The role of positive peer interactions and English exposure in Spanish-speaking preschoolers’ English vocabulary and letter-word skills

Early Childhood Research Quarterly 29 (2014) 625–635

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Early Childhood Research Quarterly

The role of positive peer interactions and English exposure in Spanish-speaking preschoolers’ English vocabulary and letter-word skills夽 Francisco Palermo a,∗ , Ariana M. Mikulski b a b

University of Missouri, United States The Pennsylvania State University, United States

a r t i c l e

i n f o

Article history: Received 22 April 2013 Received in revised form 22 July 2014 Accepted 26 July 2014 Available online 8 August 2014 Keywords: Preschool English vocabulary English literacy

a b s t r a c t We examined the extent to which positive interactions with peers and the amount of English exposure received from them during social interactions in the fall of preschool contributed to low-income Spanish-speaking children’s (N = 107; Mage = 53 months; SD = 4.30 months; 56% boys) English vocabulary and letter-word skills in the spring (controlling for parents’ language use, family income, number of English books at home, and children’s nonverbal cognitive abilities). We also examined the mediating roles of children’s learning behaviors (e.g., attentiveness, independence, initiative, persistence, and participation) and English oral proficiency in the classroom. The association between positive peer interactions and English vocabulary skills was mediated by children’s English oral proficiency, whereas the association between positive peer interactions and English letter-word skills was mediated by children’s learning behaviors and English oral proficiency. The associations among peer English exposure and children’s English vocabulary and letter-word skills were mediated by children’s English oral proficiency. There was also evidence of a transactional association between positive peer interactions and children’s learning behaviors and between peers’ and children’s English oral proficiency. The findings highlight the importance of peer experiences in fostering Spanish-speaking preschoolers’ English vocabulary and letter-word skills. © 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Introduction Many families in the U.S. speak a language other than English at home. This is also evident in school settings, where 21% of the students are dual language learners (DLLs) and 71% of them speak Spanish (National Center for Education Statistics, 2010). In Head Start preschool programs, 27% of students are DLLs, 84% of whom are Spanish-speakers (Schmidt, 2012). Given that most U.S. schools instruct in English only, many DLL children face unique challenges upon entering school because they need to know enough English to comprehend teachers’ instructions, engage in classroom content, and participate in classroom discussions before they can begin learning fundamental academic skills, including vocabulary and literacy. Additionally, many of these children are from low-income

夽 This study was supported by grant number 90YF0062 from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services awarded to Ariana M. Mikulski, Richard A. Fabes, Carol Lynn Martin, Laura D. Hanish, and Francisco Palermo. ∗ Corresponding author. Tel.: +1 573 884 0932. E-mail addresses: [email protected], [email protected] (F. Palermo). http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2014.07.006 0885-2006/© 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

households, and their parents have relatively low educational backgrounds and are unfamiliar with the U.S. educational system, thus elevating their children’s risk of underperforming academically (August & Hakuta, 1997; Kieffer, 2008). The difficulty of overcoming these challenges is evident in that many Spanish-speaking students persistently lag behind English monolinguals in English vocabulary and word reading skills, with the performance gap generally widening over time (Mancilla-Martinez & Lesaux, 2011). Limited English proficiency is a critical underlying factor that hinders Spanishspeaking children’s ability to keep pace with English monolinguals in school (Halle, Hair, Wandner, McNamara, & Chien, 2012). Thus, it is important to identify the factors that foster Spanishspeaking children’s English abilities prior to entering formal schooling. Preschool classrooms provide an excellent setting for enhancing Spanish-speaking children’s English abilities because preschool may be the first time many of them are exposed to an Englishlanguage learning environment. Also, much learning occurs in the context of social interactions, particularly with peers, and social interactions play a fundamental role in the language acquisition process. Children learn a language (whether first or second) by

626

F. Palermo, A.M. Mikulski / Early Childhood Research Quarterly 29 (2014) 625–635

engaging in social interactions that provide language exposure, practice opportunities, and conversational feedback (De Houwer, 2009). During day-to-day routines, Spanish-speaking preschoolers are likely to engage in social interactions with peers more than with teachers, and these interactions with peers play a key role in fostering English acquisition (Aukrust, 2004; Chesterfield, Chesterfield, & Chavez, 1982; Palermo et al., in press). Based on the strengths-based resiliency framework (LambParker, LeBuffe, Powell, & Halpern, 2008) and the interaction hypothesis for second language acquisition (Long, 1996), we examined the extent to which positive peer interactions and English exposure are associated with Spanish-speaking preschoolers’ English vocabulary and letter-word skills, with the associations mediated by their ability to communicate in English (henceforth referred to as English oral proficiency) and learning behaviors in the classroom (e.g., independence, persistence, initiative, and attentiveness). Data were gathered using naturalistic observations, teacher and parent surveys, and standardized assessments. Positive peer interactions and peer English exposure were expected to relate positively with children’s English oral proficiency (DeThorne, Petrill, Schatschneider, & Cutting, 2010; Hammer et al., 2012) and learning behaviors (Connell & Wellborn, 1991; Ladd, Herald-Brown, & Reiser, 2008). In turn, English oral proficiency and learning behaviors were expected to relate positively with children’s English vocabulary and letter-word skills (Connell & Wellborn, 1991; Miller et al., 2006). Positive peer interactions and children’s English skills The strengths-based resiliency framework suggests that naturally occurring factors in educational settings foster at-risk children’s learning (Lamb-Parker et al., 2008). Positive peer interactions—characterized by behaviors such as sharing, helping, and cooperating—is one of these factors (Bulotsky-Shearer, Bell, Romero, & Carter, 2012). They provide an enjoyable setting for children to develop ideas, explore, solve problems, make decisions, and practice skills collaboratively (Damon, 1984; Piaget, 1959; Rogoff, 1998). Children also practice language and engage in literacy-rich activities, such as taking notes, identifying relevant books, and pretending to read them (Andresen, 2005; Dickinson & Tabors, 2001). By working together, children coordinate ideas and build on each other’s knowledge and experiences to promote learning. Notably, positive peer interactions may benefit children who are at risk of struggling academically due to economic disadvantage. For example, Cohen and Mendez (2009) found a positive link between teacher ratings of low-income African-American preschoolers’ positive peer interactions and receptive vocabulary skills. Also, in a study of Head Start preschoolers, Bulotsky-Shearer et al. (2012) found a positive link between teacher ratings of fall positive peer interactions and children’s spring learning outcomes, including early reading, writing, and book knowledge. The work of Hampton and Fantuzzo (2003) suggests that the benefits of positive peer interactions may extend to children’s early school performance. In a sample of mostly low-income African-American children, they found a positive link between teacher ratings of positive peer interactions in kindergarten and children’s average report card grades in first grade. The above research suggests that positive peer experiences might enhance children’s learning of vocabulary and literacy, including that of low-income, ethnic-minority children. However, the majority of this literature has focused on English-speaking children. As such, the extent to which the findings can be generalized to Spanish-speaking children who are learning English as a second language is unclear. The work of Galindo and Fuller (2010) highlights the potential that positive peer interactions have to facilitate these children’s English academic skills. Using a representative

