quality ascompared to classes with a high level of academic pre-skills. These results suggest thatteachers adapt their teaching practices in accordance with children’s academicperformance in a particular kindergarten class (Corno, 2008; Pianta, 2006; Pressleyet al., 2006).

The first aim of the present study was to examine the extent to which children indifferent kindergarten classes differ in their pre-reading and pre-math skills. As washypothesised (Hypotheses 1a and 1b), the results showed that children in the samekindergarten class resembled each other in their academic pre-skills. This resultsuggests that, although Finnish children typically enrol at their nearest day care centreor school, and there is no active selection of kindergarten by the parents, children’sacademic skills differ in different classes. One possible reason for this is that parents’level of education and SES differs across different residential locations, and as chil-dren are enrolled at kindergarten according to their local catchment area, this createsa selection effect to different kindergarten classes. When interpreting the results wehave to keep in mind that these differences between the classes were relatively smallwhen compared with other countries. In our study, class differences explained by classmembership were 5% for pre-math skills and 3% for pre-reading skills, whereas inPerry et al.’s (2007) study class differences explained by class membership were 22%for math skills.

Our next aim was to examine whether the academic pre-skills typical of thekindergarten class would predict the observed classroom quality in that particularclass. As was expected (Hypothesis 2), the results showed that children’s academicpre-skills typical of the kindergarten class in the fall predicted the classroom qualityobserved in that particular class in the spring: the lower the typical academic pre-skillsof the children in the class, the higher the classroom quality observed in that particularclass. This result suggests that once aware of the low level of academic pre-skills ofthe children in their class, kindergarten teachers start to pay particular attention to theirteaching practices. That is, they start to set stable and consistent routines, lay downbehavioural rules and expectations, apply effective monitoring and make extra effortto provide the children with inherently interesting activities. By adjusting their teach-ing practices according to the children’s skill level, the teachers seek to respond to theindividual needs of children and promote their learning in their zone of proximaldevelopment (Pressley et al., 1996). Our result is in line with the recent finding ofNurmi, Kiuru, et al. (submitted) who found that the poorer the performance in readinga student showed at the end of the kindergarten, the higher the amount of support andattention in reading the first-grade teacher gave that particular student. The finding isalso in line with the previous finding showing more management by teachers in low-ability or low-track classes deployed (Eder, 1981).

This finding suggests further that awareness of low academic pre-skills of thechildren in a class activates teachers to provide more scaffolding and individualisedfeedback to children. In other words, they adjust their instructional practices in accor-dance with the academic performance of the children in their class (Corno, 2008;Doyle, 1979b; Pianta, 2006). It is possible that the teachers increase their support withthe aim of reducing the gap in academic skills between children with low pre-skillsand children with higher pre-skills and preparing them for school entry. As indicatedby findings of Hamre and Pianta (2005), high-quality instructional support can aid inclosing the gap in academic achievement between at-risk children and children with-out common risk indicators. The results of the present study are also in accordance

Downloaded By: [Jyvaskylan Yliopisto] At: 08:00 10 January 2011

Educational Psychology 49

with the finding showing that the poorer a first-grade student’s level of performancein mathematics was, the more the teacher reported providing active instruction for thatparticular student (Nurmi et al., submitted).

The finding that kindergarteners’ academic pre-skills predict the classroom qualitylater on also suggests that when children typically have low academic pre-skills in aparticular class, kindergarten teachers start to pay more attention to positive interac-tions in the classroom and to their responsiveness and sensitiveness to children’sneeds. Emotionally supportive teachers notice when students are struggling or needextra support, either academically or socially, and then respond to those needs appro-priately (Hamre & Pianta, 2007). However, although the amount of emotional supportgiven by teacher correlated negatively with children’s pre-math skills, it did not corre-late with pre-reading skills. One possible explanation for this result is that emotionalsupport has more to do with the teacher’s personality and emotional reactions, whichmight not be so easily adjusted as classroom organisation and instructional support.

