This article was downloaded by: [Universitara M Emineescu Iasi]On: 06 May 2015, At: 10:30Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registeredoffice: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Early Child Development and CarePublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/gecd20

Teacher beliefs and practices relatingto development in preschool:importance placed on social–emotionalbehaviours and skillsHeidi L. Hollingswortha & Marna K. Wintera

a Department of Education, Elon University, Elon, NC, USAPublished online: 22 Jan 2013.

To cite this article: Heidi L. Hollingsworth & Marna K. Winter (2013) Teacher beliefs and practicesrelating to development in preschool: importance placed on social–emotional behaviours and skills,Early Child Development and Care, 183:12, 1758-1781, DOI: 10.1080/03004430.2012.759567

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03004430.2012.759567

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as tothe accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinionsand views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Contentshould not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sourcesof information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever orhowsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arisingout of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Anysubstantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Teacher beliefs and practices relating to development inpreschool: importance placed on social–emotional behaviours andskills

Heidi L. Hollingsworth∗ and Marna K. Winter

Department of Education, Elon University, Elon, NC, USA

(Received 8 October 2012; final version received 13 December 2012)

Preschool teachers’ beliefs relating to the importance of social–emotionalcompetence and teacher practices that support children’s competence wereinvestigated through surveys and focus groups. Survey results indicated thatHead Start and public school pre-K teachers placed higher importance onsocial–emotional behaviours and skills than on early math and language andliteracy behaviours and skills and reported a variety of practices to promoteprosocial skills, pretend play, and friendships. Practices that support prosocialskills ranged from setting the tone of the social environment to responding tosituations that arose. Similarly, practices that support pretend play focused onsetting up pretend play scenarios and helping children play in those scenarios.Finally, practices to support friendships involved practices that may set the stagefor friendship development, facilitating dyadic and small group interactions, andinvolving parents. Results are discussed in terms of connections with previousresearch and developmentally appropriate practice recommendations.

Keywords: social development; play; friendship; preschool education;developmentally; appropriate practices; social competence

1. Introduction

Social and emotional domains are key areas for development in the first few years of life(Landy, 2009). Social competence – the ability to function socially with peers andadults (i.e. to use social skills to achieve one’s social goals, such as interacting wellwith others and having friends) – can contribute to emotional development, self-esteem, and school achievement (Landy, 2009; Tomlinson & Hyson, 2009). Children’sability to engage in pretend play contributes to their development of social competence(Landy, 2009; Myck-Wayne, 2010). Although not the same as social competence, pro-social behaviours are closely related to social competence and are usually foundtogether (Landy, 2009). Due to their importance for young children’s social andemotional development, prosocial skills, pretend play, and friendships were keyareas of focus in this study and are further described below. Teachers play a key rolein supporting young children’s development of social competence. Teacher beliefsabout children’s social–emotional competence and teacher practices to support thiscompetence are also discussed below.

# 2013 Taylor & Francis

∗Corresponding author. Email: hhollingsworth@elon.edu

Early Child Development and Care, 2013Vol. 183, No. 12, 1758–1781, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03004430.2012.759567

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itara

M E

min

eesc

u Ia

si]

at 1

0:30

06

May

201

5

1.1 Prosocial skills, pretend play, and friendships

Prosocial skills are important for children’s positive peer interactions. Prosocial beha-viours have been defined as caring behaviours that indicate concern for the well-beingof others, such as comforting, cooperating, helping, and sharing (Landy, 2009; Tomlin-son & Hyson, 2009). Prosocial behaviours progress from early engagement in turn-takingwith adults to cooperative interactions with peers and, by preschool, the ability to comfortother children who are upset (Landy, 2009). These behaviours become more frequentduring the preschool years as children develop the cognitive ability to understandothers’ feelings and have more social experiences, but some children do have difficultyin developing prosocial skills (Tomlinson & Hyson, 2009). Teachers have an importantrole in ensuring opportunities and support for children to learn the prosocial skills ofcooperating, taking turns, resolving conflicts, participating in a group, and showingempathy through pretend play (Myck-Wayne, 2010), a topic we turn to next.

Play is an important vehicle for developing self-regulation as well as for promotinglanguage, cognition, and social competence (Copple & Bredekamp, 2009; Rubin,Bukowski, & Parker, 2006). Although parallel play continues to be present and toserve as an important lead-in to more complex play, associative play (playing andsharing with others) and cooperative play (well-coordinated play with roles) are increas-ingly observed between the ages of two and five years (Rubin et al., 2006). The mostcomplex form of interactive play, and one that increases during the preschool years, ispretend play, also referred to as sociodramatic play (Copple & Bredekamp, 2009).Within the context of pretend play, children explore and make sense of the world; com-municate with meaning; and discuss, control, and negotiate imaginary roles and scripts,as well as the rules for the pretend episodes in their play (Rubin et al., 2006; Saracho,2012). Researchers have found evidence to connect dramatic play with higher levelsof development of cognitive skills: use of literate language (McMaster, 1998), use ofcomplex narratives (aiding literacy development), problem-solving abilities (Bergen,2002), and abstract thinking (Bodrova, 2008). Children need active scaffolding of imagi-native play in preschool settings if they are to develop the sustained, mature, pretend playthat contributes significantly to their self-regulation and cognitive, linguistic, social, andemotional development (Copple & Bredekamp, 2009). In summary, developmentalbenefits of engaging in pretend play include opportunities to develop communicationskills, negotiation skills (e.g. compromising), and perspective-taking skills (Rubinet al., 2006); children who engage in pretend play are more socially competent withpeers and adults than children who do not engage in pretend play (McAloney & Stagnitti,2009); and teacher support is needed to help children engage in mature pretend play.

Friendships are important contexts in which preschool children can develop inter-action skills important for school and later life, and are also important for children’sadjustment and well being (Buysse, Goldman, West, & Hollingsworth, 2008; Costin& Jones, 1992; National Research Council and Institute of Medicine, 2000). Friend-ships have been defined as voluntary and reciprocated relationships between childrenwho exhibit liking for and attachment to one another, as evidenced by frequent proxi-mity to one another, engagement in shared activities, and positive affect (Buysse,Goldman, West, & Hollingsworth, 2008). These reciprocal relationships have beenassociated with a number of positive outcomes both for children with and for childrenwithout disabilities (e.g. more interactions (Vaughn, Colvin, Azria, Caya, & Krzysik,2001) and more successful interactions (Guralnick, Gottman, & Hammond, 1996)).On the flipside, children who have difficulty in forming relationships with peers in

Early Child Development and Care 1759

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itara

M E

min

eesc

u Ia

si]

at 1

0:30

06

May

201

5

early childhood are at the risk of social adjustment problems when older (Odom,McConnell, & Brown, 2008; Rubin et al., 2006). Thus, support of early friendshipsis particularly important, though there is only limited research on ways to help childrenmake and keep friends (Asher, Parker, & Walker, 1996). Studies have documentedsome teacher-reported practices in support of friendships, for example: (a) use ofpuppets, friendship stories, and role-play activities; (b) modeling and prompting ofsocial skills; and (c) allowing children time to play together (Buysse, Goldman, &Skinner, 2003; Hollingsworth & Buysse, 2009; Sparkman, 2003).

1.2 Teacher beliefs–practices linkages

Teacher beliefs have the potential to affect teacher practices and thus influence childoutcomes (Hegde & Cassidy, 2009). Studies of teachers in the USA and other countrieshave investigated the relationship between teachers’ reported beliefs and their self-reported and/or observed practices and have found beliefs and practices to be consist-ently, though sometimes only moderately, related (McMullen et al., 2006; Wang,Elicker, McMullen, & Mao, 2008). A recent meta-analysis found that early childhoodteachers’ beliefs do affect their practices: ‘practitioner personal belief appraisals werefound to be related to their adoption and use of different kinds of early childhood inter-vention practices’ (Trivette, Dunst, Hamby, & Meter, 2012, p. 5). Trivette and col-leagues reported strong associations between teachers’ beliefs and their adoption ofspecific content or curricula. Given this connection between beliefs and practices,there continues to be interest in investigating teacher beliefs.

