Assessments of learning-related skills and interpersonal skills constructs within early childhood environments in Singapore

Infant and Child DevelopmentInf. Child. Dev. 19: 366–384 (2010)

Published online 1 April 2010 in Wiley InterScience

(www.interscience.wiley.com). DOI: 10.1002/icd.673

Assessments of Learning-relatedSkills and Interpersonal SkillsConstructs within Early ChildhoodEnvironments in Singapore

Sok Mui Lima,b,�, Sylvia Rodgerc and Ted Brownd

aDivision of Occupational Therapy, School of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences,The University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, AustraliabDepartment of Child Development, KK Women’s and Children’s Hospital,SingaporecDivision of Occupational Therapy, School of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences,The University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, AustraliadDepartment of Occupational Therapy, School of Primary Health Care, Faculty ofMedicine, Nursing and Health Sciences, Monash University, Frankston, VIC,Australia

Social skills are necessary for developing successful relationshipsand promoting learning. Interpersonal skills (IPS) are needed formaintaining friendships while learning-related skills (LRS) arerequired for positive classroom behaviours. In this study, weinvestigated the construct validity of LRS and IPS within twoexisting assessments: the Child Behavior Rating Scales (CBRS)and the Preschool and Kindergarten Behavior Scales—2nd edition(PKBS-2). Teachers completed the CBRS and PKBS-2 for 117Singaporean children aged 3–6 years. Rasch analysis was used toidentify items that fit the unidimensional constructs of LRS andIPS within each instrument. Specific items from within the CBRSwere found to measure LRS and IPS. Within the PKBS-2, itemswere found to measure IPS and a new construct labelledCompliance. Instead of creating new assessment tools to measurenew constructs, this study innovatively demonstrated how Raschanalysis can be used to document the existence of new constructswithin already existing tools. The identification of new constuctsand the use of these tools in an Asian context are presented.Copyright r 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

��

*Correspondence to: Sok Mui Lim, Division of Occupational Therapy, School of Healthand Rehabilitation Sciences, Therapies Building 84, Level 7, The University of Queens-land, Brisbane, QLD 4072, Australia. E-mail: [email protected], [email protected]

Copyright r 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Key words: social skills; young children; measurement; validity;Rasch analysis; Singapore

��

INTRODUCTION

From early childhood, children develop social skills that enable them to makefriends as well as engage in learning tasks. Early social skill acquisition dependson both the family context and the early childhood environment (Anthony et al.,2005; Bronson, Tivnan, & Seppanen, 1995). The impact of social skills on lateracademic achievement has been well documented (Chen, Chang, Liu, & He, 2008;Coolahan, Fantuzzo, Mendez, & McDermott, 2000; McClelland, Acock, &Morrison, 2006; McClelland, Morrison, & Holmes, 2000). Through interactionwith teachers and other children in early childhood environments, youngchildren begin to develop lifelong skills required for learning and socialrelationships. It is well known that children’s relationships with teachers andpeers are important for the development of competencies in preschool andsuccessful school adaptation (Henricsson & Rydell, 2006; Ladd, 1999; Nyberg,Henricsson, & Rydell, 2008). Depending on children’s roles as players, friends,and students, children need different types of social skills. This study focused onthe assessment of social skills within the early childhood contexts.

Over the past two decades, research has begun to differentiate betweeninterpersonal skills (IPS) and learning-related skills (LRS) (Bronson, 1994; Cooper &Farran, 1991; McClelland & Morrison, 2003). In this study, IPS is used to describebehaviours such as respecting other children, sharing and showing empathy forother persons (McClelland & Morrison, 2003). LRS refers to behaviours such aslistening and following directions, participating appropriately in groups, stayingon task, and organizing work materials (McClelland & Morrison, 2003). Both IPSand LRS are important for children to participate successfully in early educationenvironments.

A validity study involving 16 Australian and Singaporean early childhood andhealth professional content experts highlighted the importance of differentiatingbetween and assessing both LRS and IPS (Lim, Rodger, & Brown, in press).According to these content experts, a thorough assessment of LRS and IPS wouldallow professionals to set specific goals and identify the contexts in which toaddress social skills (e.g. playground versus classroom). The intent of the currentstudy was to investigate the existence of LRS and IPS as valid unidimensionalconstructs within previously published instruments when used in early child-hood contexts in Singapore.

Conceptualization of LRS and IPS

IPS is important for the development of friendships (Ladd, Herald, & Andrews,2006). Guralnick (2003) discussed IPS by looking at peer relationships. Accordingto Guralnick, there are two foundation domains to consider, namely emotionregulation and shared understanding. In the first domain of emotion regulation,he described play as an emotional activity. He also discussed how emotionalreactions can trigger interfering patterns, hence preventing social play fromoccurring, diminishing its quality, or abruptly ending an interaction. In thesecond domain, it was described that the appropriateness and effectiveness of a

Assessment of Learning-related Skills and Interpersonal Skills 367

Copyright r 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Inf. Child. Dev. 19: 366–384 (2010)DOI: 10.1002/icd

child’s interactions with his/her social partner depend upon important sharedunderstanding. With shared understanding, children learn about the social rulesof ownership and turn taking. Other researchers have also identified thatemotional understanding is related to IPS (Cassidy, Werner, Rourke, Zubernis, &Balaraman, 2003; Mostow, Izard, Fine, & Trentacosta, 2002). For example, in astudy with 63 children, Cassidy et al. (2003) reported that understanding ofemotions was positively related to teachers’ ratings of social skills, andbehavioural observations providing global ratings of social skills and peerpopularity. Poor IPS and relationship difficulties with peers, family, and teachersare associated with many forms of psychopathology, including depression(Segrin, 2000) and social phobia (Spence, Donovan, & Brechman-Toussaint, 1999).

LRS is important for student roles that require positive classroom behaviourand is said to ‘set the stages’ for later social behaviour and academic performance(McClelland et al., 2000). McClelland, Cameron, Wanless, and Murray (2007)presented a conceptual model which suggests that LRS consists of three domains,namely executive functioning (e.g. including working memory, attention, andinhibitory control), behavioural self-regulation, and social-emotional competence(e.g. including cooperation, independence, and responsibility).According to them, behavioural self-regulation refers to the ability of applyingexecutive function to actions, for example, integration of executive function skillsto complete tasks. They described two preliminary studies conducted to validatetheir conceptual model. In the first study with 72 Caucasian, middle class, 3- to4-year-old children, they found that executive function and social-emotionalcompetence were separate, yet functionally related domains. In the second studywith another sample of 93 pre-kindergarten children from educationally andethnically diverse families, they suggested that aspects of executive function andbehavioural self-regulation were linked to social-emotional competence.