sample of Latino kindergarteners in the U.S. from the Early Childhood Longitudinal Study-Kindergarten (ECLS-K), they found that teacher ratings of fall interpersonal skills (i.e., the ability to form and maintain friendships and willingness to help other children), predicted positive changes in kindergarteners’ math test scores across the fall and spring semesters. These findings were not specific to Spanish-speaking children, but they are consistent with the idea that positive peer interactions may be associated with their academic abilities. English exposure from peers and children’s English skills For successful English acquisition, English exposure is required. Research suggests that classmates can be valuable sources of English exposure for Spanish-speaking preschoolers (Chesterfield et al., 1982; Palermo et al., in press). Nevertheless, many of them attend classrooms with varying numbers of English- and Spanishspeaking students. As such, the amount of English exposure that children receive from peers is likely to vary based on the extent to which peers speak English relative to Spanish. This makes individual differences in peer English exposure an important variable to consider. The interaction hypothesis for second language acquisition suggests that linguistic interactions among children, including those that occur between two second language learners, foster Spanish-speaking children’s English oral proficiency by providing English exposure, practice, and opportunities to enhance comprehension (e.g., by peers repeating, elaborating, or simplifying their English speech; Long, 1996). Support for this idea stems from several studies (Aukrust, 2004; Pica, Lincoln-Porter, Paninos, & Linnell, 1996). For example, Chesterfield et al. (1982) observed the peer interactions and language use of six Spanishspeaking preschoolers in bilingual (Spanish–English) classrooms at the beginning, middle, and end of the academic year and found that those who interacted mostly with English-speaking peers were likely to exhibit the greatest gains in English oral proficiency. Similarly, Palermo et al. (in press) examined the extent to which English exposure levels from family members in the home and teachers and peers in the classroom uniquely contributed to Spanish-speaking preschoolers’ English vocabulary skills. Parents reported children’s levels of English exposure at home. Multiple observations per week were gathered on the frequency of teachers’ and peers’ English use during interactions with children in the classroom. After accounting for the contributions of English exposure from family members and teachers, Palermo et al. found that English exposure from peers uniquely enhanced Spanish-speaking preschoolers’ later English expressive vocabulary skills. Thus, English exposure from peers might play an important role in shaping Spanish-speaking preschoolers’ English vocabulary knowledge. The present study extends this work by using the same sample of Spanish-speaking preschoolers to identify the mediating processes that account for the link between peer English exposure and children’s English vocabulary skills. The link between peer English exposure and Spanish-speaking children’s English literacy skills is less clear due to a dearth of research. Filling this gap is important because peers are integral members of children’s social contexts and the available evidence hints that linguistic experiences with classroom peers may enhance Spanish-speaking children’s literacy skills. Informal peer play conversations in preschool, for example, have been positively associated with English monolingual children’s narrative production, print awareness, and letter recognition skills (Bergen & Mauer, 2000; Dickinson & Tabors, 2001; Pellegrini, 1980). Similarly, the work of Nicolopoulou and colleagues (Nicolopoulou, 2002; Nicolopoulou & Cole, 2010) suggests that classroom activities in which English-speaking preschoolers create stories and act them

F. Palermo, A.M. Mikulski / Early Childhood Research Quarterly 29 (2014) 625–635

out in front of classmates (either individually or with a group of peers) with minimal teacher support is likely to foster narrative development. With respect to Spanish-speaking children, the literature on cooperative and peer-assisted learning strategies focused on interactions between “expert” and novice children suggests that engaging in learning activities, such as decoding games and questions about readings, with more knowledgeable classmates may strengthen Spanish-speaking children’s English letter-word and reading comprehension skills (Calderón, Hertz-Lazarowitz, & Slavin, 1998; Gersten et al., 2007; Saenz, Fuchs, & Fuchs, 2005). Although not specific to informal English exposure from peers, such findings highlight how peer interactions can provide opportunities to practice material taught by teachers and engage children in classroom content, thus maximizing learning. However, more research is needed to understand the link between interacting with peers in English and Spanish-speaking children’s English literacy skills. Learning behaviors and English oral proficiency as mediational mechanisms In addition to examining the direct contributions of positive peer interactions and peer English exposure to Spanish-speaking preschoolers’ English vocabulary and letter-word skills, we tested whether their learning behaviors and English oral proficiency in the classroom mediated those associations. Learning behaviors, such as persistence, attentiveness, initiative, effort, and asking questions, reflect children’s engagement in learning activities (Fredricks, Blumenfeld, & Paris, 2004). English oral proficiency denotes DLL children’s propensity to speak that language and communicate effectively during classroom social interactions. Identifying mediational mechanisms is particularly important to understand the link between peer experiences and Spanish-speaking children’s learning of English literacy. Unlike oral language, which is acquired naturally by engaging in social interactions, literacy has to be explicitly taught by more knowledgeable adults (e.g., teachers) and/or peers (Lyon, 1998). Because preschool peer interactions occur mainly between children who are relative novices and do not always involve aspects of literacy, the contribution of informal positive peer experiences to children’s literacy learning may operate indirectly, such as by supporting learning behaviors that enhance literacy skills and promoting oral language proficiency. Connell and Wellborn’s (1991) model of self-esteem suggests that positive social interactions with classmates provide a sense of relatedness or belonging that facilitates learning by promoting classroom engagement. Specifically, the model posits that children have a fundamental need to connect or relate to their social surroundings, and that this sense of relatedness stems from positive interactions with members of a particular social context, including classroom peers. Successfully relating to peers, in turn, encourages children to become engaged in the classroom environment, such as by paying attention and participating during learning activities, which facilitates academic performance. Support for Connell and Wellborn’s (1991) model stems from several studies (Ladd, Birch, & Buhs, 1999; Wentzel, Barry, & Caldwell, 2004). Berndt and Keefe (1995) found that school-age children with intimate, prosocial, and supportive school friendships exhibited positive changes in their classroom participation levels during the school year. Relatedly, Ladd et al. (2008) found that across seven years, from kindergarten to sixth grade, children who shifted from being rejected by peers to being accepted by them exhibited increasing levels of classroom participation, whereas those who shifted from being accepted to being rejected exhibited decreasing levels of classroom participation. Thus, the changes in children’s participation levels coincided with changes in

627

their peer acceptance and rejection rates. There is also evidence that learning behaviors facilitate achievement (Fredricks et al., 2004; Ladd et al., 1999). For instance, Alexander, Entwisle, and Dauber (1993) found a positive link between classroom participation levels in first grade and children’s reading and math performance in fourth grade. Few studies have examined the associations among positive peer experiences, classroom learning behaviors, and academicrelated performance in preschool settings. Most research in this area has focused on negative peer interactions, but the findings have been consistent with the notion that peer experiences (positive or negative) indirectly influence children’s learning by enhancing or hindering classroom engagement (Connell & Wellborn, 1991). For example, using teacher ratings of interpersonal and academic competencies, McWayne and Cheung (2009) found that negative peer interactions characterized by disruptive, disconnected, and non-interactive play diminished low-income preschoolers’ classroom learning behaviors (i.e., competence motivation, attention/persistence, and attitudes toward learning) which, in turn, hindered their reading, science, and math performance in first grade. Taken together, we expected that learning behaviors would mediate the associations among positive peer interactions and Spanish-speaking preschoolers’ English vocabulary and letter-word skills. Moreover, research with English monolinguals suggests that classroom peers provide multiple opportunities for children to use language (Andresen, 2005; Dickinson & Tabors, 2001). In mixed-language (Spanish–English) classrooms, peers provide opportunities for Spanish-speaking children to speak English (Chesterfield et al., 1982), which may enhance their English vocabulary and literacy skills (DeThorne et al., 2010; Hammer et al., 2012). For instance, using a sample of Spanish-speaking children in kindergarten through third grade, Miller et al. (2006) found a positive link between English use (i.e., mean length of utterances, vocabulary diversity, verbal fluency, and narrative coherence), word-level, and (English) reading comprehension skills (as measured via standardized assessments). Thus, we expected that positive interactions with peers and the amount of English exposure that children received from them would associate positively with children’s English oral proficiency. In turn, children’s English oral proficiency was expected to associate positively with their later English vocabulary and letter-word skills.

