Prediction of school readiness from kindergarten temperament scores

Pergamon

Journal of School Psychology, Vol. 32, No. 2, pp. 135-147, 1994 Copyright 0 1994 Society for the Study of School Psychology, Inc. Printed in the USA 0022-4405/94 $6.00 + .W

0022-4405(94)E0007-T

Prediction of School Readiness From Kindergarten Temperament Scores Michael/.

Schoen and Richard /. Nagle University

of South Carolina

The relationship between temperament and school readiness scores was investigated in a sample of 152 kindergarten students. Temperament ratings on the Temperament Assessment Battery for Children (TABC) were obtained from kindergarten teachers. Level 2 of the Metropolitan Readiness Test (MRT) was subsequently administered to the students at the end of the school year. All correlations between temperament scales and MRT scores were significant when the effects of receptive vocabulary (Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test-Revised) were removed. Results from stepwise multiple regression analyses showed that once TABC persistence scores were entered, no other temperament scores significantly increased prediction of MRT prereading scores. Inclusion of teacher-rated persistence from the TABC with PPVT-R scores in the regression analyses increased the percentage of total variance accounted for in readiness scores from 32 % to 50%. These findings support previous research that has demonstrated the importance of task orientation behaviors for successful kindergarten achievement and adjustment. The results suggest that a significant component of school readiness may involve temperament-related behaviors.

Keywords: Temperament,

Popular

interest

Readiness,

and research

Persistence,

on childrens’

Kindergarten

temperament

achievement,

or behavioral

have increased substantially during the past decade. Although ment in defining specific aspects of temperament continues

style

lack of agree(Bates, 1989;

Goldsmith et al., 1987), there is some general consensus that temperament reflects individual differences in behavioral tendencies such as activity level, sociability, and emotionality that appear very early in life and provide some continuity to a child’s behavior across situations and over time (Goldsmith et al., 1987). Although theorists debate the heritability of these behavioral tendencies, there appears to be agreement among most researchers that temperament is a psychological construct with significant biological or constitutional underpinnings (Buss & Plomin, 1984; Goldsmith & Campos, 1986; Rothbart & Derryberry, 1981; Rutter, 1982). Many researchers have contributed to the growing body of research that demonstrates the influence of a child’s temperament on important developmental outcomes such as social-emotional adjustment (Garrison & Earls, Received May 7, 1992; final revision received January 2 1, 1993. Address correspondence and reprint requests to Michael J. Schoen, Carolina, Division of Continuing Education, Columbia, SC 29208.

135

PhD, University

of South

136

Journal of School Psychology

1987) and school performance (Keogh, 1989; Martin, 1988, 1989). The work of Thomas and Chess (Thomas & Chess, 1977; Thomas, Chess, & Birch, 1968) is often cited as the stimulus for the current prominence of temperament in developmental research Martin, & Gandour, 1982; theory based on the results toddlers during the course

(Goldsmith et al., 1987; Hubert, Wachs, PetersRutter, 1982). Thomas and Chess developed their of clinical interviews with parents of infants and of the New York Longitudinal Study (NYLS).