While IPS enables a child to competently perform in their role as a friend andto interact with adults, LRS contributes towards later academic performance(McClelland et al., 2000; Ponitz, McClelland, Matthews, & Morrison, 2009). It wasalso indicated that after controlling for kindergarten academic score and im-portant background variables, LRS predicted unique variance in academic out-comes at school entry and at the end of second grade (McClelland et al., 2000).Both IPS and LRS are important for a child to be socially competent in the earlychildhood settings.

The literature supports the distinctions between IPS and LRS. As described byGuralnick (2003), one of the foundation domains contributing to IPS is emotionregulation. The literature by McClelland et al. (2007) suggested that LRS, withexecutive functioning considered as a domain, requires more cognitive proces-sing. Such distinctions may also be understood further on a biological basis.Neuroimaging evidence revealed two discrete brain regions that are involved indifferent types of problem solving (Brock, Rimm-Kaufman, Nathanson, &Grimm, 2009). The orbitofrontal cortex coordinates emotional processing whilethe dorsolateral prefrontal cortex coordinates cognitive processing (Bechara,Damasio, Damasio, & Anderson, 1994; Bush, Luu, & Posner, 2000). It can be saidthat IPS involves more emotional processing while LRS involves more cognitiveprocessing. Although the physiological investigation of brain function relating toLRS and IPS is beyond the scope of this study, such neuroimaging evidencefurther suggests that the two social skill constructs are likely to be distinct.

A recent study by Ponitz et al. (2009) also supported the conceptualizationthat LRS and IPS are two distinct constructs. In their study, the head–toes–knees–shoulder task was used with 343 young children to measure

S.M. Lim et al.368


behavioural regulation. Children were tested in their ability to respond in anunnatural way, for example, when asked to ‘touch your toes’, the correct responsewould be to touch the head. In this study, higher levels of behavioural regulationin autumn predicted stronger levels of academic achievement in the spring andbetter teacher-rated LRS, but not IPS. This result also suggested that LRS and IPSare two separate constructs.

LRS and IPS in the Asian Context

When considering the development of social skills and their assessment, it isimportant to consider the cultural context. Depending on the culture, there can bedifferent expectations for children to demonstrate LRS at a young age. Lewis et al.(2009) reported on several studies conducted in three Oriental cultures: Korea,Japan, and China. Children in these cultures, from as young as 3 years old, spendup to an hour per session performing whole-class activities while receiving formalinstruction (French & Song, 1998; Kwon, 2002; Lewis et al., 2009). This descriptionis similar to early childhood environments in Singapore. Preschool children inSingapore are required to engage in both interpersonal and learning-related tasks(e.g. completing worksheets) within their classroom (Tan, 2007). Despite Easterncultures becoming increasingly westernized, children in Confucian societies (suchas Korea and China) are expected to demonstrate a higher level of self-controlthan children in Western societies (Lewis et al., 2009). Thus, as one component ofLRS, self-control is heavily emphasized in early childhood classrooms inSingapore. With the emphasis on gaining academic skills to be ready for primaryeducation as early as 3–4 years of age, there is generally a high expectation forSingaporean children to demonstrate LRS from a young age.

In terms of IPS, the literature has also reported different expectations of chil-dren in the Asian context. For example, shy-sensitive behaviours were found tobe perceived more favourably in Chinese children compared with their NorthAmerican counterparts (Chen, Rubin, & Sun, 1992). It was also identified that shysensitivity was positively correlated with peer group acceptance in Chinesechildren, but not the North American children (Chen et al., 1992). Althoughprevious research has suggested that Asian children may present LRS and IPSdifferently from their Western counterparts (Chen, Chen, Li, & Wang, 2009; Chenet al., 1992), social skill assessments validated in Western countries are stillcommonly used in Singapore. Therefore, it is important to validate some of thesesocial skill assessments within the Singaporean context.

Instruments that Assess Similar Constructs

Despite the importance of considering the cultural context, there is no instrumentthat specifically assesses LRS and IPS in young children within the Singaporeancontext at present. However, there are several published tools that assess similarconstructs in Western countries. For example, the Cooper– Farran Behavioral RatingScales (Cooper & Farran, 1991) was developed to measure work-related skills andIPS in school-entry-aged American children. The Child Behavior Rating Scales(CBRS; Bronson, Goodson, Layzer, & Love, 1990) was selected for inclusion in thecurrent study, because it was developed to assess the social and masterybehaviour of preschool-age children (e.g. Layzer, Goodson, & Layzer, 1990; Liu,2008). In addition, two recent studies conducted in the United States (Matthews,Ponitz, & Morrison, 2009; Ponitz et al., 2009) utilized the CBRS to explore the



construct of IPS and behavioural self-regulation domain of LRS, which theytermed ‘classroom behavioural regulation’ (M.M. McClelland, personal commu-nication, 20 November 2009). Items within the CBRS Social Behavior Scale such as‘Willing to share toys’, ‘Comforts peers in distress’ appeared to tap into thedomains of shared understanding and emotion regulation. While items withinthe CBRS Mastery Behavior Scale such as ‘Finds and organizes materials andworks’, ‘Returns to unfinished tasks’ appeared to tap more into the domains ofexecutive functioning and self-regulation. The CBRS was also used in a studywhich identified the emergence of LRS among children as young as 3 years of age(McClelland & Morrison, 2003).

Another instrument that appeared to assess similar constructs was the Preschooland Kindergarten Behavior Scales (PKBS; Merrell, 1994). Bracken, Keith, and Walker(1998) reviewed 13 rating scales for assessment of preschool behaviour and social-emotional functioning. From their review, the PKBS was identified as having verystrong psychometric properties. Although the PKBS was not originally designedto measure LRS and IPS, when the individual Social Skill Scale items were studiedin detail, most items appeared to either describe LRS or IPS (Lim et al., in press).For example, items such as ‘Makes friends easily’ appeared to describe IPS, while‘Follows instructions from adults’ appeared to describe LRS. With its content andstrong psychometric properties, Preschool and Kindergarten Behavior Scales—2ndedition (PKBS-2) (Merrell, 2002) was selected in the study because it presented asan instrument that could potentially be used to measure LRS and IPS.