Research indicates that preschool teachers hold the following beliefs relating toyoung children’s social–emotional development: children’s social–emotional compe-tence is important (Lee, 2006); social–emotional skills are more important thanlanguage and literacy or early math skills (Kowalski, Pretti-Frontczak, & Johnson,2001); appropriate pedagogy for preschoolers should involve learning through play(including pretend play) in a stimulating, yet predictable environment (Lara-Cinisomo,Fuligni, Daugherty, Howes, & Karoly, 2009; Lee, 2006); and curriculum should bebased on preschoolers’ everyday lives and interests (Lee, 2006). The findings ofKemple, Hysmith, and David (1996) suggested that teachers believe that they havelimited influence on children’s development of social competence, especially withregard to friendships. These latter findings are of concern because teachers whobelieve that they have little influence may be less likely to engage in practices insupport of friendships (Hollingsworth & Buysse, 2009).

Overall, the existing literature on early peer relations has documented their impor-tance for young children’s development and has found that (a) teachers engage in avariety of practices to support young children’s peer socialisation, (b) teachersbelieve social competence to be important, and (c) teachers’ beliefs may be relatedto their use of practices in the classroom. Much of the research has examined thebroader construct of peer-related social competence and, to date, there has been littleexamination of teachers’ beliefs and self-reported or observed practices focused onfriendships and pretend play.

1.3 Research questions

The purpose of this study was to describe teachers’ beliefs relating to the importance ofyoung children’s social–emotional competence and teachers’ practices in support of

1760 H.L. Hollingsworth and M.K. Winter

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itara

M E

min

eesc

u Ia

si]

at 1

0:30

06

May

201

5

such competence. In particular, we investigated teacher support of these behaviours andskills related to social competence: prosocial skills, pretend play, and friendships. Thefollowing research questions were addressed using quantitative and qualitative methods:

(1) Do preschool teachers place importance on children’s development of social–emotional behaviours and skills?

(2) Do preschool teachers rate social–emotional behaviours and skills as moreimportant than language and literacy and early math behaviours and skills?

(3) What are teachers’ self-reported practices in support of children’s developmentof social–emotional behaviours and skills, particularly, prosocial skills, pretendplay, and friendships.

2. Method

We employed paper-and-pencil surveys to answer research questions 1 and 2 and focusgroups to answer research questions 1 and 3. The surveys provided an efficient meansfor gathering and statistically processing teacher ratings in order to describe teachers’beliefs about the importance of various behaviours and skills (Cohen, Manion, &Morrison, 2011). Focus groups allowed the participants to provide detailed informationabout their beliefs and practices in their own words, in response to a consistent set ofquestions posed by the researchers and to each other’s comments (Cohen et al., 2011;Creswell, 2002). We conducted a thematic analysis to examine teacher responses relat-ing to social and emotional development of preschoolers. Our procedures are furtherdescribed below.

2.1 Participants

The participants in this study were preschool teachers in one county in southeasternUSA, serving rural, small town, suburban, and small city populations. All participantswere female, and all taught in classrooms for three-year-olds, four-year-olds, or three-and four-year-olds. Of the 32 survey participants, 13 taught in Head Start centres and 19taught in pre-K classrooms in the public school system. Public school pre-K classroomsin this county serve children whose families’ gross income is at or below 75% of theState Median Income level, as well as other children with risk factors such asLimited English Proficiency, developmental disability, or chronic health condition(DCDEE & NC Pre-K, 2012). The 14 focus-group participants were a subset ofsurvey participants: 9 Head Start and 5 public school pre-K. Survey participants (n¼ 32) ranged in age from 22 to 64 years (M ¼ 45, SD ¼ 11). Survey participants’years of preschool teaching experience varied widely (M ¼ 14, SD ¼ 10, R ¼ 0.5–39). Table 1 presents the characteristics of the survey participants. Focus-group partici-pants (n ¼ 14) ranged in age from 22 to 64 years (M ¼ 44, SD ¼ 12). Focus-groupparticipants’ years of preschool teaching experience ranged from 1 to 39 (M ¼ 16,SD ¼ 10). Table 2 presents the characteristics of the focus-group participants.

2.1.1 Surveys: recruitment

A university Institutional Review Board approved this study and the participantsprovided informed consent. With permission from the regional Head Start director,

Early Child Development and Care 1761

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itara

M E

min

eesc

u Ia

si]

at 1

0:30

06

May

201

5

the researchers contacted the Child Development Coordinator for each Head Startcentre and fixed a time to visit and invite teachers to complete the survey. Simi-larly, with permission from the superintendent of the school system, the

Table 1. Characteristics of the survey participants.

Characteristic Number of participants (n ¼ 32)

Gender

Female 32 (100%)

Ethnicitya

Not Hispanic, Latino, or Spanish origin 28 (100%)

Race

White 19 (59%)

Black/African-American or Negro 13 (41%)

Highest education level completed

Master’s degree 3 (9%)

Bachelor of Arts or Science 23 (72%)

Associate of Arts 3 (9%)

Some college 3 (9%)

Discipline of highest education level completedb

Early Childhood Education/Early Intervention 24 (80%)

Education/Special Education 6 (20%)

Licensure

B-K, K-6, and/or Pre-K add-on 23 (72%)

No licence 9 (28%)

an ¼ 28 (four participants chose not to respond to this item).bn ¼ 30 (two participants chose not to respond to this item).

Table 2. Characteristics of the focus-group participants.

Characteristic Number of participants (n ¼ 14)

Ethnicity

Not Hispanic, Latino, or Spanish origin 14 (100%)

Race

Black/African-American or Negro 9 (64%)

White 5 (36%)

Highest education level completed

Bachelor of Arts or Science 10 (71%)

Associate of Arts 1 (7%)

Some college 3 (21%)

Discipline of highest education level completed

Early Childhood Education/Early Intervention 13 (93%)

Education/Special Education 1 (7%)

Licensure

B-K, K-6, and/or Pre-K add-on license 8 (57%)

No licence 6 (43%)

1762 H.L. Hollingsworth and M.K. Winter

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itara

M E

min

eesc

u Ia

si]

at 1

0:30

06

May

201

5

researchers worked with the pre-K lead teachers to fix a time at the beginning of ascheduled professional development event to provide the consent form and surveysfor teachers to complete. We invited all of the teachers in the three Head Startcentres in the county and all of the teachers in the 24 pre-K classrooms in theschool system to participate. Of the 15 Head Start teachers, 13 (87%) completedthe survey (2 teachers were not present when the survey was administered; allpresent chose to complete it). Of the 24 pre-K teachers in the school system, 19chose to complete the survey, providing a response rate of 79%. Each teacherwas given a $10 gift card to Walmart or Target upon completing the survey asa token of appreciation of her time.

2.1.2 Focus groups: selection and recruitment

Following the analysis of survey data, the selected survey participants were con-tacted and invited to participate in a follow-up focus group. The participants wereinvited if their ratings for social–emotional items were higher than the ratings forboth language and literacy and early math items (28 participants) and if they pro-vided permission on the survey to be contacted (23 of those 28). Some participantsdid not respond to the invitation, and others were not able to join due to scheduleconstraints. Fourteen survey respondents participated in a focus group (61% ofthose who met the rating criteria and provided permission). Four focus groupswere held to accommodate the participants’ schedules, with each participant onlyattending one group. The surveys were administered in late spring and follow-upfocus groups were held in late spring and early summer. Each teacher was given a$10 gift card to Walmart or Target at the end of the focus group as a token of appreci-ation for her time.

2.2 Instrumentation and data collection

2.2.1 Surveys

The Teacher Beliefs Survey used in this study was adapted by the authors withpermission from a survey used by Kowalski et al. (2001). This survey was selectedbecause it was originally developed to reflect key behaviours, skills, and rec-ommended practices in early childhood education and had documented reliability(Kowalski et al., 2001). The survey asked teachers to rate the importance ofspecific behaviours and skills for preschoolers to learn (1 ¼ not at all important,2 ¼ somewhat important, 3 ¼ important, 4 ¼ very important, and 5 ¼ criticallyimportant). There were three scales describing specific behaviours and skills:social–emotional, language and literacy, and early math. There were 15 assess-ment items in each scale describing developmentally appropriate behaviours andskills (e.g. participate in activities when invited) and 5 distractors (e.g. tell timeusing Roman numerals). At the end of each scale, the teachers were askedwhich two items were the most important for preschoolers to learn. In addition,the survey collected information about teachers’ classroom and demographic infor-mation. The researchers visited each Head Start centre and the pre-K teachers’ pro-fessional development event, providing paper-and-pencil copies of the survey forthe teachers to complete. Teachers who consented to participate completed thesurvey during this visit.