Nine attributes of behavioral style were identified from content analyses of interviews with parents: activity level, rhythmicity of biological functions, adaptability to new situations or people, approach-withdrawal tendencies, intensity of reaction, threshold or responsiveness, quality of mood, distractibility, and attention span/persistence (Thomas & Chess, 1977). It is hypothesized that these attributes or dimensions of temperament describe or explain the manner or style of a child’s social and physical interaction with the environment. Subsequent NYLS research yielded the clinical categorizations of children as “easy,” “difficult,” or “slow to warm-up” based on particular combinations of temperament attributes (Thomas & Chess, 1977). This line of research also led to the notion of the importance of “goodness of lit” between the temperament characteristics of an individual child and the demands of a specific home or school environment (Thomas & Chess, 1977; Chess & Thomas, 1986). Studies examining the impact of temperament on school achievement and adjustment have appeared more recently, and with increasing frequency (e.g., Martin, 1988, 1989). Several studies report a strong relationship among temperament attributes, intellectual performance, and achievement. Burk (1980), for example, found differences in parents’ ratings of temperament between a group of intellectually gifted and nongifted students (Grades K-2), with gifted students rated as more persistent, more socially adaptable, more approaching, and more disposed to display positive mood. In related research, Martin and Holbrook (1985) used teachers’ ratings from the Temperament Assessment Battery for Children (TABC) to assess the relationship among temperament, achievement, and intelligence with a sample of first-grade children. The authors report that IQ scores were significantly correlated with TABC Adaptability, Approach/Withdrawal, and Persistence scores. Similar results obtained between temperament and intelligence have also been reported by Holden (1980) and Palisin (1986). A number of studies report significant relationships between temperament characteristics and specific measures of academic achievement. Chess, Thomas, and Cameron (1976) found that reading and math scores on the Wide Range Achievement Test were associated with adaptability and withdrawal tendencies in a sample of children from Grades l-6 in the NYLS. Martin and Holbrook (1985) obtained TABC ratings on first graders and 5 months later administered standardized ability and achievement tests. These authors report that TABC Activity, Adaptability, Approach/Withdrawal,

Special Theme Section Distractibility, performance

and Persistence

scores were all significant

137

predictors of reading

when the effects of IQ and when the effects of ability are con-

trolled statistically. More recently, Martin, Drew, Gaddis, and Moseley (1988) reported significant correlations between kindergarten teachers’ TABC ratings of Adaptability and Persistence and first-grade standardized achievement test scores. In addition, Activity and Distractibility appeared to be negatively correlated with both achievement scores and teacher-assigned grades. A review of the literature shows that controversy surrounding the notion or concept of kindergarten and first-grade “readiness” continues (Shepard & Smith, 1986). Among the issues involved are the limited validity of readiness tests and concern with the implications of placement decisions made in many school districts on the basis of such testing (Salvia & Ysseldyke, 1989). Research has shown that experienced classroom teachers have beliefs concerning the skills and behaviors that students need to display to be “ready” for first grade, such as social interaction skills, ability to follow directions, conduct, and self-care skills (Hains, Fowler, Schwartz, Kottwitz, & Rosenkoetter, 1989). Many of the skills that are perceived by teachers to be necessary for school promotion do not appear to be assessed by many readiness tests, however. An alternative assessment strategy, which will be examined in the current study, is to attempt to evaluate these teacher-valued behaviors by using an instrument designed to assess temperament. The hypothesis being proposed is that readiness for academic learning in first grade is dependent upon cognitive and behavioral factors that can be measured by temperament rating scales validated for use in the schools by teachers. This hypothesis follows from the results of previous research that has shown that teacher-rated temperament predicts achievement in first-grade children (Martin, 1988; Martin et al., 1988). The aim of this study is to essentially extend this finding to younger (kindergarten) children, and to hypothesize a relationship between temperament and readiness test scores at the end of kindergarten. This hypothesis also follows from the view that academic readiness involves the interaction of cognitive and behavioral factors (McDermott, 1984; Tramontana, Hooper, & Selzer, 1988). The current study will examine the role of temperament as a behavioral variable as it adds to the prediction of readiness test scores after the contribution of cognitive factors.

METHOD Sample Kindergarten children and teachers from a predominantly white, middlesocioeconomic-status suburban school district in the Columbia, South Carolina, area participated in the study. Eight kindergarten teachers representing

138

Journal of School Psychology

four elementary schools provided data from one kindergarten class each. Students enrolled in kindergarten for the previous 3 months were defined as potential participants in the current study. The parents of 193 kindergarten students were contacted by mail during February and invited to participate. Written parental consent was obtained for 164 children, yielding an 85% consent rate. Complete test data were obtained on 152 children from this group, yielding a final sample of 61 boys and 91 girls with a mean age of 6 years (72 months).