In the study by Lim et al. (in press), Australian and Singaporean contentexperts sorted items from the CBRS and PKBS-2 according to LRS or IPS. Resultsindicated that most items from the CBRS and PKBS-2 distinctively describedeither LRS or IPS. Examples of the items, which they perceived as describing LRSor IPS, are included in the Appendix A. Both these tools have not been empiri-cally researched in Asian countries.

Validating Assessment Tools Using Rasch Analysis

Rasch analysis, based on item response theory, is one approach to instrumentdevelopment, refinement, and validation that is being increasingly used in thehealth and education fields (Brown & Rodger, 2008; Chiu, Fritz, Light, & Velozo,2006; Janeslatt, Granlund, Alderman, & Kottorp, 2008; Kook & Varni, 2008). Raschanalysis has certain advantages over classical test theory such as the ability toconvert ordinal level data into interval level data and to provide data about itemdifficulty and person ability measures (McAllister, 2008). Unidimensionality refersto a scale or instrument measuring one attribute or dimension at a time (Bond &Fox, 2007). When the items in a scale meet the Rasch analysis model requirementsof unidimensionality, it provides evidence of construct validity (Bond & Fox, 2007;Lim, Rodger, & Brown, 2009). There are two key assumptions associated with theRasch model. First, individuals with higher ability levels (e.g. more sociallyskilled) are more likely to score better on all the items when compared withindividuals with lower ability levels. Secondly, all the participants are more likelyto receive better scores on easy items than on hard items (Bond & Fox, 2007).

As discussed earlier, there is no one instrument that measures LRS or IPS inthe Singaporean context. Therefore, the use of existing social skill tools wasdeemed appropriate and necessary for this study. Instead of creating newassessment tools to measure the LRS and IPS constructs, Lim et al. (2009)encouraged the use Rasch analysis to explore the existing tools. It is important to

S.M. Lim et al.370


remember that validity is not a property of an instrument, but rather a propertyof scores that are obtained when one uses a particular assessment with a specificgroup of participants, in a particular setting under certain conditions (Goodwin,2002; Messick, 1989). For this reason, while the existing tools (such as the PKBS-2)may be valid for their intended use (e.g. assessing social independence), itemsfrom these instruments may also be valid for measuring other not yet identifiedconstructs, such as LRS and IPS.

Results from our previous work (Lim et al., in press) that involved sorting theCBRS and PKBS-2 items according to the content suggested that these itemscould be used to measure the constructs of LRS and IPS. The aim of this study isto extend previous work and investigate whether the valid constructs of LRS andIPS empirically exist within the two instruments—the CBRS and PKBS-2. Thefollowing specific research questions were posed:

1. Do LRS and IPS exist as unidimensional constructs within the CBRS?2. Do LRS and IPS exist as unidimensional constructs within the PKBS-2?3. Can the CBRS and PKBS-2 be used to assess LRS and IPS within Singaporean

early childhood contexts?

Several hypotheses underpinned these questions. First, it was anticipated thatLRS and IPS would exist as unidimensional constructs within the CBRS, sinceprevious research had indicated that this tool could be used to assess the socialand mastery behaviour of preschool-age children (Layzer et al., 1990). Secondly, itwas anticipated that LRS and IPS would exist as unidimensional constructs withinthe PKBS-2, because the content panel experts in our previous study (Lim et al.,in press) identified that PKBS-2 items mostly described either LRS or IPS. Next, itwas anticipated that these tools could be used to assess IPS and LRS withinSingaporean early childhood contexts because preschool children in Singapore arerequired to engage in both interpersonal and learning-related tasks within theirclassroom (Ministry of Education Singapore, 2009). In addition, as the Singapor-ean teachers use English to communicate with the children, it was anticipated thatthere would be no language barriers when completing the CBRS and PKBR-2.

METHODS

Ethics Approval

Ethical clearance was granted by both The University of Queensland and the KKWomen’s and Children’s Hospital (Singapore). Written consent was sought fromthe directors, teachers, and the parents of the participating children prior tocommencing.

Design

This study utilized a cross-sectional descriptive survey design within Singapor-ean early childhood settings.

Participants

The participants included 117 children and 21 teachers from six preschool centres(two public and four private) spread across different geographical locations in



Singapore. There were three different levels in the Singapore preschool centres:Nursery, Kindergarten 1 and Kindergarten 2. The staff to child ratios ranged from1 teacher and 1 teacher aide to 15 pupils to 1 teacher to 25 pupils depending onthe levels and whether preschools were private or public.

A convenience sample of children ranging in age from 3 years 7 months to6 years 7 months, representing the age range of Singaporean preschoolers wasrecruited. The mean age was 5 years 0 months (S.D. 5 10 months). Of the 117children who were participated, 56 (47.9%) were girls and 61 (52.1%) were boys.Children from all the three preschool levels participated from the six partici-pating centres. There were 44 (37.6%) from Nursery (ages 3–4), 38 (32.5%) fromKindergarten 1 (ages 4–5), and 35 (29.9%) from Kindergarten 2 (ages 5–6). Bothchildren with and without special needs were recruited. Children with a physicaldisability (e.g. cerebral palsy) or with known intellectual disability (e.g. Downsyndrome) were excluded. Twenty-eight (23.9%) children had varying degrees ofspecial needs as identified by teachers. Approximately 4% of the children werefrom lower income, 74% from middle income, and 22% from higher incomefamilies. The ethnic composition of the subjects was similar to the residentcomposition in Singapore (Singapore Department of Statistics, 2008), with amajority of Chinese (n 5 89 or 76.1%), followed by Malay (n 5 13 or 11.1%),Indian (n 5 7 or 6.0%), and others (n 5 8 or 6.8%).

Instruments

Two different behaviour rating questionnaires were utilized based on a review ofsocial skill assessments (Lim & Rodger, 2008).

The CBRS (Bronson et al., 1990) was developed based on the Bronson Social andTask Skill Profile (Bronson, 1985). It consisted of 32 items, with 14 statements thatmade up the Social Behavior Scale, and 18 items that formed the Mastery BehaviorScale. The items were rated by teachers on a 5-point scale to indicate the fre-quency of the behaviours ranging from 1 (never) to 5 (always). For the internalconsistency of the CBRS, Cronbach’s alpha was 0.96 while the test–retest relia-bility of scores between fall and spring was 0.67 (Layzer et al., 1990). An exampleof items from Social Behavior Scale that appeared to describe IPS was ‘Comfortspeers in distress by doing things to make the playmate feel better’. An example ofitems from Mastery Behavior Scale that may describe LRS was ‘Shows enthusiasmfor activities or tasks’.