Early Child Development and Care 1763

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itara

M E

min

eesc

u Ia

si]

at 1

0:30

06

May

201

5

2.2.2 Focus groups

The researchers conducted each focus group at a Head Start centre or in a conferenceroom on a university campus in the county. Focus groups lasted between 39 minutesand 1 hour 15 minutes. The researchers posed three questions during each focusgroup. The first question asked the participants how they help children develop proso-cial behaviours and skills (e.g. cooperating, sharing, and showing sympathy) in theclassroom, and the second question asked them how they help children develop thebehaviours and skills for engaging in pretend play with other children. The final ques-tion asked the participants about friendships, specifically, how important they think it isfor a child to form a special friendship with another child and why and then how theyhelp a child form and keep a special friendship with another child. Notes were taken andaudio recordings made during each focus-group discussion, and these were systemati-cally transcribed following the group.

2.3 Data analysis

2.3.1 Survey data

Quantitative analyses of survey data were conducted using SPSS. These analyses aredescribed in Section 3.

2.3.2 Focus-group data

We employed an iterative interpretative process for reducing data, drawing con-clusions, and verifying interpretations (Miles & Huberman, 1994, 2002) toconduct a thematic analysis of the data and verify our findings. Together, bothauthors read through the transcript for one focus group, identifying statements ofimportance, identifying practices that the teachers said they used, and developinginitial codes to identify common information as recommended by Creswell(2002). Although the codes developed were influenced by previous researchers’work (e.g. Buysse, Goldman, & Skinner, 2003; Rhodes, 2002; Sparkman, 2003),our initial coding efforts were open and flexible to allow additional codes or strat-egies beyond those delineated in the literature (Creswell, 2002; Emerson, Fretz, &Shaw, 1995). Separately, we developed definitions, examples, and quotes forcodes and then reviewed each other’s definitions. We then coded the remainingthree focus groups independently, adding codes or clarifying definitions andexamples as needed for the additional focus-group data. This resulted in a lengthylist of codes with some overlap between separate codes.

Next, the researchers engaged in a series of meetings for the purpose of validatingthe codes and major themes that related to the study research questions. The lead authorhas experience in qualitative research and expertise on early friendships and peerrelations, whereas the second author has extensive experience as a classroom prac-titioner and expertise in the area of play. The lengthy list of codes was discussed andsome codes were clarified, collapsed together into broader codes, or separated intomore specific codes. In addition, individual, similar codes were grouped underthemes. The authors together recoded a section of one focus group using the revisedcodes and then separately recoded the remaining focus-group data. Finally, we metagain to compare codes and themes. Where there were differences, we came to a con-sensus through discussion.

1764 H.L. Hollingsworth and M.K. Winter

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itara

M E

min

eesc

u Ia

si]

at 1

0:30

06

May

201

5

In our study, the focus was not on counting the frequency of responses (the methodused for a content analysis), but on determining the meaning of teacher responses relat-ing to practices to support prosocial skills, pretend play, and friendships, consistentwith the methods used for a thematic analysis. Hence, results of the analysis arereported in terms of codes and themes shared within all, a majority, half, or just oneof the focus groups (Skinner, Rodriguez, & Bailey, 1999).

3. Results

The first two research questions (the importance that preschool teachers place on chil-dren’s social–emotional behaviours and skills and their importance relative to languageand literacy or early math behaviours and skills) were addressed through surveys andfocus groups. The results of the analyses of surveys are presented first, followed bythe results of the analyses of focus-group data. To ascertain that the teachers readand rated case by case each survey item, the mean ratings of the assessment itemswere compared with the mean ratings of the distractors. Paired samples t tests indicatedthat the mean ratings of the assessment items were indeed significantly higher than themean ratings of the distractors in each scale (p , 0.001).

3.1 Importance placed on social–emotional behaviours and skills

3.1.1 Social–emotional behaviours and skills are more important than otherdevelopmental behaviours and skills

Survey data indicated that preschool teachers placed higher importance on social–emotional behaviours and skills than on language and literacy and early math beha-viours and skills. Table 3 provides a list of assessment items ranked by teachers’mean ratings, and Figure 1 displays mean ratings data by scale. To determinewhether there were significant differences between ratings per scale, a one-way analysisof variance (ANOVA) was conducted with scale as the factor with three levels and thedependent variable being mean ratings. The ANOVA was significant, F(2, 93) ¼18.48, p , 0.001. Follow-up comparisons using the Tukey HSD procedure indicatedthat the mean ratings of social–emotional items were significantly higher (p ,

0.001) than the mean ratings of language and literacy and early math items. Theresults of these tests, as well as the means and standard deviations per scale, are pre-sented in Table 4.

Focus-group data also indicated preschool teachers’ belief in the importance of chil-dren’s development of social–emotional behaviours and skills, particularly the impor-tance of friendships as friendships were directly addressed in the focus-group protocol.Although no direct question about the importance of prosocial skills in general wasasked during focus groups, brief statements indicating the importance of such skillswere made in half of the focus groups. For example, the participants noted thatsharing, conflict resolution, and relationship-building skills were useful in preschooland throughout life.

3.1.2 Friendships are important

The participants in all four focus groups mentioned that friendships were importantbecause they provided children emotional support and a sense of connection with

Early Child Development and Care 1765

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itara

M E

min

eesc

u Ia

si]

at 1

0:30

06

May

201

5

Table 3. Assessment items in each scale ranked according to mean ratings.

Assessment items M SD

Social–emotional scale

Learn to accept and express their anger in appropriate waysa 4.41 0.76

Say positive things about themselvesa 4.25 0.80

Identify and talk about their feelingsa 4.25 0.80

Make choices and take responsibility for their own behavioura 4.22 0.75

Play cooperatively with another child on a regular basisa 4.13 0.61

Ask permission before borrowing something 3.84 0.88

Engage in pretend play with another child or a group of children 3.84 0.81

Give sympathy to another child when that child has been hurt 3.81 0.69

Form a special friendship with one or more children 3.78 0.79

Say why they like something they have done 3.56 0.72

Share toys with other children on a regular basis 3.53 1.02

Understand the perspectives of other children 3.53 0.76

Solve conflicts with other children on their own without adult intervention 3.50 0.98

Participate in activities when invited 3.19 0.87

Help adults with simple tasks, without being asked 2.90 0.70

Language and literacy scale

Identify own written name in multiple settingsa 4.12 0.75

Identify some of the letters of the alphabet, especially those from their ownnamea

4.06 0.76

Choose books to read on their owna 3.81 0.74

Listen attentively to books that teachers read to the classa 3.59 0.84

Predict what a story character will do next 3.38 0.61

Retell a familiar storya 3.34 0.65

Relate to a story, character, or event found in a read aloud 3.22 0.83

Dictate a story for an adult to write down 3.22 1.04

Tell a chronological story from beginning, to middle, to end, without assistance 3.00 0.89

Read a printed label or sign on a familiar object 2.97 0.90

Rhyme one spoken word with another (e.g. log, dog, frog) 2.88 0.91

Recognise where sentences begin and end 2.59 1.07

Introduce a friend to another person 2.47 0.95

Write a log, list, or story with some letters in it 2.41 0.88

Use compound sentences 2.09 0.93

Early math scale

Understand spatial relations vocabulary (e.g. ‘in’, ‘under’, ‘up’, ‘down’,‘between’, ‘beside’)a

4.16 0.63

Refer to familiar shapes (e.g. circle, square, triangle) by namea 4.03 0.65

Sort objects into different groupsa 3.84 0.57

Explore part to whole relationships by fitting together simple puzzlesa 3.59 0.88

Arrange objects in order by size 3.53 0.62

Identify a morning, afternoon, or evening activity 3.28 0.77

Count forward from a number .1 to find out how many there are in a groupa 3.23 1.09

(Continued)

1766 H.L. Hollingsworth and M.K. Winter

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itara

M E

min

eesc

u Ia

si]

at 1

0:30

06

May

201

5

others. Such responses indicated that children feel happy to have a friend, are comfor-table with a friend, can make a connection that influences whether or not they want tocome to school, and miss their friend when he or she is absent. One teacher noted:‘They could use that friend to talk to as their outlet, or someone just to be happy orsad with. . .. When you’re sad, they come pat you on the back.’