Instruments Temperament Assessment Battery for Children CTABC). The Teacher Form of the TABC (Martin, 1988) was used in the current study. The TABC is designed to assess six temperament variables in children 3-7 years of age and consists of 48 items divided into six scales of eight items each. Each item is rated on a ‘I-point scale corresponding to the frequency of the observed behavior during the previous 3-month period. The six scales were designed to assess activity, adaptability, approach or withdrawal, emotional intensity, distractibility, and persistence. Scale scores are obtained by converting raw scores into T scores by using normative information provided in the test manual (Martin, 1988). Each TABC scale is standardized with a mean of 50 and a standard deviation of 10. Scale scores above the mean imply a greater indication of a particular temperament dimension. The Activity scale is designed to assess the amount and vigor of motoric activity that is characteristic

of a child, particularly

with reference

to gross

motor activity. The Adaptability scale assesses the ease and speed of adjustment to a new social situation. The Approach/Withdrawal scale is designed to measure or characterize the nature or quality of a child’s initial response to a novel social situation, high scores indicating approach tendencies and low scores reflecting withdrawal tendencies. The Emotional Intensity scale assesses the vigor or intensity emphasis on the expression The Distractibility scale is attention is diverted from

of a child’s emotional reactions, with a particular of negative emotion such as frustration or anger. intended to measure the extent to which a child’s ongoing tasks by nontask or competing stimuli.

The last scale, the Persistence scale, is constructed to measure the general attention span of a child as well as the child’s tendency to persist with new learning tasks (Martin & Holbrook, 1985). Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test-Revised (PPVT-R). The PPVT-R (Dunn & Dunn, 1981) was used to measure each participant’s receptive vocabulary, for the purposes of obtaining a quick estimate of verbal ability. Although not considered an IQ measure, the PPVT-R is often used as a screening measure 1989; Helton, Workman, & Matuszek, of scholastic aptitude (Altepeter,

139

Special Theme Section

1982), (1989)

and as a predictor of reading achievement (Lindgren, 1978). Sattler reports median correlations between PPVT-R scores and intelligence

test scores in the .60 range. In a recent study PPVT-R was found to be moderately correlated with Wechsler Preschool and Primary Scale of Intelligence-Revised (WPPSI-R) Full Scale IQ scores in a sample of preschool children,

with correlations

reported

in the .58-.62

range (Faust

& Hollings-

worth, 1991). In addition, significant relationships between PPVT-R and Metropolitan Readiness Test (MRT) Pre-Reading Composite scores (Y = .51) have been reported in preschoolers (Zucker & Riordan, 1990). The PPVT-R was selected for use in the current study owing to its brevity and ease of administration, which are important considerations, given the schedule constraints imposed by the school district in which this study was undertaken. Metropolitan Readiness Test-Fifth Edition. The MRT-Level 2 was used to obtain a measure of kindergarten skill development and academic readiness 1986). Recent reviews have shown on each student (Nurss & McGauvran, that the MRT is one of the most commonly used measures of preacademic and early academic skills (Tramontana et al., 1988). The MRT is a normreferenced, multiskill, group-administered instrument that consists of eight subtests that assess prereading and premathematical achievement in the early school years. MRT subtests include Beginning Consonants, Sound-Letter Correspondence,

Visual Matching,

Finding

Patterns,

School Language,

Lis-

tening, Quantitative Concepts, and Quantitative Operations (Nurss & McGauvran, 1986). Five MRT subtest scores can be calculated: Auditory Skill, Visual Skill, Language Skill, Quantitative Skill, and Pre-Reading Composite, yielding several norm-referenced scores including percentile ranks, stanines, and scaled scores, The Pre-Reading Composite score was used as a criterion or outcome

measure

in the current

study; it consists of the sum of the raw

scores on the first six subtests (i.e., it does not include either quantitative subtest score), which corresponds to the sum of the raw scores for the Auditory, Language, and Visual Skill subtest areas. The Beginning Consonants test measures a student’s ability to discriminate among the initial sounds in words, which is presumed to be an important auditory decoding skill. Sound-Letter Correspondence test items evaluate a child’s ability to identify letters that correspond to specific letter sounds. The Visual Skill test items assess the ability to discriminate among visual symbols ( i.e., matching letters, numerals, and letter-like forms), as well as the ability

to locate formations of letter-groups, words, numerals, and artificial letters. The School Language and Listening subtests assess basic cognitive concepts and a child’s understanding of simple and complex grammatical structures, as well as the ability to analyze and evaluate orally presented information (Nurss & McGauvran, 1986). A standard score range from 230 (first percentile) to 568 (99th percentile) is reported for the Pre-Reading Composite scores for spring kindergarten sam-

140

Journal of School Psychology

ples in the normative

population

evaluated

by the authors.