The PKBS-2 (Merrell, 2002) contained 34 items in the Social Skill Scale. The scalewas rated by teachers to indicate the frequency of children’s behaviours on a4-point scale ranging from 0 (never) to 3 (often). In terms of reliability, internalconsistency of PKBS-2 demonstrated (alpha and split-half) reliability coefficientsof the total scores ranging from 0.90 to 0.97 (Merrell, 2002). The test–retestreliability coefficient ranged from 0.58 to 0.86 at 3 weeks, and from 0.66 to 0.78 at3 months. The inter-rater reliability coefficients ranged from 0.36 to 0.61 for theSocial Skill scores (Merrell, 2002). An example of PKBS-2 items that appeared toassess IPS was ‘Shows affection for other children’. An example of PKBS-2 itemsthat appeared to assess LRS was ‘Follows instructions from adults’.

Procedure

For each child, the CBRS and PKBS-2 were completed by his/her teacher andprovided to the researcher in sealed envelopes. Explanations on how to complete the

S.M. Lim et al.372


assessments were provided to the teachers. The investigator contacted the teachersinvolved regarding any missing data in the behavioural rating questionnaires.

Data Analysis

Analysis was conducted using Winsteps 3.67.0, a Rasch analysis specific softwareprogram (Linacre, 2008). The grouping of items for Rasch calibration andprincipal component analysis (PCA) was informed by the opinions of the contentexperts in Lim et al. (in press). Fit statistics, expressed as mean square (MNSQ)infit/outfit statistics can be used to determine how well the data from the itemsand participants fit the modelled expectations to be considered unidimensional(Brown & Rodger, 2008; Funk, Fox, Chan, & Curtiss, 2008). Item misfit occurswhen the pattern of observed responses for each item on all persons mismatchesthe modelled expectations. In rating scales, a commonly accepted range for meansquare values is 0.6–1.4 (Bond & Fox, 2007). Items with fit statistics/mean square(MNSQ)41.4 suggested that either the response may be too unpredictable(underfit), the items have been inaccurately scored, or the items may not belongto the proposed unidimensional construct (Bond & Fox, 2007). Therefore, in thisstudy, the items with mean squares 41.4 were considered for removal.

Unlike the usual factor analysis, Rasch analysis using Winsteps does a PCA ofresiduals, not of the original observations. The purpose of PCA of variables is toexplain variance, rather than to construct variables (Linacre, 2008). The princi-pal/first component is removed before looking for other existing dimensions orfactors (Linacre, 2008). A scale is considered unidimensional when 460% of thevariance in scores can be explained by the Rasch dimension (Pont, Wallen,Bundy, & Case-Smith, 2008). By demonstrating acceptable fit statistics and PCAresults, the items that contribute to the scale can be regarded as measuring aunidimensional construct. Each item has an item measure, which refers to theRasch estimate of item difficulty known as a logit (unit of measure). The greaterthe value of the item measure, the more difficult the item is.

Person misfit suggests that one or more of the ratings that the teachers as-signed a child did not ‘fit’ with the other ratings they assigned, and hence thechild’s profile of ratings does not conform to the measurement model’s ex-pectations for that child (Bond & Fox, 2007; Lim et al., 2009). In this study, onechild demonstrated person misfit (infit MNSQ 1.96, outfit MNSQ 3.79) and hencewas removed from the data set. The final sample size was 116 children.

Differential item functioning (DIF) informs whether test items are stable andconsistent across different participant groups (Brown & Rodger, 2008). In thisstudy, DIF analysis was performed on the following groups: age groups (3 and4 years versus 5 and 6 years) and children with and without special needs. Out ofall the 40 items found to measure the different constructs, only one item was foundto demonstrate significant DIF against children with special needs (Lim, in pre-paration). None of the items demonstrated DIF against the different age groups.

RESULTS

The aim of this study was to investigate whether the valid constructs of LRS andIPS exist within the two instruments—the CBRS and PKBS-2, when used inSingaporean early childhood contexts. Results of the following research questionsare presented in this section: ‘Do LRS and IPS exist as unidimensional constructs



within the CBRS?’ and ‘Do LRS and IPS exist as unidimensional constructswithin the PKBS-2?’

Analysis of LRS within CBRS

After removing the misfitting items, PCA was conducted and the result indicatedthat 69.0% variance was explained by the construct. The fit statistics of 12 CBRSitems (as reported in Table 1) suggested that they measured LRS. Items that weremisfitting included ‘Shows satisfaction or pride when he/she completes a task orproduct’ and ‘Interested in trying new activities, games, projects; display curiosityabout his/her environment’. Conceptually, these items appeared to assess the child’sexpression of interest, curiosity, and satisfaction with the task, unlike the remainingof the LRS items as summarized in Table 1, which looked more at the child’s abilityto engage in and complete learning tasks. Therefore, these items were removedbecause of the MNSQ that suggested misfit as well as being conceptually different.

Analysis of IPS within CBRS

Eight CBRS items fitted well in a scale and the PCA showed that variance explainedby the construct was 61.2%, suggesting that they measured the IPS dimension.These eight items are summarized in Table 2. The items that were originally in theCBRS Social Behavior Scale but demonstrated misfit and were removed included‘Complies with adult directives, giving little or no verbal or physical resistance,even with tasks’ and ‘Expresses hostility to other children physically’ (reverse-scored item). These misfitting items were conceptually different from the other IPSitems that remained as summarized in Table 2; the IPS items addressed child’sability to engage in play and relate to others’ emotions.