Alternative models We relied on theory and research to hypothesize that positive peer interactions foster children’s learning behaviors (Connell & Wellborn, 1991; Ladd et al., 2008) and that peer English exposure encourages children to speak English (Long, 1996; Palermo et al., in press). Nonetheless, to augment our understanding of the connections among these variables, we also considered the alternative possibility that children’s learning behaviors support positive peer interactions and that children’s use of English facilitates that of peers. That is, we explored whether positive peer interactions and peer English exposure are mechanisms by which children’s learning behaviors and English oral proficiency relate to their English vocabulary and letter-word skills. The extent to which learning behaviors and oral proficiency shape peer experiences is understudied. However, should both the hypothesized and alternative associations be supported, it would provide some evidence of transactionality between positive peer experiences and Spanish-speaking preschoolers’ learning behaviors and between their English oral proficiency and English exposure levels from peers.

628

F. Palermo, A.M. Mikulski / Early Childhood Research Quarterly 29 (2014) 625–635

Method Participants The participants were Spanish-speaking preschoolers from 10 Head Start (HS) classrooms in a U.S. Southwest metropolitan area. All classrooms were half-day programs with 15–20 students, and at least one staff member (the lead teacher and/or aide) who spoke Spanish fluently. Children attended five days a week for three and one-half hours a day. The proportion of Spanish-speaking students per classroom ranged from 70% to 100%. Parental consent was obtained from 143 children (out of a possible 161; permission rate = 89%). For nine children who attended a participating classroom for more than one year, only their first year of data was used. There was one classroom for which fall observations (see below) were excluded because a project staffing shortage resulted in very few observations and low reliabilities (n = 19). Thus, data from nine HS classrooms were used in the present study. Children with missing data on all study variables were excluded from the study (n = 17). Additionally, children who had less than 10 total observations in the fall had their observations of peer English exposure excluded due to insufficient data (n = 27). These children, however, were not excluded from the study. Instead, their data on the other study variables were used to derive population estimates using maximum likelihood estimation. The final sample included 107 children. Their ages at the start of preschool ranged from 44 to 60 months (M = 53 months, SD = 4 months). More than half were boys (56%). According to parents, most children were of Mexican descent (96%), with the remainders being of Central/South American (2%) or unknown descent (2%). The majority of them were born in the U.S. (90%). Furthermore, 41% of parents reported using only Spanish at home, 51% used “more Spanish than English,” and 8% used “more English than Spanish.” The majority of children lived in two-parent households (70%), with most mothers (87%) and fathers (92%) born outside of the U.S. Most parents reported household incomes of less than $30,000 annually (82%). The remaining families earned between $30,000 and $40,000 (9%), $40,000 and $50,000 (5%), or more than $50,000 (4%) annually. Notably, the mothers (87%) of the 107 children in the study sample were more likely to have been born outside of the U.S. than the mothers (67%) of the 36 children who were excluded from the study, 2 (1, N = 106) = 5.01, p = .025. The sample size was reduced in this analysis due to cases with missing data on mothers’ birthplace. No other differences were found regarding parents’ language use at home, family income levels, family structure, children’s age and gender, and children’s and fathers’ birthplace. Procedures The data were collected via naturalistic observations, standardized assessments, and teacher and parent questionnaires, as part of a longitudinal study of Spanish-speaking HS children’s school readiness. Naturalistic observations were gathered using a time-sampling procedure in which multiple observations per child were gathered indoors and outdoors across several peer collaboration contexts (i.e., large and small group classroom activities and free-play), except during meal times. Furthermore, from the months of October through December, parents (mostly mothers) reported their relative use of English and Spanish at home, annual family income levels, and the number of children’s English books at home. During November and December, teachers completed questionnaires on children’s positive peer interactions in the classroom, learning behaviors, and English oral proficiency. Finally, standardized assessments were administered by experienced English–Spanish bilingual graduate students during October

and November to gauge children’s nonverbal cognitive abilities in the fall and from March through May to gauge their English vocabulary and letter-word identification skills in the spring. Measures Positive peer interactions. The teacher version of the Penn Interactive Peer Play Scale (PIPPS-T; Fantuzzo, Coolahan, Mendez, McDermott, & Sutton-Smith, 1998) was used to gauge children’s positive peer interaction levels. The PIPPS-T is a 32-item rating scale of children’s social behaviors that facilitate or hinder prosocial peer interactions. It is comprised of three subscales: Play Interaction, Play Disruption, and Play Disconnection. In this study, only the 10item Play Interaction subscale was used (˛ = .82). It gauged teachers’ perceptions of children’s prosocial behaviors with peers such as comforting, helping, sharing, and encouraging others to play. Sample items included ‘helps other children,’ ‘shares toys with children,’ and ‘comforts others who are hurt or sad.’ Teachers’ ratings ranged from never (1) to always (4). Peer English exposure. Naturalistic observations were used to gauge the amount of English exposure that children received from peers. Most (71%) observations were gathered indoors. The observers used a randomly ordered list of participating children in a classroom and observed each child for a 15-s period, following the order on the list. After each observation, they entered the data into a handheld computer and moved on to the next child on the list. When the observers reached the bottom of the list, they repeated the observations starting from the top. The observations were conducted for 6–8 h per week in the fall of preschool from late September to early December, with most observations starting in October. These procedures have been successfully used in prior studies (Martin et al., 2013). Seventeen English–Spanish bilingual (94% female) undergraduate research assistants and one graduate research assistant were trained to conduct the observations by faculty and experienced graduate students during the first three to four weeks of the fall semester. The research assistants were unaware of the study hypotheses. Their training consisted of meetings to discuss the observation protocol, practice sessions to observe and code children’s behavior alongside the trainer at a university-sponsored preschool, compare codes, and discuss discrepant cases. Once the observers reached 90% agreement with trainers, they practiced coding alongside experienced observers at the HS classroom(s) where they were assigned to learn children’s names and gain more experience. The observers did not begin collecting data until they knew the names of all the children in their assigned classroom(s). For each 15-s observation, the observers coded the behavior of the child being observed. They selected from six mutually exclusive options: social play (rule-based play with peers, interactive play, or conversation), parallel play (engaging in the same activity alongside peers but not actively interacting with them at the time), solitary play, teacher-oriented behavior (engaged with teachers), on-looking behavior (watching others play but not involved), or unoccupied (characterized by a lack of focus). For social and parallel play observations, the identity of up to five peers of the child being observed was coded. If any peers used language, it was coded as English, Spanish, or both. When more than one peer was speaking (i.e., when several children were engaged in an activity), the language of the peer who spoke for the majority of the time was coded. If a peer started speaking Spanish and used one or more words in English or vice versa during the 15-s observation period, the peers’ language use was coded as “both.” These procedures were tested and refined during a prior pilot study. The observations relevant to the present study were those in which (1) peers used English with or near children and (2) the language use occurred while engaging in social or parallel play.