Table 3. (Continued).

Assessment items M SD

Identify and talk about patterns in the environment 3.16 0.99

Compare the number of objects in two groups 3.13 0.94

Add two small groups by combining the groups and counting all the objects 2.94 0.89

Indicate how many are left after taking one from a small group 2.78 0.91

Quickly identify the number of items in a small collection without counting (e.g.the number of dots on dice)

2.72 0.92

Write numerals to indicate 10 or fewer objects 2.34 1.15

Understand the concept of voting (e.g. the most votes wins) 2.28 1.05

Divide a group of objects into half 2.25 0.95

aTop five items according to the number of teachers selecting these when asked to select the two mostimportant for preschoolers to learn in each scale.

Figure 1. Display of mean ratings by scale.

Early Child Development and Care 1767

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itara

M E

min

eesc

u Ia

si]

at 1

0:30

06

May

201

5

One participant summed up many of the statements expressed:

I think it’s good sometimes for them to have somebody that they connect with that theycan feel comfortable with . . . Just to have a good friendship where they can share and talkand enjoy each other’s company. I think that is a good thing.

The participants in half of the focus groups mentioned that friendships were impor-tant because friends can help each other (e.g. ‘If they’re struggling in one area – it canbe something as simple as building blocks . . . then that friend can come over and theycan work together’). In addition, the participants mentioned that friendships wereimportant as a context for helping children develop social skills.

A rare response (a minority opinion even within the focus group in which it cameup) was that friendships were not a priority. One teacher said that she placed highervalue on social skills in general, rather than on specific friendships due to the fluidnature of early friendships. Although the participants in all four focus groups commen-ted on the fluid nature of early friendships (young children’s friends change frequently),all participants provided responses noting the lasting nature of some early friendships(e.g. ‘He found a buddy right away and that [child] stayed his buddy throughout thewhole year’).

3.2 Practices used to support preschoolers’ development of social–emotionalbehaviours and skills

The third research question (focused on preschool teachers’ self-reported practices tosupport children’s development of social–emotional behaviours and skills) wasaddressed through the focus groups. The results are presented in order of the threemain questions in the focus-group protocol: prosocial skills, pretend play, and friend-ships. Table 5 provides an outline of key topics, practice themes, and codes, as well asthe number of focus groups in which there were responses coded within each of these.

3.2.1 Practices to support prosocial skills

Two broad themes described the practices that the teachers reported using in support ofchildren’s prosocial skills: (a) setting the tone of the social environment and (b)responding to children and situations that arise. Each theme is further described below.

3.2.1.1 Setting the tone of the social environment. The participants in all four focusgroups described general instructional practices that set the tone of social classroomenvironment. These practices were generally used with the whole class. The

Table 4. Means and standard deviations per scale.

Scale M SD Social–emotional Early math

Social–emotional 3.78 0.47

Early math 3.15 0.52 ∗

Language and literacy 3.14 0.46 ∗ NS

Note: ∗, Significant differences between pairs of means; NS, non-significant difference using the TukeyHSD procedure.

1768 H.L. Hollingsworth and M.K. Winter

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itara

M E

min

eesc

u Ia

si]

at 1

0:30

06

May

201

5

participants noted the following general instruction practices: (a) use of curricularmaterials (e.g. Building Bridges and Fair Ways to Play chart), (b) lessons (e.g. onsharing, taking turns, and listening skills), (c) reading stories (e.g. about feelings,‘what you do when you are mad or when you are hurt or sad’), (d) use of puppets(e.g. to model problem-solving skills), and (e) playing games to teach skills such assharing and taking turns (e.g. Doggy, Doggy, Who has your Bone? and Hot Potato).The teachers also mentioned show and tell and talking through or role-playing how

Table 5. Practice themes and codes.

Key topics, themes, and codesNumber of focus groups in which practices

were mentioned per code

Practices to support prosocial skills

Setting the tone of the social environment

General instructional practices 4

Providing structure, materials, and rewards 2

Responding to children and situations thatarose

Targeted instruction 3

Talking-it-through 3

Observing and assessing 2

Collaborating 2

Giving specific suggestions 1

Participating in play 1

Practices to support pretend play

Setting up pretend play scenarios

Use of specific themes or curricula 4

Materials 4

Introducing pretend play scenarios 4

Building background knowledge 3

Helping children play in pretend playscenarios

Joining in the play 4

Asking questions 3

Giving specific ideas 3

Practices to support friendships

General practices that may set the stage forfriendship development

General social environment practices 4

Talking about friendships in general 4

Noticing friendships 4

Facilitating dyadic or small group interactions

Putting two children together 4

Helping two children interact with eachother

4

Keeping two children together 2

Involving parents 4

Early Child Development and Care 1769

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itara

M E

min

eesc

u Ia

si]

at 1

0:30

06

May

201

5

to solve problems. Practices coded as setting the tone of the social environment alsoincluded providing structure, having enough materials, and giving rewards. Theselatter practices were mentioned in half of the focus groups. To provide structure, theteachers mentioned making lists to show children who will go to which centre nextand to ensure that each child has a turn during group activities. The participants men-tioned rewarding prosocial behaviour with stickers and intentionally pointing out whenchildren exhibited prosocial behaviour, as described in this comment: ‘There was thislittle boy in our class and any time somebody fell or was crying he would come over.Then once we started pointing it out, all the kids were like: “Are you okay?”’ Inaddition to setting the tone of the social environment through general instructional prac-tices and providing structure, materials, and rewards, preschool teachers reportedresponding to children and situations that arose in the classroom.

3.2.1.2 Responding to children and situations that arose. The second broad theme ofpractices to support prosocial skills described how teachers responded to small groups ofstudents when problems came up. The participants in a majority of focus groups said thatthey used targeted instruction and talking-it-through. Targeted instruction was coded insituations when the teachers used curriculum, lessons, puppets, or games with a smallgroup (thus setting this code apart from the general instructional practices used with thewhole class described in the previous section). Some teachers mentioned using scriptedlessons, visuals, or social stories. Talking-it-through was coded when the teachersdescribed asking children questions during a disagreement (e.g. ‘Asking them: “Howdid you feel when. . .?” and “What will make you feel better?”’), giving children words(e.g. ‘If you see someone playing with a toy that you like, ask them: “Hey, such-and-such, may I play with that toy when you’re finished?”’), and helping children talk toeach other when there is conflict. The participants in half of the focus groups mentionedobserving children outside and in centres and assessing whether to step in if there were dis-agreements. The teachers in half of the focus groups also talked about collaborating withother teachers to gain strategies for ways to handle situations that arose. Less commonresponses – mentioned in only one focus group – included giving children specific sug-gestions (e.g. ‘Why don’t you play with the orange one for a while?’) and participating inthe play themselves (e.g. playing with a child in a centre and modelling how to share a toy).

In summary, the teachers reported a variety of practices to support the prosocialbehaviours and skills of preschoolers, from setting the tone of the social environmentto responding to children and situations that arose within that environment. The nextsection addresses teacher practices in support of preschoolers’ pretend play.

3.2.2 Practices to support pretend play

Two broad themes described the practices that the teachers reported using in support ofchildren’s pretend play skills: (a) setting up pretend play scenarios and (b) helping chil-dren play in pretend play scenarios. Each theme is further described below.

3.2.2.1 Setting up pretend play scenarios. When asked how they help childrendevelop behaviours and skills for engaging in pretend play with other children, the par-ticipants in all focus groups reported the following aspects of setting up pretend playscenarios: use of specific themes or curricula, the importance of materials, and introdu-cing play scenarios to children. The teachers said that they created centres with the

1770 H.L. Hollingsworth and M.K. Winter

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itara

M E

min

eesc

u Ia

si]

at 1

0:30

06

May

201

5

assistance of curricula such as Tools of the Mind (Bodrova & Leong, 2006), accordingto themes suggested in The Creative Curriculumw for Preschool (Dodge et al., 2010),or according to what children were familiar with. In addition, they reported designingpretend play scenarios around children’s interests (e.g. pretend play focused on a fairwhen there was a fair near the preschool). The teachers discussed the importance ofusing meaningful and plentiful materials to enhance and further facilitate children’sengagement within a pretend play scenario. Examples of materials that the teachersdescribed included little cups of water with paint brushes for a nail salon centre, house-keeping supplies, magnifying glasses and bug catchers in a science centre, and even theuse of prop boxes to support a theme. One teacher noted children’s involvement increating materials: ‘They got to make a lot of the things that they were going to playwith which made it more personal to them.’