The

standard

administration time of the complete Level 2 battery, including 15 minutes for the practice booklet, is estimated to be 105 minutes (Nurss & McGauvran, 1986).

Procedure The PPVT-R was administered to the students by trained research assistants prior to MRT testing. Classroom teachers administered the MRT in early April to small groups of students (6-8) according to the administration procedures recommended in the test manual (Nurss & McGauvran, 1986). The teachers completed the Teacher Form of the TABC during the week of school prior to readiness testings.

RESULTS On the PPVT-R,

a total sample mean of 105.9 was obtained,

which corre-

sponds to normative performance at the 63rd percentile nationally (Dunn & Dunn, 1981). Boys and girls did not differ on this measure of verbal aptitude (t = .48, df = 150, ns). The mean MRT Pre-Reading Composite score was 432.32 (SD = 38), which corresponds to normative performance at the 52nd percentile (Nurss & McGauvran, 1986). Significant sex differences were found, the girls (mean percentile rank = 58) outperforming the boys (mean percentile rank = 42) by an average of 16 percentile points (t = 2.54, df = 150, p < .02). PPVT-R and MRT scores were also significantly correlated in the total sample r = .56, p < .OOl). Table 1 presents the means and standard deviations

for temperament

Table 1 Means and Standard Deviations of Temperament Scale Scores by Sex

Scale Activity Adaptability Approach/Withdrawal Emotional

Intensity

Distractibility Persistence

M SD M SD M SD M SD M SD M SD

M&S

Females

Total

51.4 10.3 54.5 10.8

42.8 7.3 54.8 10.6

46.3 9.6 54.7 10.6

50.8

49.4

50.0

9.7 47.5 8.8 48.9 10.4 54.3 11.5

11.7 42.8 9.8 44.5 9.7 57.1 11.4

11.0 45.0 8.5 46.3 10.2 56.0 11.5

Note. N = 152 for total sample (61 males, 91 females).

rat-

141

Special Theme Section ings obtained

on the current sample of kindergarten

are standardized

children.

T scores, with higher scores reflecting

Scores reported

more behavioral

indi-

cation of the temperament attribute. For the Approach/Withdrawal scale, higher scores indicate approach behaviors. As can be seen, boys scored as a group within a standard deviation of the mean on all TABC scales. A similar pattern was obtained for girls, although it can be seen that girls as a group fell in the low average range on the Activity and Emotional Intensity scales. The results from a multivariate analysis of variance showed that boys and girls obtained significantly different mean scale scores on the Teacher Form of the TABC (F = 8.77, df = 1, 145, p < .OOl). U mvariate tests confirms that the scales contributing to the group differences included the Activity F = 35.90, p < .OOl), Emotional Intensity F = 11.57, p < .OOl), and Distractibility F = 6.96, p < .Ol) scales. Overall, the sample means presented in Table 1 suggest that the sample of kindergarten students studied presented a statistically normal profile, yielding mean scale scores consistent with scores for samples reported by Martin (1988). Correlations between scales of the TABC and MRT Pre-Reading Composite scores are displayed in Table 2. As can be seen, the strongest relationship was found between Persistence and prereading skills(r = .62). This appears to indicate that persistence is moderately related to performance on the MRT. Thus, children who show greater levels of attention and a tendency to persist in learning tasks display higher levels of readiness on the MRT. In addition, significant correlations were found between MRT Pre-Reading scores and Adaptability (r = .42) and Approach/Withdrawal (r = .39) scores. Although these behavioral attributes are positively associated with readiness scores, they are indicative of relationships of reduced magnitude. Not surprisingly, both the Distractibility (r = - .55) and Activity (r = - .42) scales were negatively correlated with readiness test scores. A nonsignificant relationship was found between MRT scores and Emotional Intensity scale scores. Multiple regression analyses were performed to determine if temperament information provided by classroom teachers adds to the prediction of readiness

Table 2 Correlations and Partial Correlations Between TABC Teacher Scales and Metropolitan Readiness Test Pre-Reading, Composite Scores Scale Activity Adaptability Approach/Withdrawal Emotional Intensity Distractibility Persistence

*p <

,001.