Overall, the results of the present study add to our knowledge of the impact ofchildren’s previous academic skills on teachers’ teaching practices. In addition tobeing associated with teachers’ self-reports on their instruction (Nurmi, Kiuru, et al.,submitted; Nurmi et al., submitted), children’s previous academic performance is alsoconnected with the classroom quality observed in their kindergarten class. Our find-ings suggest that teachers actively adapt their instructional practices according to thelevels of pre-reading and pre-math skills in the kindergarten class. It is important tonote that we controlled for mothers’ education typical of that kindergarten class,number of children in the group and professional experience of the teacher in ouranalyses. Children’s academic skill level but not the other background variables werefound to predict the overall level of classroom quality.

The present study has also some implications for future research. First, as ourstudy is one of the first efforts to examine the impact of the overall level of children’sacademic pre-skills in the class on the quality of instruction given by teachers, thereis clearly a need for future studies on this topic at different grade levels and educa-tional settings. Second, as our study did not investigate the impacts of adaptiveinstruction on children’s academic performance, there is an evident need for futurestudies on this topic. Research in these areas will contribute, in particular, to the devel-opment of teaching practices that can effectively help both individual children andclasses with different levels of academic skills. Third, as our study examined teachingpractices by using classroom observation, it would also be important to investigateteachers’ opinions and reflections on adaptive teaching, such as how aware they areof their teaching practices and of modifying them according to students’ level ofperformance.

The present study has also some practical implications. First, the findings empha-sise the importance of finding appropriate pedagogical tools to handle the differencesin pre-reading and pre-math skills between students in classroom contexts. Forexample, Pressley et al. (1996) suggested recently that matching demands of instruc-tion to students’ skill levels plays an important role in classroom learning. In suchindividual instruction, students are given tasks that are just a bit challenging for thembut not far away beyond their current competence (see also Juel & Minden-Cupp,2000; McCaslin & Good, 1996). Second, there is an evident need to develop newmethods for teacher training which would contribute to self-understanding and meta-cognitive knowledge of one’s instructional practices, and their regulation in classroomcontexts.

Downloaded By: [Jyvaskylan Yliopisto] At: 08:00 10 January 2011

50 E. Pakarinen et al.

Limitations

This study has some limitations that need to be considered in any attempts to genera-lise the findings of the study. First, our study did not investigate the cross-laggedrelations between children’s pre-skills in a particular class and their teachers’ teachingpractices, that is, not all variables were measured at each time point. Such cross-laggedinvestigations are needed to better understand the processes involved in teacher–student interactions, and to make sure that low academic pre-skills contribute to teach-ers’ teaching practices. Second, the sample size of the observed teachers in the studywas small, which might have decreased the power of statistical testing. Third, althoughthe ICCs of the academic pre-skills were statistically significant, they were small inmagnitude. Thus, cautious is warranted when trying to generalise the findings andconcluding practical implications. Fourth, the measure of children’s pre-math skillswas relatively narrow, comprising only number sequence skill. Fifth, the results werefound in a particular cultural and educational setting, that is, in Finnish kindergartens.As there is a substantial amount of variation in how kindergartens and primary schoolsare organised, and the kinds of instruction provided in different countries, these find-ings should be replicated in other cultures and educational settings. Finally, theCLASS observation instrument has also some limitations. Although it has proven tobe a valid and reliable instrument in a variety of educational settings (Hamre et al.,2007; Pianta et al., 2008), it measures quite a general classroom quality and does takeinto account the experiences of individual children. Consequently, more detailed andindividualised investigation of the student–teacher interaction is needed in the future.

Conclusion

Overall, the results of the present study suggest that kindergarten teachers’ instruc-tional practices are sensitive to the level of academic performance typical of thechildren in their classes. Teachers actively adjust their instructional support and class-room organisation to the academic skills of the children in their class.

ReferencesAllington, R.L. (1980). Teacher interruption behaviors during primary-grade oral reading.

Journal of Educational Psychology, 72, 371–377.Aunola, K., Leskinen, E., Lerkkanen, M.-K., & Nurmi, J.-E. (2004). Developmental dynamics

of math performance from preschool to Grade 2. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96,699–713.

Babad, E. (1990). Measuring and changing teachers’ differential behavior as perceived bystudents and teachers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 683–690.

Babad, E. (1998). Preferential affect: The crux of the teacher expectancy issue. In J.Brophy (Ed.), Advances in research on teaching: Expectations in the classroom (Vol. 7,pp. 183–214). New York: JAI Press.