Behind-the-scenes selection of themes and materials was not the sole focus of thediscussions; all of the focus groups involved discussions about the importance of intro-ducing play scenarios to children. To introduce play scenarios, the teachers reportedhaving whole group discussions, demonstrating specific play roles, giving instructionson how to play in a centre, and even role-playing with a co-worker. One participantexpressed the importance of theme-building:

All of our centres had something to do with Walmart. . . . We do about 2 weeks of themebuilding, and that’s when we talk about:‘We’re at the cash register. What does the person at the cash register do?’ We bring outthose things in that centre and we will act it out. I’ll act it out with a child, and then I’ll say:‘Who wants to take my turn?’ Then everyone’s hands go up and I have to pick a child andthey act it out.

We coded one additional practice under the theme of setting up pretend play scen-arios: building background knowledge (mentioned in three of the four focus groups).Specific practices coded as building background knowledge included going on fieldtrips; sharing stories, books, or pictures about things that may not be familiar to chil-dren, such as a circus; bringing in fire fighters and other people from the communityto tell children: ‘This is who I am. These are some things I do’; and giving differentperspectives (e.g. ‘Going to the doctor doesn’t always mean that you’ve got to get ashot’). In addition to practices for setting up pretend play scenarios (usually usedwith the whole group), the teachers noted practices to help children play in pretendplay scenarios (usually used with small groups).

3.2.2.2 Helping children play in pretend play scenarios. The participants in all fourfocus groups reported joining in the play with small groups of children. For example,the teachers participated in pretend play conversations with children or cooked and atea meal with children in dramatic play: generally, ‘showing them how to make-believeplay’. The teachers in a majority of focus groups reported asking open-ended questionsto assist children in their pretend play (e.g. ‘What can this be today?’ ‘Tell me . . . anotherending of how we can do this’). Finally, the teachers in a majority of groups mentionedthat sometimes they give specific ideas to children about how to use materials (e.g. ‘Youcan build a tower and you can knock it down, or it can be a river, or it can be a mountain’)or about roles with which children may be familiar (e.g. mom and dad).

In summary, the teachers reported a variety of practices to support preschoolers’pretend play, from setting up pretend play scenarios to helping children play within

Early Child Development and Care 1771

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itara

M E

min

eesc

u Ia

si]

at 1

0:30

06

May

201

5

those scenarios. We turn now to the final topic of particular interest in this study: prac-tices in support of young children’s friendships.

3.2.3 Practices to support friendships

Three broad themes described the practices that the teachers reported using in supportof children’s friendships: (a) general practices, (b) facilitating dyadic interactions, and(c) involving parents. Each theme is further described below.

3.2.3.1 General practices that may set the stage for friendship development. Severalof the practices that the participants reported using to support friendships could bedescribed as general practices that were usually used with the whole class or a smallgroup, rather than with a friendship dyad. These general practice codes may be impor-tant for setting the stage for friendship development (Buysse et al., 2008) and includedgeneral social environment practices, talking about friendships in general, and noticingfriendships. Each of these came up in all four of the focus groups.

When asked how they help a child form and keep a special friendship, many par-ticipants described general social environment practices rather than practices aimedat helping two children. For example, the participants described mentioning friendsand friendship to children, but their responses indicated that they were referring tomembers of the class or children getting along in general (e.g. after reading a story,the teacher asked children to turn to a friend and discuss who the characters were).The teachers also reported scheduled or curricular activities such as songs about friend-ship, friendship dances, making friendship bracelets, setting up centres where childrenwould interact with a variety of other children, and taking pictures of children togetherfor a class album. Some teachers said that they introduced children to other children(e.g. children from different classes during outside time) and helped children to joina group at play:

I took her to a group and said, ‘You know what? Safia . . . wants to play with somebody’,and ‘Is it alright if she joins you?’ And they said, ‘Yeah’. So then I said, ‘Would you liketo play with them?’ And she joined in. I said, ‘When you join in, sometimes you mighthave to do what they’re doing; they might not want to change their game.’

Other responses indicated that the teachers talk to children about friendship withmore of an understanding of it being a relationship between children, rather thanhow all class members get along. The teachers talked with their classes about what afriend is, what friends do, and how friends treat each other. The teachers also told chil-dren that it was okay to have more than one friend and that it was okay to play withsomething different than your friend. Finally, the teachers reported telling childrenwho their own adult friends were. Many focus-group comments described teachersnoticing which children were friends (e.g. ‘Every time you see Jeff, there goesJose’). Some participants mentioned children’s commonalities in their responses (e.g.teachers noticed that two children who spoke Spanish were friends or that two childrenwho were on a similar academic level were friends). The teachers also noticed whenparents arranged playdates between certain children.

3.2.3.2 Facilitating dyadic interactions. Practices that the teachers used to supportinteractions between two children were coded under this second broad theme. These

1772 H.L. Hollingsworth and M.K. Winter

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itara

M E

min

eesc

u Ia

si]

at 1

0:30

06

May

201

5

practices included putting two children together, helping two children interact witheach other, and keeping two children together.

The teachers in all four focus groups mentioned putting pairs of children together intheir classrooms. The teachers talked about pairing children for activities, according totheir interests or strengths, according to their similarities, or because they ‘balanced’each other (e.g. a child who was quiet with a child who was louder). One teachernoted that a particular dyadic combination allowed for more engaged play than did alarger group:

If you put her and this one little girl together, then they played nicely: you would see themtalking. But when the other girls were in there, she tended to follow with them and wouldtry to exclude. . . . You want them to be engaged and playing.

A different teacher introduced a Spanish-speaking child to a new Spanish-speakingchild who was having difficulty in adjusting to the class: ‘They came out to be really goodfriends at the end of the school year, just by me introducing him to help him out.’ Anotherpractice coded under this theme described more than just putting two children togetherand focused on helping two children interact with each other. The teachers in all focusgroups said that they engaged in these practices, such as playing games with two childrenand helping two children who had a falling out to work it out. However, helping two chil-dren interact with each other did not always mean direct teacher–dyad involvement. Theteachers also mentioned easing away once children were interacting well and not splittingup two friends at play. To help two children maintain a friendship, one teacher reported:‘Giving them their own little special time; whether it’s in a centre that is only a 2-personplace, or allow[ing] them time to play together . . . just those two.’ Keeping two childrentogether was mentioned in half of the focus groups.

3.2.3.3 Involving parents. The teachers in all focus groups reported involving parents tosupport friendships (i.e. they did more than simply notice parents arranging playdates asreported under the first broad friendship theme). The ‘involving parents’ theme encom-passed the following practices: letting parents know about their child’s friends in pre-school, offering to pass contact information from one child’s parent to another child’sparent so parents could arrange playdates, writing a comment on the daily note home(‘She made a new friend today. Ask her who her new friend is and what they did’), andtalking about children’s friendships (e.g. at parent–teacher conferences). One teacherseemed attuned to parents’ wishes to hear that their child has a friend: ‘We can say . . .“These two have gotten to be really close in the classroom”. . .. Especially the ones thatdon’t develop very many close friendships; you especially want to mention to thoseparents because they really want their child to interact.’ Other participants reported pro-viding information to parents about the nature of friendships, as in this example:

I would ask at conference . . . ‘Who does your child talk about playing with?’ . . . Byasking that sort of lead-in question, that opened the door for me to respond like: ‘Thatseems like a good thing’, or ‘There’s a lot of conflict going on – they need to be super-vised when they’re together.’

In most cases, the teachers reported sharing information with parents about theirchildren’s friendships rather than looking to parents as a source of information aboutsuch friendships.