T

Partial r

- .42* .42’ ,398 -.18 -.55* .62*

- .38* .29* .25* - .28* - .46* .51*

Journal of School Psychology

142

Table 3 Multiple Regression Analysis Predicting Metropolitan Pre-Reading Composite Scores from Temperament Score-Teacher Form and PPVT-R Scores Variable

Beta

I7 ’ increment

PPVT-R Persistence Activity Adaptability Approach/Withdrawal Emotional Intensity Distractibility

.37 .46 -.06 -.15 - .Ol .03 - .05

.32* .18” _ _ _ _ _

Note. N = p < ,001.

scores.

152 for total sample.

A combination

‘p < ,001.

of hierarchical

Readiness Scale

Cumulative

R*

.32 50 .50 .50 .50 .50 .50

Total R* = .50, F = 73.6,

and stepwise procedures

was used to

partially control entry of predictor variables (Tabachnick & Fidell, 1983). Since the aim of the study was to examine the unique contribution of temperament variables in predicting readiness scores after the contribution of cognitive factors, PPVT-R scores were assigned high priority and entered first into the regression analyses. Following this hierarchical point of entry, stepwise entry of TABC scales was performed. MRT Pre-Reading Composite scores were used as the outcome or criterion variable. Analyses were completed with SPSS-PC Regression programs (Noruss, 1988). The results from three regression analyses attempting to predict MRT scores from PPVT-R and TABC scores are shown in Tables 3-5. Total sample results (Table 3) show that after entry of PPVT-R scores (Step l), Persistence scores (Step 2) contribute significantly to the prediction of MRT scores. The two predictor variables combine to yield an R2 value of .50 (F = 73.6, p < .OOl), with Persistence scores adding 18 % in additional predicted

Table 4 Multiple Regression Analysis Predicting Metropolitan Pre-Reading Scores for Males from Temperament Scores-Teacher Form and PPVT-R Scores Variable

Beta

R* increment

PPVT-R Persistence Activity Adaptability Approach/Withdrawal Emotional Intensity Distractibility

.48 .36 - .09 --.15 - .Ol .03 .02

.36* .11* _ -

Readiness Scale

Cumulative .36 .47 .47 .47 .47 .47 .47

Note. N = 61. */J < ,001. Total R* = .47, F = 25.60, p < ,001.

R*

143

Special Theme Section

Table 5 Multiple Regression Analysis Predicting Metropolitan Readiness Pre-Reading Composite Scores for Females from Temperament Scale Scores-Teacher Form and PPVT-R Scores Variable

Beta

R 'increment

PPVT-R Persistence Activity Adaptability Approach/Withdrawal Emotional Intensity Distractibility

.34 .53 -.17 -.ll - .05 .13 .03

.34* .22’ _

Note. N = 91. ‘p <

,001. Total

R2 =

Cumulative

.56, F = 56.6, p <

R2

.34 .56 .56 .56 .56 .56 .56 .OOl.

total variance. Entry of additional temperament variables into the regression equation did not result in any significant increments in R*.The results of separate regression analyses by sex are shown in Tables 4 and 5. Although the same variables contribute to the prediction of readiness scores for boys and girls in the sample, it can be seen that slightly more total variance can be predicted for girls (56%) than for boys (49 ‘3~). The difference in R* values between boys and girls, however, is not significant (t < 1). Overall, this set of regression analyses suggest that temperament information from teachers makes a significant contribution to the prediction of MRT Pre-Reading Composite scores. In addition, similar patterns of prediction were found for boys and girls in the sample.