Babad, E., Bernieri, F., & Rosenthal, R. (1989). When less information is more informative:Diagnosing teacher expectations from brief samples of behaviour. British Journal ofEducational Psychology, 59, 281–295.

Bell, R.Q. (1968). A reinterpretation of the direction of effects in studies of socialization.Psychological Review, 75, 81–95.

Bell, R.Q., & Harper, L. (1977). Child effects on adults. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Borko, H., & Putnam, R.T. (1996). Learning to teach. In D. Berliner & R. Calfee (Eds.),

Handbook of educational psychology (pp. 673–708). New York/London: MacmillanLibrary Reference USA/Prentice Hall International.

Downloaded By: [Jyvaskylan Yliopisto] At: 08:00 10 January 2011

Educational Psychology 51

Brophy, J., & Good, T.L. (1970). Teachers’ communication of differential expectations forchildren’s classroom performance: Some behavioral data. Journal of EducationalPsychology, 61, 365–374.

Calderhead, J. (1996). Teachers: Beliefs and knowledge. In D. Berliner & R. Calfee (Eds.),Handbook of educational psychology (pp. 709–725). New York/London: MacmillanLibrary Reference USA/Prentice Hall International.

Connor, C.M., Piasta, S.B., Fishman, B., Glasney, S., Schatschneider, C., Crowe, E., …Morrison, F.J. (2009). Individualizing student instruction precisely: Effects of child ×instruction interactions on first graders’ literacy development. Child Development, 80,77–100.

Cooper, H.M. (1979). Pygmalion grows up: A model for teacher expectation communicationand performance influence. Review of Educational Research, 49, 389–410.

Corno, L. (2008). On teaching adaptively. Educational Psychologist, 43, 161–173.Corno, L., & Snow, R.E. (1986). Adapting teaching to individual differences among learners.

In M.C. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (3rd ed., pp. 605–629). NewYork: American Educational Research Association.

Cronbach, L.J., & Snow, R.E. (1977). Aptitudes and instructional methods: A handbook forresearch on interactions. Oxford: Irvington.

Davis, H.A. (2003). Conceptualizing the role and influence of student–teacher relationshipson children’s social and cognitive development. Educational Psychologist, 38, 207–234.

De Fraine, B., Van Damme, J., Van Landeghem, G., Opdenakker, M.C., & Onghena, P.(2003). The effect of schools and classes on language development. British EducationalResearch Journal, 29, 841–859.

Doyle, W. (1979a). Classroom effects. Theory into Practice, 18, 138–144.Doyle, W. (1979b). Making managerial decisions in classrooms. In D.L. Duke (Ed.), Class-

room management: 78th Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education(pp. 42–74). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

Doyle, W. (1981). Research on classroom contexts. Journal of Teacher Education, 32, 3–6.Duncan, T.E., Duncan, S.C., Alpert, A., Hops, H., Stoolmiller, M., & Muthén, B. (1997).

Latent variable modeling of longitudinal and multilevel substance use data. MultivariateBehavioral Research, 32, 275–318.

Eder, D. (1981). Ability grouping as a self-fulfilling prophecy: A micro-analysis of teacher–student interaction. Sociology of Education, 54, 151–162.

Emmer, E.T., Oakland, T.D., & Good, T.L. (1974). Do pupils affect teachers’ styles ofinstruction? Educational Leadership, 31, 700–704.

Emmer, E.T., & Stough, L. (2001). Classroom management: A critical part of educationalpsychology, with implications for teacher education. Educational Psychologist, 36, 103–112.

Finnish National Board of Education. (2000). Esiopetuksen opetussuunnitelman perusteet[The core curriculum for kindergarten education]. Helsinki: Finnish National Board ofEducation.

Good, T.L., Cooper, H.M., & Blakey, S.L. (1980). Classroom interaction as a function ofteacher expectations, student sex, and time of year. Journal of Educational Psychology,72, 378–385.

Hamre, B.K., & Pianta, R.C. (2001). Early teacher–child relationship and the trajectory ofchildren’s school outcomes through eighth grade. Child Development, 72, 625–638.