Early Child Development and Care 1773

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itara

M E

min

eesc

u Ia

si]

at 1

0:30

06

May

201

5

In summary, the teachers reported using a variety of practices in support of pre-school children’s friendships. These ranged from general practices that may set thestage for friendship development to practices to facilitate dyadic interactions and invol-ving parents. Taken together, these practices reveal a variety of ways in which teachersmay support early friendships.

4. Discussion

We investigated the beliefs of teachers regarding the importance of young children’ssocial–emotional competence compared with other developmental behaviours andskills. In addition, we documented the strategies that the teachers reported using tosupport children’s social–emotional competence, specifically children’s prosocialskills, pretend play, and friendships.

4.1 Relative importance of social–emotional behaviours and skills

Quantitative and qualitative data revealed that teachers place importance on preschoo-lers’ social–emotional behaviours and skills. Our results are consistent with those ofKowalski et al. (2001). In their study of 470 preschool teachers, social–emotionalbehaviours and skills were rated significantly higher than language and literacy andearly math behaviours and skills. In addition, our results are consistent with studiesfinding that teachers believe that prosocial skills and friendships (Kemple et al.,1996; Kowalski et al., 2001) are important for their students. Our focus-group datarevealed teachers’ belief that friendships were important for the emotional supportand connection that they provided children and as a context for the development ofsocial skills; findings aligned with those of Hollingsworth and Buysse (2009) in theirstudy of teachers and parents of preschool children in established friendships.

4.2 Practices used to support prosocial skills, pretend play, and friendships

The ability to form and sustain relationships with others, both adults and children, iscentral to a child’s social development (Copple & Bredekamp, 2009). According todevelopmentally appropriate practices, young children need guidance and opportunitiesto use proactive strategies to organise, direct, and sustain interactions with others(Bodrova & Leong, 2008; Bronson, 1994). The participants in the current study dis-cussed using curricular materials, lessons, stories, puppets, and games to teach proso-cial skills such as sharing and turn-taking within a whole class context. By providingsuch structures within the classroom environment, teachers gave children knowledgeand experiences for practising prosocial skills in a safe and nurturing environment.The participants reported using positive reinforcements such as stickers or pointingout prosocial behaviours as a means of setting the tone for the social environment, prac-tices which are supported in the research: children with teachers who provide high-quality emotional and instructional support, along with helpful feedback in a predict-able environment, develop better social skills than children in other classrooms(Rimm-Kaufman, La Paro, Downer, & Pianta, 2005). These proactive strategiesallow children to have more complex interactions with fewer conflicts (Copple & Bre-dekamp, 2009). In small group contexts, when a specific problem arose, teachers tendedto respond with targeted instruction, again using structured methods (e.g. curriculum,lessons, puppets, and games) in an attempt to provide a means of conflict resolution.

1774 H.L. Hollingsworth and M.K. Winter

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itara

M E

min

eesc

u Ia

si]

at 1

0:30

06

May

201

5

The teachers also discussed using open-ended questions as a means to scaffold chil-dren’s problem-solving during a disagreement. These strategies used in a prescriptivemanner assist in helping a child develop prosocial skills (Copple & Bredekamp,2009). As described in Section 3, when teachers saw a need, they addressed theissue in a positive manner (Gallagher & Sylvester, 2009).

The participants in the focus groups reported using curricula or children’s interestsand familiarity with a theme to determine which themes to extend into pretend playscenarios. The participants demonstrated an understanding of the importance of build-ing background knowledge about a play scenario prior to engaging in the play (e.g.through the use of children’s literature (reading about a farm) or field trips (going toa farm)). We know that in order for children to engage in complex play, they musthave an understanding of how to play in a specific centre (Saracho, 2012). This canbe accomplished by (a) giving ideas for various scenes; (b) suggesting roles; (c) provid-ing time, space, and play props to motivate children to engage in play and stimulatethem to construct specific scenarios (Bender, 1971; Myhre, 1993; Saracho, 2012);(d) helping children implement some rules and then backing away and letting childrenplay alone (Copple & Bredekamp, 2009; Leong & Bodrova, 2012); and (e) deepening achild’s understanding of schema (Owocki, 1999). The teachers in the current studyreported using all of these practices. Consistent with the recommended practices,these teachers demonstrated the importance of play materials by modelling the useof materials, allowing children time to explore materials and even having childrencreate their own materials for the centres (Copple & Bredekamp, 2009; Owocki,1999; Saracho, 2012). They articulated their value of play materials and noted thatthe children’s creation of and deep understanding of how to use various props werekey to children being able to play in a centre (Owocki, 1999). The teachers notedthat it was also important to use materials that were important or familiar to childrenin order to allow them to explore play situations reflecting their own world. The partici-pants discussed in detail the methods used to introduce play scenarios. Saracho (2012)noted that children may not have the background knowledge necessary for a particularplay scenario and, in order for that experience to be meaningful, teachers must intro-duce various roles, activities, and use props for each centre. It is only then that childrenwill truly be involved and interact in the play. As children explore and interact in playscenarios, they are able to make sense of the interdependent world in which they live.The following extended quote describes the mature play that children exhibited in apretend play community that the teachers helped the children develop:

We had the mailman centre . . . and they wrote letters, and he went to all the differentoffices – the doctor’s office – and picked up the mail and delivered it. They sorted themail at the post office . . . we had the bakery, and we had the beauty salon, and we hadthe pharmacy, and we had the construction site, and they delivered the mail there. Wehad the police station. We even . . . made little cars out of bigger boxes and they couldpretend to ride around in their car and go from place to place. They were mobile; theydidn’t have to just stay there, but they could interact. . .. The vet got bit by one of theanimals: ‘Oh, I think I need to go to the doctor!’ He’ll put his [box] car on and he’llgo to the doctor. ‘One of the animals bit my finger. Can you fix it?’ Then he’ll leavethere and he’ll go back to the vet.

The teachers in the classroom described above provided the students with meaning-ful materials, props, scripts, and background knowledge, all of which allowed the chil-dren time to explore the theme of community.

Early Child Development and Care 1775

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itara

M E

min

eesc

u Ia

si]

at 1

0:30

06

May

201

5

Leong and Bodrova (2012) identified six critical elements of children’s play: (1)planning for play, (2) roles for children, (3) props, (4) extended time frame, (5)language, and (6) scenarios. The participants of the current study reported the use ofpractices aligned with elements 2, 3, 5, and 6 mentioned above. The teachers did notmention helping children plan their play. Furthermore, the teachers in only one focusgroup described theme-building as taking two to three weeks, while the teachers intwo focus groups described play themes as changing weekly. Based on these results,we suggest that teachers instruct children to plan their play and encourage them toextend their time in play to enhance children’s prosocial and pretend play skills inthe classroom (Leong & Bodrova, 2012). Research recommends that parents beinvolved in conversations about children’s play in the classroom (Owocki, 1999).Although the teachers reported discussing friendships with parents, they did notmention asking parents about their children’s interests regarding play. Developmentallyappropriate practice requires that teachers have knowledge about individual childrenand the contexts of their lives (Copple & Bredekamp, 2009) and families are an impor-tant source of information about children’s play (Owocki, 1999). We recommend thefollowing, as described by Myck-Wayne (2010) and Owocki (1999), to help teacherslearn about children’s lives outside of school, learn about children’s play interests,and help ensure optimal growth and development of children with and without disabil-ities: questionnaires, home–school journals, and meaningful discussions among tea-chers and family members.

We found, as have other researchers, that when teachers talk about supportingfriendships, they sometimes end up describing how all children within a classget along, rather than supporting dyadic relationships between children (Hollingsworth& Buysse, 2009; Sparkman, 2003). However, our results are also consistent with extantresearch finding that teachers do use focused strategies to help two children interact,along with more general strategies that may set the stage for friendship development(Hollingsworth & Buysse, 2009). Specific strategies mentioned by the teachers thatare consistent with the literature include intentionally pairing certain children together,helping two children resolve conflicts, and protecting the space of two children at play(see Brown, Odom, & Conroy, 2001; Buysse et al., 2008; Hollingsworth & Buysse,2009; Sparkman, 2003). As found by Hollingsworth and Buysse (2009), the teachersin the current study rarely reported planning friends’ favourite activities as a contextfor facilitating their friendship. Teachers could be encouraged to more frequently andintentionally draw children together by providing activities that will capture their atten-tion and provide common contexts for social interactions, as recommended by Buysseet al. (2008). The participants in the current study reported involving parents in friend-ship support. However, similar to the finding described above for pretend play, teachersrarely reported using parents as a source of information about children’s friendships(see also Hollingsworth & Buysse, 2009). The teachers saw their role as sharing infor-mation with parents, rather than asking parents to share information with them.