DISCUSSION The findings

of the current

study provide support for the major

hypothesis

that temperament in kindergarten children, as rated by their teachers, may be an important psychometric component in predicting first-grade readiness. An examination of the correlations between the TABC and MRT scores, with PPVT-R scores partialed out, clearly reveals that all temperament scales on the TABC were significantly related to the Pre-Reading Composite readiness scores. More specifically, the triad of Persistence, Activity, and Distractibility scales was found to be most related to school readiness as measured by the MRT. Once Persistence scores were added to PPVT-R scores in regression analyses to predict MRT Pre-Reading Composites, no other temperament scale accounted for any significant variance. Collectively, these findings suggest that there are strong interrelationships among the TABC scales, particularly between Persistence, Activity, and Distractibility. These interrelationships are reminiscent of Keogh, Pullis, and Cadwell’s (1982) Task Orientation factor, which is composed of the temperament attributes of persistence, low distractibility, and low activity on a short form of the Thomas and Chess questionnaire, and of Martin’s (1988) factor analysis work on the TABC.

144

Journal of School Psychology

These findings suggest that future researchers may formulate predictions at the factor rather than the scale level for these temperament dimensions. This triad of behavioral traits appears to play a significant role in influencing a child’s tendency or ability to stay on task in the classroom and appears to contribute importantly to first-grade readiness scores as measured by the MRT Pre-Reading Composite. The present results parallel those of Martin and Holbrook (1985), who reported 47 % of the variance in first graders’ reading achievement could be predicted from IQ scores and three temperament scales of the TABC (Persistence, Activity, and Approach/Withdrawal). Therefore, the present results extend the temperament-achievement relationship observed among first graders to the temperament-readiness relationship with kindergarten children. The current findings also agree with previous research that has demonstrated that kindergarten teachers value task-orientation behaviors (Martin, 1989; Tramontana et al., 1988). The temperament triad involving persistence, activity level, and distractibility may also overlap somewhat with Kornblau’s (1982) notion of “teachability” characteristics in children. In Kornblau’s research, the Teachable Pupil Survey was used to measure teachers’ perceptions of the behavioral attributes that characterize teachable students. The results from multidimensional scaling techniques produced three dimensions labeled cognitive-motivational, school-appropriate behaviors, and personalsocial behaviors. Kornblau’s item descriptions subsumed by the latter two dimensions appear to include many behaviors related to persistence, activity level, and distractibility (Kornblau, 1982). The present findings appear to also compliment earlier research with kindergarten children that has implicated the critical importance of attention span processes as they relate to other areas of kindergarten functioning such as classroom adjustment (Skarpness & Carson, 1987), and to teachers’judgments concerning the need for monitoring and supervision (Pullis & Cadwell, 1982). It seems reasonable to conclude that the constructs of first-grade readiness, persistence, low distractibility, low activity, and teachability share overlapping variance. This conclusion, based partially on the results from the present study, leads to several important implications for practicing school psychologists. First, the addition of temperament information from teachers’ ratings of kindergarten classroom behavior may result in the addition of critical behavioral information, relatively easily obtained, that will increase prediction of first-grade achievement significantly. Specifically, the addition of teacherrated temperament evaluations from observations of classroom behavior in sample groups of kindergartners can assist teachers and school psychologists in making more meaningful and accurate predictions of first-grade reading performance. The identification of persistence as an important readiness behavior may also provide opportunities for teachers and school psychologists to stress important components of the kindergarten curriculum and specific parent-child activities that may promote the development of behavioral persis-

Special Theme Section tence (as an important

145

subset of readiness skills). For some parents,

for exam-

ple, this may involve stressing the value of participation in small-group activities, cooperative play, line arts activities, and other kindergarten activities that often promote successful psychosocial development. The notion that is proposed is that specific dimensions of temperament can be thought of as behavioral characteristics in children that essentially serve as building blocks for “learning how to learn,” that is, for increasing a child’s teachability. A number of questions are also raised by the current study that may provide opportunities for further research. One tify the variables that account for the MRT scores for year-end kindergarten mation in the present study improved

question involves attempting to idenunexplained variance in predicting students. While temperament inforprediction significantly, it is still the

case that 50% of the variance remains unpredicted. One strategy could be to use individually administered intelligence test scores such as the WISC-III or Stanford-Binet to obtain a better estimate of aptitude or intellectual functioning. Alternatively, several different measures or ratings of temperament could be employed, such as the classroom observation procedures used by Martin, Nagle, and Paget (1983), or the clinician’s form of the TABC, which is used after formal psychological evaluation. A multimethod approach that incorporates several different assessment strategies for evaluating temperament would also conceivably reduce the potential bias that may be present when teachers’ ratings are used singularly. It may be useful to consider activities to evaluate the various domains of temperament, more robust measure of these temperament characteristics.