Hamre, B.K., & Pianta, R.C. (2005). Can instructional and emotional support in the first gradeclassroom make a difference for children at risk of school failure? Child Development, 76,949–967.

Hamre, B.K., & Pianta, R.C. (2007). Learning opportunities in preschool and early elementaryclassrooms. In R.C. Pianta, M.J. Cox., & K. Snow (Eds.), School readiness and the transi-tion to kindergarten (pp. 49–84). Baltimore: Brookes.

Hamre, B.K., Pianta, R.C., Mashburn, A.J., & Downer, J.T. (2007). Building a science ofclassrooms: Application of the CLASS framework in over 4,000 U.S. early childhood andelementary classrooms. Retrieved December 20, 2007, from http://www.fcd-us.org/resources/resources_show.htm?doc_id=507559

Hargreaves, A. (1998). The emotions of teaching and educational change. In A. Hargreaves,A. Lieberman, M. Fullan, & D. Hopkins (Eds.), International handbook of educationalchange (pp. 558–575). Dordrecht/Boston, MA/London: Kluwer Academic.

Downloaded By: [Jyvaskylan Yliopisto] At: 08:00 10 January 2011

52 E. Pakarinen et al.

Juel, C., & Minden-Cupp, C. (2000). Learning to read words: Linguistic units and instruc-tional strategies. Reading Research Quarterly, 35, 458–492.

Justice, L.M., Cottone, E.A., Mashburn, A., & Rimm-Kauffman, S.E. (2008). Relationshipsbetween teachers and preschoolers who are at risk: Contribution of children’s languageskills, temperamentally based attributes, and gender. Early Education and Development,19, 600–621.

La Paro, K.M., Pianta, R.C., & Stuhlman, M. (2004). The classroom assessment scoringsystem: Findings from the prekindergarten year. Elementary School Journal, 104, 409–426.

Lerkkanen, M.-K., Niemi, P., Poikkeus, A.-M., Poskiparta, E., Siekkinen, M., & Nurmi, J.-E.(2006). The First Steps Study (Alkuportaat, ongoing). Finland: University of Jyväskylä.

Lerkkanen, M.-K., Poikkeus, A.-M., & Ketonen, (2006). ARMI – Luku-ja kirjoitustaidonarviointimateriaali 1. luokalle [ARMI – The test material of reading and writing skills forthe first grade]. Helsinki: WSOY.

Lerkkanen, M.-K., Rasku-Puttonen, H., Aunola, K., & Nurmi, J.-E. (2004). Reading perfor-mance and its developmental trajectories during the first and the second grade. Learningand Instruction, 14, 111–130.

Leppänen, U., Niemi, P., Aunola, K., & Nurmi, J.-E. (2004). Development of readingskills among preschool and primary school pupils. Reading Research Quarterly, 39,72–93.

Martin, J. (2004). Self-regulated learning, social cognitive theory, and agency. EducationalPsychologist, 39, 135–145.

McCaslin, M., & Good, T.L. (1996). The informal curriculum. In D.C. Berliner & R.C. Calfee(Eds.), The handbook of educational psychology (pp. 622–670). New York: AmericanPsychological Association/Macmillan.

Muthén, L., & Muthén, B.O. (1998–2008). Mplus version 5. & Mplus users guide. http://www.statmodel.com/index.shtml

Nurmi, J.-E., Kiuru, N., Lerkkanen, M.-K., Niemi, P., Poikkeus, A.-M., Ahonen, T., & Lyyra,A.-L. (Submitted). A child’s literacy skills have an impact on teacher’s support inreading: Classroom characteristics as moderators.

Nurmi, J.-E., Viljaranta, J., & Aunola, K. (Submitted). Novice teachers adjust their instruc-tion in accordance to students’ academic performance.

Opdenakker, M.-C., Van Damme, J., De Fraine, B., Van Landeghem, G., & Onghena, P. (2002).The effects of schools and classes on mathematics achievement. School Effectiveness andSchool Improvement, 13, 399–427.

Pakarinen, E., Lerkkanen, M.-K., Poikkeus, A.-M., Kiuru, N., Siekkinen, M., Rasku-Puttonen,H., & Nurmi, J-E. (2010). A validation of the Classroom Assessment Scoring System inFinnish kindergartens. Early Education and Development, 21, 95–124.