Teachers’ beliefs in the importance of children’s social–emotional behaviours andskills and the variety of different practices that the teachers reported using to supportpreschoolers’ prosocial skills, pretend play, and friendships were encouraging. Thefocus-group responses of the participants indicated their use of both whole groupand small group practices to promote these aspects of children’s social competence.However, small group practices were largely discussed in terms of teachers respondingto issues that arose. The focus-group participants rarely mentioned the use of planned,individualised practices (e.g. scripts and social stories) targeting specific children. Such

1776 H.L. Hollingsworth and M.K. Winter

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itara

M E

min

eesc

u Ia

si]

at 1

0:30

06

May

201

5

interventions (e.g. tier 3 interventions in tiered approaches as described by Buysse &Peisner-Feinberg, 2010, and the National Professional Development Center onInclusion, 2012) may be important for some children who need significant supportsin order to develop social competence, including some children with disabilities(Jamison, Forston, & Stanton-Chapman, 2012). Intervention hierarchies to facilitatepeer interactions, children’s social–emotional competence, and friendships havebeen described by a number of researchers (e.g. Brown et al., 2001; Buysse et al.,2008; Fox, Dunlap, Hemmeter, Joseph, & Strain, 2003; Han & Kemple, 2006).Despite the existence of empirically validated social competence interventions, earlychildhood practitioners often do not implement them (Brown & Conroy, 2011). Pre-service and in-service personnel preparation and professional development pro-grammes should prepare teachers with strategies to facilitate prosocial skills, pretendplay skills, and friendships for all children. Han (2012) recently described an effectivemodel for teacher-driven professional development on practices to promote young chil-dren’s peer social competence. Furthermore, professional development should continuethe emphasis on family-centred practices recommended by professional guidelines andstandards (e.g. Copple & Bredekamp, 2009; Sandall, McLean, & Smith, 2000; Stayton,Miller, & Dinnebeil, 2003).

5. Conclusion

5.1 Study limitations

In this study, we asked preschool teachers to report their beliefs and practices relating tothe support of children’s social–emotional competence. Appropriate participants wereselected to address the research questions, reasonable interview questions were asked,digital recordings facilitated accurate transcription of focus groups, measures such asuse of pseudonyms and removal of identifying information were taken to protect par-ticipant confidentiality, and results were analysed systematically, all indicators ofquality within qualitative research (Brantlinger, Jimenez, Klingner, Pugach, & Richard-son, 2005). However, it must be acknowledged that the sample size was relativelysmall. ‘Qualitative research is not done for purposes of generalization, but rather toproduce evidence based on the exploration of specific contexts and particular individ-uals’ (Brantlinger et al., 2005, p. 203). Additional details about the participating tea-chers, their classrooms, and the curricula that they used might have provided readerswith more information with which to determine the relevance of the evidence toreaders’ own circumstances (Brantlinger et al., 2005). Our approach relied on teacherself-report, rather than on directly observed behaviour, and the participants may haveprovided responses that they felt were socially acceptable. However, agreements andconsistencies within and across focus-group responses provided some measure of tri-angulation for individual participants’ reported practices. Researchers interested inthe same topics might consider direct classroom observations to document practicesthat teachers use in support of children’s social–emotional behaviours and skills.

5.2 Future research directions

Findings from our qualitative research pointed out specific ways that preschool teacherssupport children’s social–emotional competence. Intervention research is needed tothoroughly investigate the effects of identified and recommended practices on young

Early Child Development and Care 1777

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itara

M E

min

eesc

u Ia

si]

at 1

0:30

06

May

201

5

children’s prosocial skills, ability to engage in complex pretend play, and emergent andestablished friendships. In addition, research is needed to determine the best methodsfor providing pre-service and in-service practitioners in early care and education set-tings the professional development that will prepare them to effectively implementintentional strategies for supporting young children’s social–emotional development.Indeed, this continues to be a topic of great importance: ‘The number of children enter-ing early childhood settings who lack social competence and other important capacitiesnecessary for their ongoing success is increasing. Therefore, research on evidence-based practices that can improve social competence of young children is critical’(Landy, 2009, p. 579).

Notes on contributorsHeidi L. Hollingsworth is an assistant professor of education and program coordinator for EarlyChildhood Education at Elon University. Her research interests include early social-emotionaldevelopment and friendships, inclusion, and personnel preparation.

Marna K. Winter is a lecturer in the School of Education at Elon University. She facilitates pro-fessional development in local preschools and elementary schools. Her current research interestsinvolve global education, international PLCs, the importance of play, and project based learningin preschool classrooms.

ReferencesAsher, S.R., Parker, J.G., & Walker, D.L. (1996). Distinguishing friendship from acceptance:

Implications for intervention and assessment. In W.F. Bukowski, A.F. Newcomb, &W.W. Hartup (Eds.), The company they keep: Friendship in childhood and adolescence(pp. 366–405). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

Bender, J. (1971). Have you ever thought of a prop box? Young Children, 26(3), 164–170.Bergen, D. (2002). The role of pretend play in children’s cognitive development. Early

Childhood Research and Practice, 4(1), 2–15.Bodrova, E. (2008). Make-believe play versus academic skills: A Vygotskian approach to

today’s dilemma of early childhood education. European Early Childhood EducationResearch Journal, 16(3), 357–369.

Bodrova, E., & Leong, D.J. (2006). Tools of the mind: The Vygotskian approach to early child-hood education (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.

Bodrova, E., & Leong, D.J. (2008). Developing self-regulation in kindergarten: Can we keep allthe crickets in the basket? Young Children, 63(2), 56–58.

Brantlinger, E., Jimenez, R., Klingner, J., Pugach, M., & Richardson, V. (2005). Qualitativestudies in special education. Exceptional Children, 71(2), 195–207.

Bronson, M.B. (1994). The usefulness of an observational measure of children’s social andmastery behavior in early childhood classrooms. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 9,19–43.

Brown, W.H., & Conroy, M.A. (2011). Social–emotional competence in young children withdevelopmental delays: Our reflection and vision for the future. Journal of EarlyIntervention, 33(4), 310–320.

Brown, W.H., Odom, S.L., & Conroy, M.A. (2001). An intervention hierarchy for promotingyoung children’s peer interactions in natural environments. Topics in Early ChildhoodSpecial Education, 21, 162–175.

Buysse, V., Goldman, B.D., & Skinner, M.L. (2003). Friendship formation in inclusive earlychildhood classrooms: What is the teacher’s role? Early Childhood Research Quarterly,18, 485–501.

Buysse, V., Goldman, B.D., West, T., & Hollingsworth, H. (2008). Friendships in early child-hood: Implications for early education and intervention. In W.H. Brown, S.L. Odom, & S.R.McConnell (Eds.), Social competence of young children: Risk, disability, and intervention(pp. 77–97). Baltimore, MD: Brookes.

1778 H.L. Hollingsworth and M.K. Winter

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itara

M E

min

eesc

u Ia

si]

at 1

0:30

06

May

201

5

Buysse, V., & Peisner-Feinberg, E. (2010). Recognition & response: Response to interventionfor pre-K. Young Exceptional Children, 13(4), 2–13.

Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2011). Research methods in education (7th ed.).New York, NY: Routledge.

Copple, C., & Bredekamp, S. (Eds.). (2009). Developmentally appropriate practice in earlychildhood programs (3rd ed.). Washington, DC: National Association for the Educationof Young Children.

Costin, S.E., & Jones, D.C. (1992). Friendship as a facilitator of emotional responsiveness andprosocial interventions among young children. Developmental Psychology, 28, 941–947.

Creswell, J.W. (2002). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitat-ive and qualitative research. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.

DCDEE & NC Pre-K. (2012, July). NC Pre-Kindergarten (NC Pre-K) Program requirementsand guidance. Raleigh, NC: North Carolina Division of Child Development and EarlyEducation and North Carolina Prekindergarten Program.