Table 1. Items that formed the LRS scale within CBRS arranged according to hierarchicalordering from easy to difficult items

Itemnumber

Item content InfitMNSQ

OutfitMNSQ

Itemmeasure

CBRS 21 Completes tasks successfully 0.68 0.63 �1.25CBRS 20 Completes learning tasks involving two or

more steps (e.g. cutting and pasting)in organized way

0.71 0.70 �1.24

CBRS 26 Feels he/she can cope well with classroom situations 1.10 1.03 �0.71CBRS 25 Takes time to do his/her best on a task 1.22 1.13 �0.37CBRS 32 Shows enthusiasm for activities or tasks 1.18 1.21 �0.28CBRS 27 Finds and organizes materials and works in an

appropriate place when activities are initiated1.06 0.94 �0.14

CBRS 31 Conveys confidence about being able to succeedat a task or in an activity

1.03 1.03 0.05

CBRS 29 Returns to unfinished tasks after interruption 0.98 1.00 0.25CBRS 22 Attempts new challenging tasks 0.97 0.94 0.26CBRS 24 Responds to instructions and then begins

an appropriate task without being reminded0.69 0.68 0.42

CBRS 23 Concentrates when working on a task;is not easily distracted by surroundingactivities

1.03 1.08 0.80

CBRS 28 Sees own errors in a task and corrects them 1.22 1.20 2.20

Note: MNSQ 5 mean square.

S.M. Lim et al.374


Conceptually, the item contents indicated that the IPS within CBRS items andLRS within CBRS items were different.1 The IPS items such as ‘Plays with otherchildren’ and ‘Comforts peers in distress by doing things to make the playmatefeel better’ described shared understanding and the ability to play together.While the LRS items such as ‘Responds to instructions and then begins an ap-propriate task without being reminded’ tapped more executive function and self-regulation as suggested by McClelland, Cameron, Wanless, et al. (2007).

Analysis of LRS within PKBS-2

After removing the misfitting items, PCA was conducted on the remaining sevenPKBS-2 items and variance explained by the construct was 60.3%, suggestingunidimensionality. The content of these seven PKBS-2 items suggested thatconceptually, they could be measuring something different from the LRS withinCBRS. Unlike the LRS within CBRS items, which mainly focused on the child’sinteraction with learning-related task, these seven items generally examined achild’s ability to comply and follow adults’ instructions. In other words, these sevenitems were not necessarily task oriented and such behaviours could occur duringnon-learning-related activities within the classroom such as queuing up or waitingfor snack. Correlation of this construct with LRS within CBRS was 0.526. With thismoderate correlation and the differing content, we considered these seven items aseparate construct and we named it Compliance instead of LRS.2

Items that exhibited Rasch model misfit included ‘Attempts new tasks beforeasking for help’ and ‘Participates in family or classroom discussions’. Con-ceptually, these items were different from the other Compliance items (Table 3)that assessed more on the child’s ability to comply with the teachers’ instruction.

Table 2. Items that formed the IPS scale within CBRS arranged according to hierarchicalordering from easy to difficult items

Itemnumber


OutfitMNSQ

Itemmeasure

CBRS 4 Plays with other children 0.87 0.82 �1.41CBRS 1 Spontaneously joins in play with two or more

children who are using the same set ofmaterials or playing the same game

1.03 1.17 �0.76

CBRS 3 Willing to share toys or other things withother children when playing; does not fightor argue with playmates in disputes overproperty

1.39 1.36 �0.46

CBRS 7 Cooperative with playmates when partici-pating in a group play activity; willing togive and take in the group, to listen to or helpothers

0.82 0.79 �0.38

CBRS 8 Takes turns in a game situation with toys,materials, and other things without beingtold to do so

1.11 1.07 �0.27

CBRS 10 Suggestions for play are accepted by otherchildren

0.82 0.87 0.84

CBRS 9 Offers suggestions for play to other children 0.97 1.05 1.01CBRS 2 Comforts peers in distress by doing things to

make the playmate feel better0.90 0.89 1.43




The item ‘Accepts decisions made by adults’ displayed slightly misfitting fitstatistics, but was retained as it conceptually fitted the other Compliance items.

Analysis of IPS within PKBS-2

Thirteen PKBS-2 items were found to contribute towards a unidimensional scalethat appeared to measure IPS, as summarized in Table 4. The PCA resultsindicated that variance explained by the construct was 60.7%. Misfitting itemsthat were removed included ‘Seeks comfort from an adult when hurt’ and ‘Is ableto separate from parents without extreme distress’. Conceptually, these items didnot appear to fit well with the remaining items in Table 4 that related more to thechild’s ability to play with other children and to respond emotionally.

Although the CBRS and PKBS-2 items were worded differently, the correlationbetween IPS within PKBS-2 and IPS within CBRS was relatively high at 0.763,suggesting they were both assessing the similar construct of IPS.

Table 3. Items that formed the Compliance scale within PKBS-2 arranged according tohierarchical ordering from easy to difficult items

Itemnumber


OutfitMNSQ

Itemmeasure

PKBS 22 Cleans up his/her messes when asked 1.07 1.27 �0.96PKBS 29a Accepts decisions made by adults 1.13 1.45 �0.65PKBS 7 Follows instructions from adults 0.65 0.61 �0.27PKBS 2 Is cooperative 0.99 0.90 �0.10PKBS 23 Follows rules 0.63 0.60 �0.06PKBS 10 Shows self-control 1.17 1.23 0.71PKBS 12 Uses free time in an acceptable way 1.13 1.23 1.34

aThis item was slightly misfitting but was retained to assess children whose ability are at thatequivalent level of item difficulty.Note: MNSQ 5 mean square.

Table 4. Items that formed the IPS scale within PKBS-2 arranged according to hierarchicalordering from easy to difficult items

Itemnumber


OutfitMNSQ

Itemmeasure

PKBS 3 Smiles and laughs with other children 0.73 0.54 �1.86PKBS 6 Is accepted and liked by other children 1.02 1.15 �1.35PKBS 4 Plays with several different children 1.15 1.16 �1.08PKBS 11 Is invited by other children to play 0.94 0.97 �0.96PKBS 9 Makes friends easily 0.90 0.92 �0.92PKBS 26 Stands up for his/her rights 1.09 1.04 �0.34PKBS 34 Shows affection for other children 0.90 0.88 0.01PKBS 21 Invites other children to play 0.86 0.82 0.06PKBS 5 Tries to understand another child’s behavior

(‘Why are you crying?’)0.99 1.08 0.89

PKBS 17 Stands up for other children’s rights (‘That’s his!’) 1.19 1.16 0.97PKBS 19 Has skills or abilities that are admired by peers 1.25 1.26 1.34PKBS 20 Comforts other children who are upset 0.79 0.77 1.44PKBS 33 Is sensitive to adult problems (‘Are you sad’?) 0.99 1.05 1.80


S.M. Lim et al.376


DISCUSSION

The aim of this study was to investigate whether the valid constructs of IPS andLRS exist within the two instruments—the CBRS and PKBS-2, when used inSingaporean early childhood contexts. The results suggested that items withinthe CBRS may be measuring IPS and LRS constructs, which supported thecontent experts (Lim et al., in press) and investigators’ hypotheses. In contrast, thePKBS-2 was found to assess IPS and a different construct named Compliance,instead of IPS and LRS as hypothesized.