laboratory-based thus yielding a

In addition to a closer examination of additional variables that contribute to predicting kindergarten test scores, the issue of sex differences needs further investigation. A major limitation in the temperament literature has been the failure of researchers to examine either sex differences (Prior, 1992) or the relationships of temperament characteristics with criterion variables separately for boys and girls (Kohnstamm, 1989). In the present study, boys were found to be significantly more active, more distractible, and more emotionally intense in their classroom behaviors and reactions. Despite these differences, readiness scores were predicted equally well for boys and girls. An extension of this study might be done in which teachers’ expectations for achievement and behavior are compared with ratings of temperament. For example, do kindergarten teachers generally expect boys to be active and girls to be less active and distractible? Another area for further research involves longitudinal comparisons of achievement-temperament relationships. While it is apparent that temperament may operate in combination with cognitive factors to codetermine achievement in the early grades, the size of this effect needs to be examined as students increase in age and grade. For example, will temperament continue to be a meaningful construct among late elementary and middle school students? Beyond validating this study to predict general achievement by grade, future research may also want to examine the role of specific

146

Journal of School

temperament handicaps. studies ferences

dimensions Certainly

that

the

will ultimately

Psychology

in the prediction temperament lead

and how they operate

and identification literature

to increased to influence

is open

understanding

of learners to these

and

of individual

with other dif-

behavior.

REFERENCES Altpeter, J, S. (1989). The PPVT-R as a measure of psycholinguistic functioning: A caution. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 45(6), 935-941. Bates, J. E. (1989). Concepts and measures of temperament. In G. A. Kohnstamm, J. E. Bates, & M. K. Rothbart (Eds.), Terrperament in childhood (pp. 3-26). New York: Wiley. Burk, E. A. (1980). Relationship of temperamentaltraits to achievement and adjustment in &ted children. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Fordham University, New York. Buss, A. H., & Plomin, R. (1984). T emp emment: Early developing personality traits. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Chess, S., &Thomas, A. (1986). T emp erament in clinicalpractice. New York: Guilford. Chess, S., Thomas, A., & Cameron, M. (1976). Temperament: Its significance for early schooling. New York University Education Quarters, Spring, 24-29. Dunn, L., & Dunn, J. (1981). Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test-Revised. Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Service. Faust, D. S., & Hollingsworth, J. 0. (1991). C oncurrent validation of the Wechsler Preschool and Primary Scale of Intelligence-Revised (WPPSI-R) with two criteria of cognitive abilities. Journal of PsychoeducationalAssessment, 9(3), 224-229. Garrison, W. T., & Earls, F. J. (1987). T emp erament and childpsychopatholou. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Goldsmith, H., Buss, A. H., Plomin, R., Rothbart, M., Thomas, A., Chess, S., Hinde, R., & McCall, R. (1987). Roundtable: What is temperament? Child Development, 58, 505-529. Goldsmith, H. H., & Campos, J. J. (1986). Fundamental issues in the study of early temperament: The Denver Twin Study. In M. E. Lamb & A. Brown (Eds.), Advances in developmentalpsychology (pp. 231-283). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Hains, A. H., Fowler, S. A., Schwartz, I. S., Kottwitz, E., & Rosenkoetter, S. (1989). A comparison of preschool and kindergarten teacher expectations for school readiness. Early Childhood Research Quarterly 4, 75-88. Helton, G., Workman, E., & Matuszek, P. (1982). Psychoeducational assessment. New York: Grune and Stratton. Holden, D. (1980). Child Temperament and teacher expectations: Their interactive effect on children’sschool achievement. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Denver. Hubert, N., Wachs, T., Peters-Martin, P., & Gandour, M. (1982). The study of early temperament: Measurement and conceptual issues. Child Development, 53, 571-600. Keogh, B. K. (1989). Applying temperament research to school. In G. A. Kohnstamm, J. E. Bates, & M. K. Rothbart (Eds.), Temperament in childhood (pp. 437450). New York: Wiley. Keogh, B. K., Pullis, M. G., & Cadwell, J. (1982). A short form of the Teacher Temperament Questionnaire. Journal of Educational Measurement, 29, 323-329. Kohnstamm, G. A. (1989). Temperament in childhood: Cross-cultural and sex differences. In G. A. Kohnstamm, J. E. Bates, & M. K. Rothbart (Eds.), Temperament in childhood (pp. 483-508). New York: Wiley. Kornblau, B. (1982). The Teachable Pupil Survey: A technique for assessing teachers’ perceptions of pupil attributes. Psychology in the Schools, 19, 170-174.