Dodge, D.T., Heroman, C., Berke, K., Bikart, T., Aghayan, C., Colker, L.J., & Dighe, J. (2010).The Creative Curriculumw for preschool (Vols. 1–5, 5th ed.). Bethesda, MD: TeachingStrategies.

Emerson, R.M., Fretz, R.I., & Shaw, L.L. (1995). Writing ethnographic fieldnotes. Chicago, IL:University of Chicago Press.

Fox, L., Dunlap, G., Hemmeter, M.L., Joseph, G.E., & Strain, P.S. (2003). The teachingpyramid: A model for supporting social competence and preventing challenging behaviorin young children. Young Children, 58, 48–52.

Gallagher, K.C., & Sylvester, P.R. (2009). Supporting peer relationships in early education. InO.A. Barbarin & B.H. Wasik (Eds.), Handbook of child development and early education(pp. 223–246). New York, NY: Guilford Press.

Guralnick, M.J., Gottman, J.M., & Hammond, M.A. (1996). Effects of social setting on thefriendship formation of young children differing in developmental status. Journal ofApplied Developmental Psychology, 17, 625–651.

Han, H.S. (2012). Professional development that works: Shifting preschool teachers’ beliefs anduse of instructional strategies to promote peer social competence. Journal of EarlyChildhood Teacher Education, 33(3), 251–268.

Han, H.S., & Kemple, M. (2006). Components of social competence and strategies of support:Considering what to teach. Early Childhood Education Journal, 34, 241–246.

Hegde, A.V., & Cassidy, D.J. (2009). Teachers’ beliefs and practices regarding developmentallyappropriate practices: A study conducted in India. Early Child Development and Care,179(7), 837–847.

Hollingsworth, H.L., & Buysse, V. (2009). Establishing friendships in early childhood inclusivesettings: What roles do parents and teachers play? Journal of Early Intervention, 31(4),287–307.

Jamison, K.R., Forston, L.D., & Stanton-Chapman, T.L. (2012). Encouraging social skill devel-opment through play in early childhood special education classrooms. Young ExceptionalChildren, 15(2), 3–19.

Kemple, K.M., Hysmith, C., & David, G.M. (1996). Early childhood teachers’ beliefs about pro-moting peer competence. Early Child Development and Care, 120, 145–163.

Kowalski, K., Pretti-Frontczak, K., & Johnson, L. (2001). Preschool teachers’ beliefs concern-ing the importance of various developmental skills and abilities. Journal of Research inChildhood Education, 16, 5–14.

Landy, S. (2009). Pathways to competence: Encouraging healthy social and emotional devel-opment in young children (2nd ed.). Baltimore, MD: Brookes.

Lara-Cinisomo, S., Fuligni, A.S., Daugherty, L., Howes, C., & Karoly, L. (2009). A qualitativestudy of early childhood educators’ beliefs about key preschool classroom experiences.Early Childhood Research & Practice, 111(1), 1–17.

Lee, J.S. (2006). Preschool teachers’ shared beliefs about appropriate pedagogy for 4-year-olds.Early Childhood Education Journal, 33(6), 433–441.

Leong, D.J., & Bodrova, E. (2012). Assessing and scaffolding make-believe play. YoungChildren, 67(1), 28–34.

McAloney, K., & Stagnitti, K. (2009). Pretend play and social play: The concurrent validity ofthe Child-Initiated Pretend Play Assessment. International Journal of Play Therapy, 18(2),99–113.

Early Child Development and Care 1779

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itara

M E

min

eesc

u Ia

si]

at 1

0:30

06

May

201

5

McMaster, J. (1998). Doing literature: Using drama to build literacy. The Reading Teacher,51(7), 574–584.

McMullen, M.B., Elicker, J., Goetze, G., Huang, H., Lee, S., Mathers, C., & Yang, H. (2006).Using collaborative assessment to examine the relationship between self-reported beliefsand the documentable practices of preschool teachers. Early Childhood EducationJournal, 34(1), 81–91.

Miles, M.B., & Huberman, A.M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks,CA: Sage.

Miles, M.B., & Huberman, A.M. (2002). The qualitative researcher’s companion. ThousandOaks, CA: Sage.

Myck-Wayne, J. (2010). In defense of play: Beginning the dialog about the power of play.Young Exceptional Children, 13(4), 14–23.

Myhre, S.M. (1993). Enhancing your dramatic play area through the use of prop boxes. YoungChildren, 48(5), 6–11.

National Professional Development Center on Inclusion. (2012). Response to intervention (RTI)in early childhood: Building consensus on the defining features. Chapel Hill: The Universityof North Carolina, FPG Child Development Institute, Author.

National Research Council and Institute of Medicine. (2000). From neurons to neighborhoods:The science of early childhood development. Committee on Integrating the Science of EarlyChildhood Development. J.P. Shonkoff & D.A. Phillips (Eds.). Board on Children, Youth,and Families, Commission on Behavioral and Social Sciences Education. Washington, DC:National Academy Press.

Odom, S.L., McConnell, S.R., & Brown, W.H. (2008). Social competence of young children:Conceptualization, assessment, and influences. In W.H. Brown, S.L. Odom, & S.R.McConnell (Eds.), Social competence of young children: Risk, disability, and intervention(pp. 3–29). Baltimore, MD: Brookes.

Owocki, G. (1999). Literacy through play. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.Rhodes, H.G. (2002). Family practices and beliefs around the friendship socialization of pre-

school children. Dissertation Abstracts International, 63(03), 904A (UMI No. 3047062).Rimm-Kaufman, S.E., La Paro, K.M., Downer, J.T., & Pianta, R.C. (2005). The contribution of

classroom setting and quality of instruction to children’s behavior in kindergarten class-rooms. Elementary School Journal, 105(4), 377–394.

Rubin, K.H., Bukowski, W., & Parker, J.G. (2006). Peer interactions, relationships, and groups.In N. Eisenberg (Ed.), Handbook of child psychology: Vol. 3. Social, emotional, and person-ality development (6th ed., pp. 571–645). New York, NY: Wiley.

Sandall, S., McLean, M.E., & Smith, B.J. (Eds.). (2000). DEC recommended practices in earlyintervention/early childhood special education. Longmont, CO: Sopris (DEC).

Saracho, O. (2012). An integrated play-based curriculum for young children. New York, NY:Routledge.

Skinner, D., Rodriguez, P., & Bailey, D.B. (1999). Qualitative analysis of Latino parents’religious interpretations of their child’s disability. Journal of Early Intervention, 22,271–285.

Sparkman, K.L. (2003). Promoting social and emotional competence in preschoolers with andwithout disabilities: What is the role of teachers’ educational beliefs and practices?(Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, ChapelHill.

Stayton, V.D., Miller, P.S., & Dinnebeil, L.A. (Eds.). (2003). DEC personnel preparation inearly childhood special education: Implementing the DEC recommended practices.Missoula, MT: Division for Early Childhood.

Tomlinson, H.B., & Hyson, M. (2009). Developmentally appropriate practice in the preschoolyears – ages 3–5. In C. Copple & S. Bredekamp (Eds.), Developmentally appropriatepractice in early childhood programs serving children from birth through age 8 (3rd ed.,pp. 111–148). Washington, DC: National Association for the Education of Young Children.

Trivette, C.M., Dunst, C.J., Hamby, D.W., & Meter, D. (2012). Relationship between earlychildhood practitioner beliefs and the adoption of innovative and recommended practices.Research Brief, 6(1), 1–12. Tempe, AZ: Tots-n-Tech Research Institute. Retrieved fromtnt.asu.edu

1780 H.L. Hollingsworth and M.K. Winter

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itara

M E

min

eesc

u Ia

si]

at 1

0:30

06

May

201

5

Vaughn, B.E., Colvin, T.N., Azria, M.R., Caya, L., & Krzysik, L. (2001). Dyadic analyses offriendship in a sample of preschool-age children attending Head Start: Correspondencebetween measures and implications for social competence. Child Development, 72,862–878.

Wang, J., Elicker, J., McMullen, M., & Mao, S. (2008). Chinese and American preschoolteachers’ beliefs about early childhood curriculum. Early Child Development and Care,178(3), 227–249.

Early Child Development and Care 1781

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itara

M E

min

eesc

u Ia

si]

at 1

0:30

06

May

201

5