Perry, K.E., Donohue, K.M., & Weinstein, R.S. (2007). Teaching practices and the promo-tion of achievement and adjustment in first grade. Journal of School Psychology, 45,269–292.

Perry, K.E., & Weinstein, R.S. (1998). The social context of early schooling and children’sschool adjustment. Educational Psychologist, 33, 177–194.

Pianta, R.C. (2006). Classroom management and relationships between children and teachers:Implications for research and practice. In C.M. Evertson & C.S. Weinstein (Eds.), Handbookof classroom management: Research, practice, and contemporary issues (pp. 685–709).Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Pianta, R.C., La Paro, K.M., & Hamre, B.K. (2008). The Classroom Assessment ScoringSystem: Manual, Pre-K. Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.

Pianta, R.C., Nimetz, S.L., & Bennett, E. (1997). Mother–child relationships, teacher–childrelationships, and school outcomes in preschool and kindergarten. Early ChildhoodResearch Quarterly, 12, 263–280.

Pressley, M., Gaskins, I.W., Solic, K., & Collins, S. (2006). A portrait of benchmark school:How a school produces high achievement in students who previously failed. Journal ofEducational Psychology, 98, 282–306.

Pressley, M., Hogan, K., Wharton-McDonald, R., Mistretta, J., & Ettenberg, S. (1996). Thechallenges of instructional scaffolding: The challenges of instruction that supports studentthinking. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 11, 138–146.

Downloaded By: [Jyvaskylan Yliopisto] At: 08:00 10 January 2011

Educational Psychology 53

Rautanen, R. (2007). Lasten koulunkäynti [School attendance]. In Suomalainen lapsi 2007[The Finnish child 2007] (pp. 187–205). Helsinki: Statistics Finland.

Rimm-Kaufman, S.E., Early, D., Cox, M., Saluja, G., Pianta, R., Bradley, R., & Payne, C.(2002). Early behavioral attributes and teachers’ sensitivity as predictors of competentbehavior in the kindergarten classroom. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology,23, 451–470.

Rudasill, K.M., & Rimm-Kaufman, S.E. (2009). Teacher–child relationship quality: The rolesof child temperament and teacher–child interactions. Early Childhood ResearchQuarterly, 24, 107–120.

Rutter, M. (1983). School effects on pupil progress: Research findings and policy implications.Child Development, 54, 1–29.

Seymour, P.H., Aro, M., & Erskine, J.M. (2003). Foundation literacy acquisition in Europeanorthographies. British Journal of Psychology, 94, 143–174.

Sinatra, G.M., & Mason, L. (2008). Beyond knowledge: Learner characteristics influencingconceptual change. In S. Vosniadou (Ed.), International handbook of research onconceptual change (pp. 560–582). New York: Routledge.

Sinclair, D.A., & Vealey, R.S. (1989). Effects of coaches’ expectations and feedback on theself-perceptions of athletes. Journal of Sport Behavior, 12, 77–91.

Skinner, E., & Belmont, M. (1993). Motivation in the classroom: Reciprocal effects of teacherbehavior and student engagement across the school year. Journal of EducationalPsychology, 85, 571–581.

Solomon, G.B., Striegel, D.A., Eliot, J.F., Heon, S.N., Maas, J.L., & Wayda, V.K. (1996). Theself-fulfilling prophecy in college basketball: Implications for effective coaching. Journalof Applied Sport Psychology, 8, 44–59.

Sutton, R., & Wheatley, K. (2003). Teachers’ emotions and teaching: A review of the literatureand directions for future research. Educational Psychology Review, 15, 327–358.

Turner, J.C., & Meyer, D.K. (2000). Studying and understanding the instructional contexts ofclassrooms: Using our past to forge our future. Educational Psychologist, 35, 69–85.

Yarrow, M., Waxler, C., & Scott, P. (1971). Child effects on adult behavior. DevelopmentalPsychology, 5, 300–311.

Yates, G.C., & Yates, S.M. (1990). Teacher effectiveness research: Towards describinguser-friendly classroom instruction. Educational Psychology, 10, 225–238.

Downloaded By: [Jyvaskylan Yliopisto] At: 08:00 10 January 2011