Special Theme Section

147

Lindgren, S. C. (1978). Finger localization and the prediction of reading disability. Cortex, 14(l), 87-101. Martin, R. P. (1988). The Temperament Assessment Battery for Children. Brandon, VT: Clinical Psychology Publishing. Martin, R. P. (1989). Activity level, distractibility, and persistence: Critical characteristics in early schooling. In G. A. Kohnstamm, J. E. Bates, & M. K. Rothbart (Eds.), Temperament in childhood (pp. 451-462). New York: Wiley. Martin, R. P., Drew, K. D., Gaddis, L. R., & Moseley, M. (1988). Prediction of elementary school achievement from preschool temperament: Three studies. School Psycholou Review, 17, 125-137. Martin, R. P., & Holbrook, J. (1985). Relationship of temperament characteristics to the academic achievement of first-grade children. Journal of Psychoedwational Assessment, 3, 131-140. Martin, R. P., Nagle, R., & Paget, K. (1983). Relationship between temperament and classroom behavior, teacher attitudes, and academic achievement. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 1, 3 77-386. McDermott, P. (1984). Asyndromic typology for analyzing school children’s disturbed social behavior. School Psychology Review, 12, 250-259. Noruss, M. (1988). SPSUPC = V2.0 base manual. Chicago: SPSS. Nurss, J. R., & McGauvran, M. E. (1986). Metropolitan Readiness Tests (5th ed.). New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich. Palisin, H. (1986). Preschool temperament and performance on achievement tests. Developmental Psychology, 22, 766-770. Prior, M. (1992). Childhood temperament. Journal of Child Psycholou and Psychiatry and Allied Disciplines, 33, 249-279. Pullis, M., & Cadwell, J. (1982). The influence of children’s temperament characteristics on teachers’ decision strategies. American Educational Research Journal, 19, 165181. Rothbart, M. K., & Derryberry, D. (1981). Development of individual difference in temperament. In M. Lamb & A. Brown (Eds.), Advances in developmental psychology (Vol. 1, pp. 37-86). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Rutter, M. (1982). Temperamental d;ff erences in infants andyoung children (Ciba Foundation Symposium 89). London: Pittman. Salvia, J., Ysseldyke, J. (1985). Assessment in special and remedial education (3rd ed.). Boston: Houghton Mifflin. Sattler, J. M. (1989). Assessment of children’s intelligence and special abilities (3rd ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon. Shepard, L. A., & Smith, M. L. (1986). Synthesis of research on school readiness and kindergarten retention. Education Leadership, 44, 78-86. adjustment: Skarpness, L. R., & Carson, D. K. (1987). C orrelates of kindergarten Temperament and communicative competence. Early Childhood Research Quarterb, 2, 367-376. U stng multivariate statistics. New York: Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (1983). Harper and Row. Thomas, A., & Chess, S. (1977). T emp erament and development. New York: Brunnerl Mazel. Thomas, A., Chess, S., & Birch, H. G. (1968). T emp erament and behavior disorders in children. New York: New York University Press. Tramontana, M. G., Hooper, S. R., & Selzer, S. C. (1988). Research on the preschool prediction of later achievement: A Review. Developmental Review, 8, 89-146. Zucker, S., & Riordan, J. (1990). 0 ne- y ear predictive validity of new and revised conceptual language measurement. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 8(l), 4-8.