LRS

McClelland and Morrison (2003) tested the construct of LRS by using abackground questionnaire, Social Skill Scales from the Social Skill RatingSystem—Teacher (Gresham & Elliott, 1990) and Mastery Behavior Scale from theCBRS (Bronson et al., 1990) with 72 American preschool children. They found thatLRS, as rated by teachers, were present in children as young as 3 years. Inaddition, variability existed in the LRS construct, indicating that while manychildren were rated as having good LRS, some children were rated as havinglower levels of these skills even during the preschool years (McClelland &Morrison, 2003). Although the age of preschool children in Singapore is3–6 years, which is different from the United States, similar results were foundin the present study. The LRS construct was validated within the CBRS and theresults showed that LRS were present in Singaporean children from as youngas 3 years 7 months (youngest child in the current study).

Although LRS may or may not always involve some form of social interaction,they do contribute to the teacher’s judgment about whether a child is consideredas socially competent. A child who constantly needs individual attention tocomplete work may be perceived as less socially competent by his/her teachers.Hersh and Walker (1982) suggested that social behaviour standards held byteachers included the presence of behaviours that facilitate academic perfor-mance (e.g. listening to teacher, completing tasks) and the absence of disruptiveor unusual behaviour that challenges authority or disrupts the classroom ecology.Therefore, to be perceived as socially competent in the early childhoodenvironment, a child is required to also demonstrate LRS.

Compliance

Next, a specific construct Compliance emerged from the use of PKBS-2 withSingaporean children. The items from the PKBS-2 were originally developedbased on norms from the United States. Unlike some countries where earlychildhood education is more play based, the early childhood education inSingapore is more structured and has a strong focus on academic development(Tan, 2007). Singaporean children learn to read and write at an early age. Thehigh level of proficiency in pre-literacy and mathematic skills was demonstratedin a study with 3000 Singaporean preschool children (Ko, 1992). The Complianceconstruct examined the extent to which young children comply with rules andinstructions and demonstrated self-control within the early childhood environ-ments. This construct focused more on a child’s interactions with the adults in theearly childhood environments. It is likely that young Singaporean children arerequired to demonstrate compliance to meet the high educational expectations.



Although this study did not compare children between Eastern andWestern cultures, the cultural expectations for Singaporean children to demon-strate high levels of self-control from a young age might have resulted in theemergence of Compliance as a distinct unidimensional construct within thePKBS-2. There are several reasons why children from Eastern cultures demon-strate higher level of self-control and compliance compared with their Westerncounterparts. First, the differences could be attributed to genetic factors(Sabbagh, Xu, Carlson, Moses, & Lee, 2006). Sabbagh et al. (2006) also highlightedthat sociocultural factors could have impacted on the higher level of self-controlwith the example that Chinese parents expect children as young as 2 years old tomaster impulse control. Hence, the second factor could be the Asian style ofparenting that stresses the importance of filial respect and self-control in every-day conduct (Chao & Tseng, 2002) that could have an impact on the preschooler’slevel of compliance.

Thirdly, it could be the early introduction of educational policies that em-phasize the importance of self-control on the preschooler’s everyday conduct(Tobin, Wu, & Davidson, 1989). Fourthly, parents in Singapore introduce struc-tured learning tasks early in childhood. One study demonstrated that the ma-jority of Singaporean Chinese parents teach their preschool children to read athome and approximately half of the Singaporean Chinese parents teach theirpreschool children to write Chinese characters (Li & Rao, 2000). Such introduc-tion of learning tasks early in a child’s life is also likely to contribute towardsyoung children’s ability to pay attention and comply with instructions.

IPS

Most of the IPS items found in this study were related to the child’s ability toform relationships with other children. By taking a closer look at the IPS withinPKBS-2 and IPS within CBRS items, the majority of them involved pro-socialbehaviours that occurred during play and relating to other’s emotion. Examplesof these items included ‘Plays with other children’, ‘Invites other children toplay’, ‘Tries to understand another children’s behaviour’, and ‘Comforts otherchildren who are upset’. Such behaviours were congruent with those found in thedefinition of IPS. IPS describes behaviours needed for children to successfullyand appropriately interact and form relationships with other people, such asrespecting other children, showing empathy, and sharing. The foundationdomains of emotion regulation and shared understanding as suggested byGuralnick (2003) are necessary pre-requisites for children to demonstrate IPS asidentified in items from the two instruments.

Social skills and friendships develop from opportunities to interact and playwith other children (Ladd, 1990; Olson, 2009). Many of the IPS items identified inthis study involved play. The relationship between IPS and opportunities to playcan be said to be bidirectional. On one hand, having more chances to play andinteract with other children enables a child to develop good IPS and formfriendships. It was reported that young children develop IPS and relationship-management skills during informal peer-play activities (Ladd & Hart, 1992). Onthe other hand, it is the children that have good IPS who will seek playmates andin turn have more opportunities to play with their peers (Ladd, 1990). Studieshave also found that children who engaged in less elaborate and complex playdemonstrated reduced social skills (Farmer-Dougan & Kaszuba, 1999; Miller &Almon, 2009; Uren & Stagnitti, 2008).

S.M. Lim et al.378


Extending Utility of Existing Instruments

It should be highlighted that this is the first study that utilized the instrumentsCBRS and PKBS-2 to examine the constructs of LRS and IPS within Singaporeanearly childhood contexts. These instruments were originally developed by the testdevelopers to assess different constructs. For example, the PKBS-2 was designedto assess Social Cooperation, Social Interaction, and Social Independence. Therefore,removal of misfitting items would only be applicable if these instruments are usedto measure constructs as investigated in this study and within Singaporean earlychildhood contexts. Using Rasch analysis, the utility of these two instruments hasbeen extended by expanding the repertoire of valid constructs they can measure(such as IPS and Compliance), in addition to the original constructs (as proposed bytest developers). As there are already many social skill assessment toolscommercially available and validated by other researchers, this study demon-strated that instead of creating new assessment tools for different constructs andcontexts, validation studies using Rasch analysis can be conducted.