F. Palermo, A.M. Mikulski / Early Childhood Research Quarterly 29 (2014) 625–635

Across two years of data collection, a total of 2092 observations were gathered during the fall semesters (M = 21.61 per child, Mdn = 18.00, SD = 10.67, range = 10–45). Individual differences in the number of observations were due to several factors, including the number of students per classroom, classroom schedules, children’s time spent in the classroom on a daily basis, absences, unavailability (e.g., in the bathroom), and whether they left or enrolled mid-year in a participating classroom. Given the study goals, 1129 observations that involved teacher-oriented behaviors, solitary play, on-looking behaviors, or unoccupied behaviors were excluded. Of the remaining 963 social and parallel play observations, 494 involved peers using language with children (165 for English, 290 for Spanish, and 39 for both languages). The remaining 469 observations were those in which peers did not use language. The raw frequency counts of peers’ English use during social and parallel play with target-children were used to gauge each child’s amount of English exposure from peers. To gauge interrater reliability, two independent observers gathered 402 observations simultaneously (about 19% of the total observations). These observations were collected throughout the fall semesters to monitor for observer drift and then averaged to gauge overall levels of agreement. The average kappa of .64 for peers’ English use (yes/no) indicated good levels of agreement (Landis & Koch, 1977). Additionally, we calculated a proportion of peer language use variable by summing the number of times peers were observed using English, Spanish (kappa = .78), or both languages (kappa = 1.00) with each target-child and dividing that by the target-child’s total number of fall observations. The proportion of peer language use variable was included in our analyses to account for individual differences in the number of observations across children. Learning behaviors. Teachers completed an 8-item questionnaire gauging children’s levels of engagement in behaviors that support learning, such as attentiveness, independence, participation, and willingness to explore (Fabes, Martin, Hanish, Anders, & Madden-Derdich, 2003). Sample items included ‘focuses attention during large-group teacher-directed activities’, ‘can work independently’, and ‘actively participates in class activities.’ Teachers’ response choices were not yet (1), early stage (2), intermediate stage (3), or proficient (4). The responses were averaged to create a classroom learning behavior score for each child (˛ = .95). Children’s English oral proficiency. To gauge children’s English oral proficiency in the classroom, teachers completed 3-items. They rated children’s ability to: (1) ‘use elaborate English to describe objects and events,’ (2) ‘use English to initiate and maintain interactions with adults and peers,’ and (3) ‘use English to gather information and solve problems (asks questions).’ Response choices were not yet (1), early stage (2), intermediate stage (3), or proficient (4), which were averaged to create an English oral proficiency score for each child (˛ = .97). English vocabulary and letter-word skills. The Picture Vocabulary (˛ = .76) and Letter-Word Identification (˛ = .94) subscales of the Woodcock-Johnson III gauged children’s English vocabulary and letter-word skills (Woodcock, McGrew, & Maher, 2000). In the Picture Vocabulary subscale, children are presented with a picture of an object and asked to name it. In the Letter-Word Identification subscale, children are asked to name and identify letters and read words. Because these assessments were normed with monolingual English-speaking samples, which can lead to bias when interpre˜ & Halle, 2011), we used the W scores provided ting test results (Pena by the test developers. They are mathematical transformations of the raw scores based on the Rasch model to create equal-interval scale scores based on children’s actual performance, not relative performance to the norming sample (Mather & Woodcock, 2001). Control variables. In addition to controlling for the proportion of peers’ language use, we considered several home- and child-level variables as potential covariates, including children’s

629

nonverbal cognitive abilities. We also considered family income levels, parents’ relative use of English and Spanish, and the number of children’s English books at home, which were assessed using single-item measures in the parent questionnaire. To gauge parent’s language use, they were asked to select which option best described the use of language in their household, with the response choices being only Spanish (1), more Spanish than English (2), more English than Spanish (3), or only English (4). Children’s fall nonverbal cognitive abilities were measured using the Naglieri Nonverbal Ability Test (NNAT-I; Naglieri, 2003). The NNAT-I uses matrix items involving shapes and geometric designs interrelated via spatial or logical organization to gauge cognitive abilities, regardless of English oral proficiency levels (because it can be administered in English or Spanish) or socioeconomic background (Naglieri, Booth, & Winsler, 2004). The NNAT-I is a reliable (˛ = .89) and valid measure that correlates (r > .50) with tests of intelligence and achievement, such as the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children—4th edition (Naglieri, 2003; Naglieri et al., 2004). Given that it was normed for use starting with kindergarten-aged children, we used the raw scores in our analyses. Results We examined the role of positive peer interactions and English exposure levels in low-income Spanish-speaking preschoolers’ English vocabulary and letter-word skills, and whether those linkages were mediated by children’s learning behaviors and English oral proficiency. Preliminary analyses were conducted to examine the normality of the study variables, identify covariates, and describe children’s levels of peer English exposure, positive peer interactions, English oral proficiency, learning behaviors, and English vocabulary and letter-word skills. Next, path analysis was used to examine the extent to which fall positive peer interactions and English exposure levels were associated with children’s spring English vocabulary and letter-word skills and to test the mediating roles of learning behaviors and English oral proficiency. Preliminary analyses The study variables were reasonably well distributed, with skewness values ranging from −.61 to 1.83 (values from +2 to −2 indicate a normal distribution; Bachman, 2004). To examine the links between parents’ language use at home and the study variables, the children were categorized into one of two groups: those whose parents used Spanish only (n = 44) and those whose parents used Spanish and English. The latter group was created by combining children (n = 55) whose parents used “more Spanish than English” with those whose parents used “more English than Spanish” (n = 8). As shown in Table 1, children from homes where parents used Spanish and English were likely to receive greater English exposure from peers, speak English more in the classroom, and exhibit greater English vocabulary skills than children from homes where parents used Spanish only. The children from Spanish–English homes were also likely to be from higher family income levels and exhibit greater nonverbal cognitive abilities at the start of preschool than children from Spanish-only homes. Cohen’s (1988) d effect sizes ranged from small to moderate. Thus, we controlled for parents’ language use in our analyses. Table 2 contains the means, standard deviations, ranges, and bivariate correlations of the study variables. These data were computed using maximum likelihood estimation in Mplus to handle cases with missing data (Muthén & Muthén, 2010). The proportion of missing data ranged from 3% to 25%. Positive peer interactions and English exposure levels in the fall were positively correlated with children’s English vocabulary and letter-word

630

F. Palermo, A.M. Mikulski / Early Childhood Research Quarterly 29 (2014) 625–635

Table 1 Mean level differences by parents’ language use at home. Variable Family income levels Spanish-only Spanish–English Nonverbal cognitive abilities Spanish-only Spanish–English Number of English books Spanish-only Spanish–English Positive peer interactions Spanish-only Spanish–English Peer English exposure Spanish-only Spanish–English Learning behaviors Spanish-only Spanish–English English oral proficiency Spanish-only Spanish–English English vocabulary skills Spanish-only Spanish–English English letter-word skills Spanish-only Spanish–English

M

SD

df

F

p

d

1.74 2.40

.79 1.12

1, 82

8.87

.004

.681

7.09 9.08

4.80 3.79

1, 99

5.32

.023

.460

1.51 1.65

.85 .86

1, 85

.55

.459

.164

2.63 2.72

.51 .45

1, 102

1.03

.313

.187

.98 1.63

1.59 1.70

1, 105

4.09

.046

.394

3.01 2.99

.78 .56

1, 101

.01

.924

.015

1.98 2.63

.94 .98

1, 101

11.26

.001

.677

427.67 441.05

21.74 19.77

1, 96

9.94

.002

.644

324.03 329.81

21.63 22.02

1, 96

1.65

.203

.265

Note. The degrees of freedom varied due to cases with missing data. Family income levels ranged from 0–$10,000 (1) to $50,000–$60,000 (6). Children’s nonverbal cognitive abilities were their raw NNAT scores. The number of children’s English books at home was 1 (0–9), 2 (10–25), 3 (26–50), or 4 (more than 51). Peer English exposure was the sum of observations in which they spoke English. Children’s English oral proficiency ranged from 1 (not yet) to 4 (proficient).

skills in the spring. Positive peer interactions were also positively correlated with children’s learning behaviors and English oral proficiency. Peer English exposure correlated positively with children’s English oral proficiency. Similarly, children’s learning behaviors and English oral proficiency were positively correlated with their English vocabulary and letter-word skills. With respect to covariates, family income levels were positively correlated with peer English exposure levels and children’s English vocabulary skills. Nonverbal cognitive abilities correlated positively with children’s positive peer interactions, learning behaviors, English oral proficiency, vocabulary, and letter-word skills. Finally, the number of English books for children in the home correlated positively with children’s English oral proficiency, vocabulary, and letter-word skills. To control for family income levels, parents’ language use,

children’s nonverbal cognitive abilities, and the number of English books for children at home, we included these variables in subsequent analyses. Path analyses Path analysis was used to test the hypothesized associations among the study variables. Separate models were tested for each outcome (i.e., English vocabulary and letter-word skills). Maximum likelihood with robust standard errors (MLR) was used to compute parameter estimates and test mediational effects. To assess model fit, multiple fit indices were used, including the 2 statistic, root mean square of approximation (RMSEA), comparative fit index (CFI), and standardized root mean square residual (SRMR).

Table 2 Bivariate correlations, means, and standard deviations of study variables (N = 107). 1 1. Family income levels 2. Children’s general cognitive abilities 3. Number of English books at home 4. Positive peer interactions 5. Children’s classroom learning behaviors 6. Children’s English oral proficiency 7. Peer English Exposure 8. Peers’ proportion of language-use 9. Children’s English vocabulary 10. Children’s English letter-word skills M SD Range

.14 .02 .13 .09 .12 .26** .07 .21* .12 2.34 1.58 1–6

2

3

−.09 .27** .25** .39*** .14 .01 .36*** .27**

.01 −.07 .21* .14 .13 .25* .37***

8.29 4.31 0–21

1.57 .87 1–4

4

.59*** .37*** .07 .14 .37*** .25** 2.69 .47 1.5–4

5

.43*** .14 −.02 .33*** .40*** 3.00 .65 1.5–4

6

.31*** .03 .57*** .49*** 2.38 1.01 1–4

7

.35*** .36*** .26** 1.36 1.67 0–7

8

.22* .20* .21 .10 0–.55

9

10

.39*** 435.65 21.47 384–477

327.34 21.71 276–396

Note. Maximum likelihood was used for handling cases with missing data. Family income levels ranged from 1 (less than $10,000 annually) to 6 (more than $50,000 annually). The number of children’s English books at home was 1 (0–9), 2 (10–25), 3 (26–50), or 4 (more than 51). Children’s nonverbal cognitive abilities were their raw NNAT scores. Peer English exposure was the sum of observations in which they used English. Peers’ proportion of language use was the sum of observations in which they used any language divided by children’s total number of observations. Children’s English oral proficiency ranged from 1 (not yet) to 4 (proficient). * p < .05. ** p < .01. *** p < .001.

F. Palermo, A.M. Mikulski / Early Childhood Research Quarterly 29 (2014) 625–635

Fall

Positive Peer Interactions

.59***

Spring

Children’s Learning Behaviors

.20* .29**

.26**

631

.21**

Children’s English Vocabulary

.28** Peer English Exposure

.34***

Children’s English Oral Proficiency

.19+

.42***

.22** .22*

Peers’ Proportion of Language Use

Parents’ Home Language Use

Children’s Nonverbal Cognitive Ability

Total Family Income

Number of English Books at Home

Fig. 1. Mediated peer effects on Spanish-speaking preschoolers’ English vocabulary skills. Standardized path coefficients are shown. Dashed paths represent nonsignificant effects. The covariance values among covariates were omitted to facilitate the interpretation of the model. 2 (32) = 37.01, p = .248, RMSEA = .03, CFI = .96, SRMR = .09. + p = .060, *p < .05, **p < .01, ***p < .001.

Nonsignificant chi-square values indicate good model fit, as well as RMSEA values less than .05, CFI values above .90, and SRMR values close to .08 (Hu & Bentler, 1999). Children’s English vocabulary. The vocabulary skills path model tested two direct paths from fall positive peer interactions and peer English exposure to children’s spring English vocabulary. Three indirect paths were also tested: (1) positive peer interactions to English vocabulary via children’s learning behaviors, (2) positive peer interactions to English vocabulary via children’s English oral proficiency, and (3) peer English exposure to English vocabulary via English oral proficiency. To control for individual differences in number of observations, we included a path from peers’ proportion of language use to peer English exposure. Family income, parents’ language use, and children’s nonverbal cognitive abilities were also controlled for by including paths to significant covariances (e.g., a path from family income to English vocabulary, a path from children’s cognitive abilities to their English oral proficiency). The results fit the data well, 2 (24) = 25.13, p = .39, RMSEA = .02, CFI = .99, SRMR = .08. Seven covariate paths and one hypothesized path were nonsignificant. These paths were set to zero and the path model was retested. As shown in Fig. 1, the resulting model fit the data well. Parents’ language use was positively associated with children’s English oral proficiency, as were nonverbal cognitive skills. More importantly, positive peer interactions were positively associated with children’s learning behaviors and English vocabulary skills. English exposure from peers was positively associated with children’s English vocabulary. Furthermore, an indirect path was found from positive peer interactions to English vocabulary via children’s English oral proficiency. Similarly, an indirect path was found from peer English exposure to English vocabulary via children’s English oral proficiency. Notably, the direct effect from peer English exposure to children’s English oral proficiency

approached significance (p = .060). Formal tests of mediation using MLR revealed that children’s English oral proficiency partially mediated the association between positive peer interactions and children’s English vocabulary skills, ˇ = .12, SE = .04, p = .003. Moreover, the mediating effect of English oral proficiency in the association between peer English exposure and children’s English vocabulary approached significance, ˇ = .08, SE = .04, p = .059. Children’s English letter-word skills. The hypothesized letterword skills path model was similar to the one above. The main differences were the outcome and, because children’s letter-word skills were uncorrelated with family income levels and did not vary by parents’ language use, those two paths were omitted. The hypothesized letter-word skills path model fit the data well, 2 (26) = 26.18, p = .453, RMSEA = .00, CFI = .99, SRMR = .06. However, three covariate and two hypothesized paths were nonsignificant, and thus set to zero. As shown in Fig. 2, the resulting model fit the data well. The covariate effects were similar to those of the English vocabulary skills path model, except that the number of children’s English books at home was positively linked with English letterword skills. Three indirect paths were found: (1) from positive peer interactions to English letter-word skills via learning behaviors, (2) from positive peer interactions to English letter-word skills via English oral proficiency, and (3) from peer English exposure to English letter-word skills via English oral proficiency. As before, the path from peer English exposure to children’s English oral proficiency approached significance (p = .067). Tests of mediation revealed that children’s learning behaviors, ˇ = .17, SE = .05, p = .003, and English oral proficiency, ˇ = .09, SE = .03, p = .016, mediated the link between positive peer interactions and English letter-word skills. Children’s English oral proficiency, however, did not mediate the link between peer English exposure and English letter-word skills.

632

F. Palermo, A.M. Mikulski / Early Childhood Research Quarterly 29 (2014) 625–635

Fall

Positive Peer Interactions

Spring

Children’s Learning Behaviors

.59***

.29** Children’s English Letter-Word

.28**

.26**

.28** Peer English Exposure

.18+

.31**

Children’s English Oral Proficiency

.31** .34** Peers’ Proportion of Language Use

.23** Parents’ Home Language Use

.22* Children’s Nonverbal Cognitive Ability

Total Family Income

Number of English Books at Home

Fig. 2. Mediated peer effects on Spanish-speaking preschoolers’ English letter-word skills. Standardized path coefficients are shown. Dashed paths represent nonsignificant effects. The covariance values among covariates were omitted to facilitate the interpretation of the model. 2 (32) = 36.22, p = .277, RMSEA = .03, CFI = .97, SRMR = .08. + p = .067, *p < .05, **p < .01, ***p < .001.