Implications

There are several practical implications from this study. First, in early childhoodenvironments, social participation does not only occur when children areplaying, but also during adult directed and small group learning tasks.Depending on the different presenting concerns, practitioners can select specificinstruments for assessing the different types of social skills. When assessing achild’s social skills in the early childhood environments, it is necessary for earlychildhood educators or health professionals to observe across a range ofactivities, such as playing, having a snack, working in small groups, andparticipating in structured learning tasks.

Secondly, like in Singapore, children in other Asian cultures (e.g. Korea, Japan,and China) from as young as 3 years old spend relatively long period of timeperforming whole-class activities, often receiving formal instruction (French &Song, 1998; Kwon, 2002; Lewis et al., 2009). It appeared that the Singaporean earlychildhood environments may be more similar to those in other Asian countries,compared with Western early childhood environments which may be more playbased. The results of this study support the assessment of LRS, IPS, and Com-pliance in Asian children, which is important given that these skills are heavilyemphasized in Asian early childhood contexts.

A third implication of the findings relate to setting goals for children with socialskills difficulty after assessment. The items in Tables 1–4 are organized accordingto the hierarchical ordering of item difficulty. After assessing a child’s social skills,practitioners can also use the item difficulties listed in the tables as a guide forgoal setting. For example, referring to Table 4, one would assist a child in attainingeasier skills such as ‘Tries to understand other children’s behavior’ (0.89 logit)before more difficult ones like ‘Comforts other children who are upset’ (1.44 logit).

Strengths and Limitations

This study utilized Rasch analysis to extend the validity of existing instruments.It has identified assessment tools that can be used to assess different types ofsocial skills in young Singaporean children. The results of the study alsoprovided item difficulty measures for different assessment items, which can beuseful for setting goals when working with children who have poor social skills.



Children with some ‘special needs’ (e.g. speech and language impairment,developmental delay) were included in the study. In Singapore, children withvery challenging behaviour or complex special needs (e.g. severe autism) attendspecial schools with low student–teacher ratio. The children with ‘special needs’in this study were those who were well integrated within mainstream classroomenvironments, with other typical developing children without additional sup-port. Children with extremely challenging behaviour or complex special needswere not included in the study. A limitation of the study is that the results did notinform whether the assessments can be used for children with more complexneeds.

In addition, as this study was cross-sectional, it did not examine how thesemeasures would function over time to assess LRS, IPS, and Compliance. Futureresearch could include a longitudinal study of similar design.

Future Research Directions

Considering all the three assessments were developed for children in Westerncontexts, replication of this study in non-Asian countries or countries where earlychildhood education programs are more play based and less focused oninstruction in formal literacy is also suggested. The literature is suggesting thatearly childhood in America is increasingly becoming more academically driven.In two new studies of New York City and Los Angeles kindergartens, mostteachers reported that they spend 2–3 h each day in academic activities such asteaching literacy and mathematics, and that children have 30 min or less each dayfor play or ‘choice time’ (Miller & Almon, 2009). Therefore, a replication of thisstudy in countries like America could potentially reveal similar findings. Futurestudies involving children with more complex needs and a longitudinal study ofsimilar design are also needed.

CONCLUSION

With the use of Rasch analysis, this study aimed at validating the IPS and LRSconstructs within two already existing instruments. Findings suggested thatitems within the CBRS may be measuring both LRS and IPS constructs. Contraryto the hypothesis, the constructs IPS and Compliance were validated withinPKBS-2. In terms of assessment recommendations, CBRS can be used when achild presents with both IPS and LRS difficulties. When a child presents withspecifically IPS difficulties or difficulties with complying with adult directions,the IPS scale and the Compliance scale in PKBS-2 can be used, respectively. Thestudy has also explored the cultural and educational expectations of Asiancultures that could have led to the emergence of different social skill constructs.Therefore, the choice of assessment tools to be used for assessing social skillsshould be based on consideration of both referring/reported concerns as well asthe child’s cultural context.

Notes

1. Additional analysis: When the LRS within CBRS items and IPS within CBRSitems were combined together in a Rasch analysis, the items did not fit well

S.M. Lim et al.380


together and the PCA also suggested the two sets of items as separateconstructs.

2. Additional analysis: When the LRS within CBRS items and Compliance withinPKBS-2 items were combined together in a Rasch analysis, the items did not fitwell together and the PCA also suggested the two sets of items comprisedseparate constructs.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The early childhood educators, the parents who consented to their children’sparticipation, and the children who took part as research subjects are thanked fortheir valuable contribution to the study. Acknowledgments are extended to theUniversity of Queensland for the Faculty of Health Sciences InternationalScholarship, University of Queensland Research Scholarship, and GraduateSchool Research Travel Grant, and KK Women’s and Children’s Hospital (grantno.: RAU/2008/140) whose funding made this study possible. Thanks areextended to Association for Early Childhood Educators Singapore for assistancewith the recruitment and Miss. Lin Yan Xin and Miss. Siew Lai Ching whoprovided assistance with the data collection. Thanks are also extended toProfessor Mike Linacre for his guidance with the data analysis.

Appendix A

Examples of items from CBRS and PKBS-2 that described IPS and LRS asperceived by content experts in Lim et al. (in press) are summarized in Table A1.

Table A1.

Examplesof items

Item description Perception ofcontent experts

PKBS 3 Smiles and laughs with other children IPSPKBS 6 Plays with several different children IPSPKBS 20 Comforts other children who are upset IPSPKBS 7 Follows instructions from adults LRSPKBS 22 Cleans up his/her messes when asked LRSPKBS 23 Follows rules LRSCBRS 1 Spontaneously joins in play with two or more children

who are using the same set of materials or playingthe same game

IPS

CBRS 2 Comforts peers in distress by doing things to makethe playmate feel better

IPS

CBRS 3 Willing to share toys or other things with other childrenwhen playing; does not fight or argue with playmatesin disputes over property

IPS

CBRS 23 Concentrates when working on a task; is not easilydistracted by surrounding activities

LRS

CBRS 24 Responds to instructions and then begins an appropriatetask without being reminded

LRS

CBRS 25 Takes time to do his/her best on a task LRS



REFERENCES

Anthony, L. G., Anthony, B. J., Glanviile, D. N., Naiman, D. Q., Waanders, C., & Shaffer, S.(2005). The relationships between parenting stress, parenting behaviour and preschoo-ler’s social competence and behaviour problems in the classroom. Infant and ChildDevelopment, 14, 133–154.