Alternative path models. Given that our predictor and mediator variables were cross-sectional, we tested the possibility that positive peer interactions and peer English exposure mediated the linkages between children’s learning behaviors and English oral proficiency and their English vocabulary and letter-word skills. As shown in Fig. 3, the alternative English vocabulary path model fit the data well. Tests of mediation revealed that positive peer interactions mediated the link between children’s learning behaviors and English vocabulary, ˇ = .11, SE = .05, p = .020, and that peer English exposure mediated the link between children’s English oral proficiency and vocabulary, ˇ = .06, SE = .02, p = .025. The alternative English letter-word skills path model also fit the data well. However, children’s’ learning behaviors and English oral proficiency were only directly associated with their English letter-word skills.

Discussion The goal of this study was to examine the extent to which positive peer interactions and peer English exposure levels were linked with low-income Spanish-speaking preschoolers’ English vocabulary and letter-word skills. The results revealed that positive peer interactions and peer English exposure levels in the fall of preschool were positively associated with children’s English vocabulary and letter-word skills in the spring (controlling for several home- and child-level factors). We also found that English oral proficiency in the classroom mediated the contribution of positive peer interactions to children’s English vocabulary and letter-word skills. Similarly, we found that learning behaviors mediated the link between positive peer interactions and children’s English letterword skills. Furthermore, the findings highlighted the possibility of transactional effects between peer experiences (i.e., positive interactions and English exposure) and children’s learning behaviors and English oral proficiency in the classroom.

The importance of positive peer interactions The findings of this study are consistent with the strengthsbased resiliency framework (Lamb-Parker et al., 2008) by suggesting that positive peer experiences are an important correlate of low-income Spanish-speaking preschoolers’ English vocabulary and letter-word skills. Children who exhibited high levels of positive peer interactions in the fall were likely to perform better on tests of English vocabulary and letter-word skills in the spring than those who exhibited lower levels. However, positive peer interactions were differentially linked with preschoolers’ English vocabulary and letter-word skills. Whereas positive peer interactions were directly and indirectly associated with English vocabulary skills via English oral proficiency, they were only indirectly associated with English letter-word skills via learning behaviors and English oral proficiency. These differential links may occur because peer interactions are likely to provide multiple opportunities for conversations in which Spanish-speaking children use and learn new English words. In contrast, the association between positive peer interactions and letter-word skills may only operate indirectly because peer conversations do not always explicitly involve aspects of literacy (e.g., spelling, rhyming, or reciting the alphabet). Our findings, however, raise an important question about why classroom learning behaviors would account for the contribution of positive peer experiences to English letter-word skills, but not English vocabulary. The difference might stem from the classroom settings in which vocabulary and literacy skills are attained. In general, oral language skills are acquired naturally by engaging in social interactions across multiple settings (e.g., large-group, small-group, and free-play), whereas literacy is generally taught in large-group, teacher-directed activities (e.g., learning the alphabet song). Perhaps learning behaviors are not as necessary for learning English vocabulary but instead play a

F. Palermo, A.M. Mikulski / Early Childhood Research Quarterly 29 (2014) 625–635

Fall Children’s Learning Behaviors

.59***

Spring Positive Peer Interactions

.40***

Children’s English Oral Proficiency

.20*

.43***

.30**

633

Peer English Exposure

Children’s English Vocabulary

.21**

Alternative English Vocabulary Path Model χ2 (33) = 33.49, p = .443, RMSEA = .01, CFI = .99, SRMR = .08

Children’s Learning Behaviors

.59***

Positive Peer Interactions

.28** .40***

Children’s English Oral Proficiency

.31**

.29**

Children’s English Letter-Word

Peer English Exposure

Alternative English Letter-Word Skills Path Model χ2 (33) = 32.64, p = .484, RMSEA = .00, CFI = 1.00, SRMR = .07 Fig. 3. Alternative path models. Standardized path coefficients are shown. Dashed paths represent nonsignificant effects. Covariate effects were omitted to facilitate interpretation. *p < .05, **p < .01, ***p < .001.

key role in facilitating children’s learning of English word-level skills presented during teacher-directed activities by fostering children’s classroom engagement. If so, learning behaviors might be an important mechanism by which peer experiences can foster Spanish-speaking preschoolers’ English literacy. Notably, the alternative model suggests that positive peer interactions mediate the link between children’s learning behaviors and English vocabulary. That is, children’s learning behaviors appeared to support positive peer interactions, which in turn fostered their English vocabulary skills. The findings from both the hypothesized and alternative models hint that there may be a transactional link between positive peer interactions and children’s learning behaviors. However, the connections among positive peer interactions, children’s learning behaviors, and their English letter-word skills may be unidirectional. This is because in the alternative model positive peer interactions did not contribute directly to children’s English letter-word skills. Instead, the contribution of positive peer interactions to children’s English letter-word skills appeared to operate indirectly by enhancing children’s classroom learning behaviors. Peer English exposure Furthermore, our findings suggest that linguistic experiences with peers in English correlate positively with Spanish-speaking preschoolers’ English vocabulary knowledge. Specifically, English

exposure from peers appeared to foster children’s proficiency in that language, which in turn enhanced their English vocabulary skills. This suggests that English oral proficiency may be a key mechanism by which peer English exposure supports children’s English vocabulary. Importantly, we also found support for the idea that children’s English oral proficiency facilitates English exposure from peers, which in turn benefits children’s English vocabulary skills. These findings point to the possibility of a transactional association between peers’ and children’s use of English, which is consistent with the interaction hypothesis for second language acquisition in that children need repeated opportunities to hear and practice the language (Long, 1996). It is also consistent with Swain’s (1985) comprehensible output hypothesis, which emphasizes the importance of giving learners opportunities to produce their second language in meaningful social contexts as opposed to simply hearing it. English exposure from peers, however, appeared to be unrelated to children’s English letter-word skills. Instead, the contribution of peers to children’s English letter-word skills appears to stem mainly from prosocial peer interactions that motivate children to become engaged in classroom content. In preschool, children have many opportunities to interact with one another. These interactions generally occur during free-play or small-group structured classroom activities that place few limits on children. These activities provide opportunities for extended language use, allowing Spanish-speaking children to hear and speak English. Even Spanish-speaking peers can offer simple forms

634

F. Palermo, A.M. Mikulski / Early Childhood Research Quarterly 29 (2014) 625–635

of corrective feedback, such as letting a child know that s/he has used an incorrect word to label an object or telling a child that they did not understand what they said (Pica et al., 1996). In fact, Spanish-speaking peers may provide additional opportunities for children to negotiate meaning and facilitate comprehension of English words because they can ask questions in Spanish about the meaning of English words used by peers (Strong, 1983). However, the contribution of peer English exposure and children’s English oral proficiency on their English vocabulary skills may vary by activity. Based on prior research with English-speaking children, dramatic forms of play might be particularly beneficial for Spanish-speaking children’s English acquisition (Andresen, 2005; Dickinson & Tabors, 2001). However, other types of interactive activities might also be beneficial, including playing with blocks, dolls, board games, crafting, and coloring. More research is needed to examine how different types of positive peer play activities contribute to Spanish-speaking preschoolers’ English acquisition. Implications Our findings suggest that prosocial peer interactions are likely to be positively associated with Spanish-speaking children’s learning of English vocabulary and letter-word skills in preschool. Thus, it is important for preschool teachers to encourage positive peer experiences that involve the use of English in the classroom as a potential avenue toward fostering Spanish-speaking preschoolers’ English skills prior to entering formal schooling. The importance of children’s social development in preschool is well documented, as evidenced by the inclusion of social and emotional development in Head Start’s overarching goals (Office of Head Start, 2003). Consequently, the notion of fostering social and emotional development, and encouraging positive peer interactions in particular, is something that many teachers may already be doing. With respect to preschool classrooms with varying proportions of English- and Spanish-speaking children, positive peer interactions can be supported by designing small group and inclusive peer learning activities in English and monitoring children’s interactions with each other (Girard, Girolametto, Weitzman, & Greenberg, 2011). If teachers witness children being excluded, they can make efforts to better integrate them into the classroom. For example, if they are being rejected due to limited English proficiency, they can teach the Spanish-speaking children simple phrases in English that can be used to invite others to play or join peers in an activity. Teachers can also encourage English-speaking peers to include Spanish-speaking children in their activities. These strategies may help promote a sense of inclusion, and thereby maximizing the opportunities that Spanish-speaking children have to interact positively with classroom peers. Limitations of the study Several limitations of this study are noteworthy. First, we did not consider the role of positive peer interactions across different classroom social settings. Positive peer interactions during classroom learning activities that introduce new concepts may promote children’s learning behaviors in different ways compared to freeplay, and free-play itself may vary in the types of language use it promotes. Second, the present study did not consider the role of the quality of English exposure from peers. Just as the quantity of English exposure could vary by classroom activity, the quality of peers’ English use (e.g., lexical richness, grammatical complexity, and nature of feedback) may also vary. Third, because the observations were conducted in preschool classrooms comprised primarily of Spanish-speaking students, the extent to which the findings can be generalized to Spanish-speaking children in other types of classrooms may be limited. Fourth, with respect to the naturalistic

observations, we did not measure reactivity. Thus, we were unable to gauge if children’s behavior changed due to being observed. Fifth, the cross-sectional nature of the data did not allow us to test the transactional link between positive peer interactions and children’s learning behaviors and between peer English exposure and children’s English oral proficiency. Nevertheless, our findings provide a framework for future research to examine the linkages between classroom peer experiences and Spanish-speaking children’s learning of English. Lastly, the wording and response options of the English oral proficiency measure may have made it difficult for teachers to distinguish between the constructs of language proficiency and language use. Given the aforementioned limitations, future research should investigate whether the type of classroom activity moderates the extent to which positive peer interactions and peer English exposure relate to children’s English vocabulary and literacy skills. Future research should also consider the quality of English that Spanish-speaking preschoolers receive from peers, particularly in classrooms with varying numbers of English and Spanishspeaking students. Finally, as the research in this area grows, some methodological considerations are noteworthy to gain a clear understanding of how peer interaction qualities and peer English exposure levels are associated with children’s learning of English, such as by measuring reactivity in observations of children’s language use and gathering longitudinal data to examine the possibility of a transactional association between positive peer experiences and children’s learning behaviors and between peer English exposure and children’s English oral proficiency. Moreover, future research should address how best to distinguish between the constructs of language proficiency and language use in young children. The present study added to the existing literature by highlighting the connections among positive peer interactions and English exposure and Spanish-speaking preschoolers’ English vocabulary and letter-word skills. Consequently, a potential avenue toward advancing these children’s English skills might be the encouragement of quality peer interactions in preschool that offer opportunities to hear and communicate in English. As this previously overlooked area of research continues to grow, we can gain an improved understanding of how peer interaction qualities and English exposure are associated with Spanish-speaking preschoolers’ English skills. Such work will be crucial to identifying the best ways to foster the English acquisition, school readiness, and academic success of a growing population that has persistently lagged behind English monolingual peers.

References Alexander, K. L., Entwisle, D. R., & Dauber, S. L. (1993). First-grade classroom behavior: Its short- and long-term consequences for school performance. Child Development, 64, 801–814. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1131219 Andresen, H. (2005). Role play and language development in preschool years. Culture & Psychology, 11, 387–414. the http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1354067X05058577 August, D., & Hakuta, K. (Eds.). (1997). Improving schooling for language-minority children: A research agenda. Washington, DC: National Academic Press. Aukrust, V. G. (2004). Explanatory discourse in young second learners’ peer play. Discourse Studies, 6, 393–412. language http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1461445604044296 Bachman, L. F. (2004). Statistical analyses for language assessment. New York, NY: Cambridge University. Bergen, D., & Mauer, D. (2000). Symbolic play, phonological awareness, and literacy skills at three age levels. In K. Roskos, & J. Christie (Eds.), Play and literacy in early childhood. Research from multiple perspectives (pp. 45–62). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Berndt, T. J., & Keefe, K. (1995). Friends’ influence on adolescents’ adjustment to school. Child Development, 66, 1312–1329. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1131649 Bulotsky-Shearer, R. J., Bell, E. R., Romero, S. L., & Carter, T. M. (2012). Preschool interactive peer play mediates problem behavior and learning for lowincome children. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 33, 53–65. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.appdev.2011.09.003

F. Palermo, A.M. Mikulski / Early Childhood Research Quarterly 29 (2014) 625–635 Calderón, M., Hertz-Lazarowitz, R., & Slavin, R. (1998). Effects of bilingual cooperative integrated reading and composition on students making the transition from Spanish to English reading. The Elementary School Journal, 99(2), 153–165. http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/461920 Chesterfield, K., Chesterfield, R., & Chavez, R. (1982). Peer interaction, language proficiency, and language preference in bilingual preschool classrooms. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 4, 467–486. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/07399863820044004 Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Cohen, J. S., & Mendez, J. L. (2009). Emotion regulation, language ability, and the stability of preschool children’s peer play behavior. Early Education & Development, 20, 1016–1037. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10409280903305716 Connell, J. P., & Wellborn, J. G. (1991). Competence, autonomy, and relatedness: A motivational analysis of self-system processes. In M. Gunnar, & A. Sroufe (Eds.), Self processes and development: The Minnesota symposia on child psychology (pp. 43–77). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Damon, W. (1984). Peer education: The untapped potential. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 5, 331–343. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/ 0193-3973(84)90006-6 De Houwer, A. (2009). Bilingual first language acquisition. Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters. DeThorne, L. S., Petrill, S. A., Schatschneider, C., & Cutting, L. (2010). Conversational language use as a predictor of early reading development: Language history as a moderating variable. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 53, 209–223. http://dx.doi.org/10.1044/1092-4388(2009/08-0060 Dickinson, D. K., & Tabors, P. O. (2001). Beginning literacy with language: Young children learning at home and school. Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes. Fabes, R. A., Martin, C. L., Hanish, L. D., Anders, M. C., & Madden-Derdich, D. A. (2003). Early school competence: The roles of sex-segregated play and effortful control. Developmental Psychology, 39, 848–858. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.39.5.848 Fantuzzo, J., Coolahan, K., Mendez, J., McDermott, P., & Sutton-Smith, B. (1998). Contextually-relevant validation of peer play constructs with African American Head Start children: Penn Interactive Peer Play Scale. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 13, 411–431. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0885-2006(99)80048-9 Fredricks, J. A., Blumenfeld, P. C., & Paris, A. H. (2004). School engagement: Potential of the concept, state of the evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74, 59–109. http://dx.doi.org/10.3102/00346543074001059 Galindo, C., & Fuller, B. (2010). The social competence of Latino kindergartners and growth in mathematical understanding. Developmental Psychology, 46, 579–592. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0017821 Gersten, R., Baker, S. K., Shanahan, T., Linan-Thompson, Collins, P., & Scarcella, R. (2007). Effective literacy and English language instruction for English learners in the elementary grades. Retrieved from http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/pdf/practice guides/20074011.pdf Girard, L., Girolametto, L., Weitzman, E., & Greenberg, J. (2011). Training early childhood educators to promote peer interactions: Effects on children’s aggressive and prosocial behaviors. Early Education and Development, 22, 305–323. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10409281003668060 Halle, T., Hair, E., Wandner, L., McNamara, M., & Chien, N. (2012). Predictors and outcomes of early versus later English language proficiency among English language learners. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 27, 1–20. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2011.07.004 Hammer, C. S., Komaroff, E., Rodriguez, B. L., Lopez, L. M., Scarpino, S. E., & Goldstein, B. (2012). Predicting Spanish–English bilingual children’s language abilities. Journal of Speech, Language & Hearing Research, 55, 1251–1264. http://dx.doi.org/10.1044/1092-4388(2012/11-0016) Hampton, V. R., & Fantuzzo, J. W. (2003). The validity of the Penn Interactive Peer Play Scale with urban, low-income kindergarten children. School Psychology Review, 32, 77–91. Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6, 1–55. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118 Kieffer, M. J. (2008). Catching up or falling behind? Initial English proficiency, concentrated poverty, and the reading growth of language minority students in the United States. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100, 851–868. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.100.4.851 Ladd, G. W., Birch, S. H., & Buhs, E. S. (1999). Children’s social and scholastic lives in kindergarten: Related spheres of influence? Child Development, 70, 1373–1400. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1467-8624.00101 Ladd, G. W., Herald-Brown, S. L., & Reiser, M. (2008). Does chronic classroom peer rejection predict the development of children’s classroom participation during the grade school years? Child Development, 79, 1001–1015. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2008.01172.x Lamb-Parker, F., LeBuffe, P., Powell, G., & Halpern, E. (2008). A strengthbased, systemic mental health approach to support children’s social and emotional development. Infants & Young Children, 21, 45–55. http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/01.IYC.0000306372.40414.a7 Landis, J. R., & Koch, G. G. (1977). The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics, 33, 159–174.

635

Long, M. H. (1996). The role of linguistic environment in second language acquisition. In W. C. Ritchie, & T. K. Bhatia (Eds.), Handbook of language acquisition. Vol. 2: Second language acquisition (pp. 413–468). New York, NY: Academic. Lyon, G. R. (1998). Why reading is not a natural process. Educational Leadership, 55, 14–18. Mancilla-Martinez, J., & Lesaux, N. K. (2011). Early home language use and later vocabulary development. Journal of Educational Psychology, 103, 535–546. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0023655 Martin, C. L., Kornienko, O., Schaefer, D. R., Hanish, L. D., Fabes, R. A., & Goble, P. (2013). The role of sex of peers and gender-typed activities in young children’s peer affiliative networks: A longitudinal analysis of selection and influence. Child Development, 84, 921–937. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12032 Mather, N., & Woodcock, R. W. (2001). Examiner’s manual. Woodcock-Johnson III Tests of Achievement. Itasca, IL: Riverside. McWayne, C., & Cheung, K. (2009). A picture of strength: Preschool competencies mediate the effects of early behavior problems on later academic and social adjustment for Head Start children. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 30, 273–285. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.appdev.2008.12.014 Miller, J. F., Heilmann, J., Nockerts, A., Iglesias, A., Fabiano, L., & Francis, D. J. (2006). Oral language and reading in bilingual children. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 21, 30–43. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5826.2006.00205.x Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (2010). Mplus user’s guide (6th ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Author. Naglieri, J. A. (2003). Naglieri nonverbal ability test individual form. San Antonio, TX: Harcourt Assessments. Naglieri, J. A., Booth, A. L., & Winsler, A. (2004). Comparison of Hispanic children with and without limited English proficiency on the Naglieri Nonverbal Ability Test. Psychological Assessment, 16, 81–84. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/1040-3590.16.1.81 National Center for Education Statistics. (2010). The condition of education. (Rep. No. NCES 2010-028). Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2010/2010028.pdf Nicolopoulou, A. (2002). Peer-group culture and narrative development. In S. BlumKulka, & C. E. Snow (Eds.), Talking to adults: The contribution of multiparty discourse to language acquisition (pp. 117–152). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Nicolopoulou, A., & Cole, M. (2010). Design experimentation as a theoretical and empirical tool for developmental pedagogical research. Pedagogies: An International Journal, 5, 61–71. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15544800903406316 Office of Head Start. (2003). Domain 6: Social and emotional development: The Head Start leader’s guide to positive child outcomes. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Retrieved from http://eclkc.ohs.acf.hhs.gov/hslc/tta-system/teaching/eecd/domains%20of %20child%20development/social%20and%20emotional%20development/ edudev art 00016 061705.html Palermo, F., Mikulski, A. M., Fabes, R. A., Hanish, L. D., Martin, C. L., & Stargel, L. E. (2014). English exposure in the home and classroom: Predictions to Spanish-speaking preschoolers’ English vocabulary skills. Applied Psycholinguistics (in press). Retrieved from http://journals.cambridge.org/action/ displayFulltext?type=1&fid=8826060&jid=APS&volumeId=-1&issueId=-1&aid= 8826058 Pellegrini, A. D. (1980). The relationship between kindergartners’ play and achievement in prereading, language, and writing. Psyin chology the Schools, 17, 530–535. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ 1520-6807(198010)17:4<530::AID-PITS2310170419>3.0.CO;2-A ˜ Pena, E. D., & Halle, T. G. (2011). Assessing preschool dual language learners: Traveling a multiforked road. Child Development Perspectives, 5, 28–32. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1750-8606.2010.00143.x Piaget, J. (1959). The language and thought of the child (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Humanities Press. Pica, T., Lincoln-Porter, F., Paninos, D., & Linnell, J. (1996). Language learners’ interaction: How does it address the input, output, and feedback needs of L2 learners? TESOL Quarterly, 30, 59–84. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3587607 Rogoff, B. (1998). Cognition as a collaborative process. In D. Kuhn, & R. Siegler (Eds.), Cognition, perception, and language. Handbook of Child Psychology (2) (5th ed., 2, pp. 679–744). New York, NY: Wiley & Sons. Saenz, L., Fuchs, L., & Fuchs, D. (2005). Peer-assisted learning strategies for English language learners with learning disabilities. Exceptional Children, 71, 231–247. Schmidt, S. (2012). Head Start participants, programs, families and staff in 2011. Retrieved from the Center of Law and Social Policy [CLASP] webhttp://www.clasp.org/admin/site/publications/files/EHS-PIR-2011-Factsite Sheet.pdf Strong, M. (1983). Social styles and the second language acquisition of Spanish-speaking kindergartners. TESOL Quarterly, 17, 241–258. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3586652 Swain, M. (1985). Communicative competence: Some roles of comprehensible input and comprehensible output in its development. In S. Gass, & C. Madden (Eds.), Input in second language acquisition (pp. 235–256). New York, NY: Newbury House. Wentzel, K. R., Barry, C. M., & Caldwell, K. A. (2004). Friendships in middle school: Influences on motivation and school adjustment. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96, 195–203. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.96.2.195 Woodcock, R. W., McGrew, K. S., & Mather, N. (2000). Woodcock-Johnson III. Itasca, IL: Riverside Publishing.