Bechara, A., Damasio, A. R., Damasio, H., & Anderson, S. W. (1994). Insensitivity to futureconsequences following damage to human prefrontal cortex. Cognition, 50, 7–15.

Bond, T. G., & Fox, C. M. (2007). Applying the Rasch model: Fundamental measurement in thehuman sciences (2nd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Bracken, B. A., Keith, L. K., & Walker, K. C. (1998). Assessment of preschool behavior andsocial-emotional functioning: A review of thirteen third-party instruments. Journal ofPsychoeducational Assessment, 16, 153–169.

Brock, L. L., Rimm-Kaufman, S. E., Nathanson, L., & Grimm, K. J. (2009). The contributionsof ‘hot’ and ‘cool’ executive function to children’s academic achievement, learning-related behaviors, and engagement in kindergarten. Early Childhood Research Quarterly,24(3), 337–349.

Bronson, M. B. (1985). Manual for the Bronson social and task skills profile. Chestnut Hill, MA:Boston College.

Bronson, M. B. (1994). The usefulness of an observational measure of young children’ssocial and mastery behaviors in early childhood classrooms. Early Childhood ResearchQuarterly, 9(1), 19–43.

Bronson, M. B., Goodson, B. D., Layzer, J. I., & Love, J. M. (1990). Child behavior rating scale.Cambridge, MA: Abt Associates.

Bronson, M. B., Tivnan, T., & Seppanen, P. S. (1995). Relations between teacher andclassroom activity variables and the classroom behaviors of prekindergarten children inchapter 1 funded programs. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 16(2), 253–282.

Brown, T., & Rodger, S. (2008). Validity of the developmental test of visual-motorintegration supplemental developmental test of visual perception. Perceptual and MotorSkills, 106, 659–678.

Bush, G., Luu, P., & Posner, M. I. (2000). Cognitive and emotional influences in the anteriorcingulated cortex. Trends in Cognitive Science, 4(6), 215–222.

Cassidy, K. W., Werner, R. S., Rourke, M., Zubernis, L. S., & Balaraman, G. (2003). Therelationship between psychological understanding and positive social behaviors. SocialDevelopment, 12(2), 198–221.

Chao, R., & Tseng, V. (2002). Parenting of Asians. In M. H. Bornstein (Ed.), Handbook ofparenting. Volume 4: Social conditions and applied parenting (2nd ed.). Mahwah, NJ:Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Chen, X., Chang, L., Liu, H., & He, Y. (2008). Effects of the peer group on the developmentof social functioning and academic achievement: A longitudinal study in Chinesechildren. Child Development, 79(2), 235–251.

Chen, X., Chen, H., Li, D., & Wang, L. (2009). Early childhood behavioral inhibition andsocial and school adjustment in Chinese children: A 5-year longitudinal study. ChildDevelopment, 80(6), 1692–1704.

Chen, X., Rubin, K. H., & Sun, Y. (1992). Social reputation and peer relationships in Chineseand Canadian children: A cross-cultural study. Child Development, 63(6), 1336–1343.

Chiu, Y. P., Fritz, S. L., Light, K. E., & Velozo, C. A. (2006). Use of item response analysis toinvestigate measurement properties and clinical validity of data for the dynamic gaitindex. Physical Therapy, 86(6), 778–787.

Coolahan, K., Fantuzzo, J., Mendez, J., & McDermott, P. (2000). Preschool peer interactionsand readiness to learn: Relationships between classroom peer play and learningbehaviors and conduct. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92(3), 458–465.

Cooper, D. H., & Farran, D. C. (1991). The Cooper– Farran behavioral rating scales. Brandon,VT: Clinical Psychology Publishing Co., Inc.

Farmer-Dougan, V., & Kaszuba, T. (1999). Reliability and validity of play-basedobservations: Relationship between PLAY behaviour observation systems and standar-dised measures of cognitive and social skills. Educational Psychology, 19(4), 429–440.

French, L., & Song, M. (1998). Developmentally appropriate teacher-directed approaches:Images from Korean kindergartens. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 30, 409–430.

S.M. Lim et al.382


Funk, J., Fox, C., Chan, M., & Curtiss, K. (2008). The development of the children’sempathic attitudes questionnaire using classical and Rasch analyses. Journal of AppliedDevelopmental Psychology, 29(3), 187–196.

Goodwin, L. D. (2002). The meaning of validity. Journal of Pediatric Gastroenterology andNutrition, 35(1), 6–7.

Gresham, F. M., & Elliott, S. N. (1990). Social Skills Rating System. Circles Pines, MN:American Guidance Service.

Guralnick, M. J. (2003). Assessment of peer relations. Child Development and MentalRetardation Center, University of Washington [Electronic Version]. Retrieved 1 November2007. Available from: http://depts.washington.edu/chdd/guralnick/research_peer.html.

Henricsson, L., & Rydell, A.-M. (2006). Children with behaviour problems: The influence ofsocial competence and social relations on problem stability, school achievement and peeracceptance across the first six years of school. Infant and Child Development, 15, 347–366.

Hersh, R. H., & Walker, H. M. (1982). Great expectations: Making school effective for allstudents. Policy Studies Review, 2(1), 147–188.

Janeslatt, G., Granlund, M., Alderman, I., & Kottorp, A. (2008). Development of a newassessment of time processing ability in children, using Rasch analysis. Child: Care,Health and Development, 34(6), 771–780.

Ko, P. (1992). The cognitive and social development of pre-school children in Singapore:What we learned from the IT-BvLF study? In W. K. Ho & P. S. Ko (Eds.), Growing inSingapore: The pre-school years (pp. 135–168). Singapore: Longman Singapore Publishers.

Kook, S. H., & Varni, J. W. (2008). Validation of the Korean version of the pediatric quality oflife inventory 4.0 (PedsQL) generic core scales in school children and adolescents usingthe Rasch model. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 6(41). DOI: 10.1186/1477-7525-6-41.

Kwon, Y. I. (2002). Western influences in Korean preschool education. InternationalEducation Journal, 3(3), 153–164.

Ladd, G. W. (1990). Having friends, keeping friends, making friends and being liked bypeers in the classroom: Predictors of children’s early school adjustment? ChildDevelopment, 61, 1081–1100.

Ladd, G. W. (1999). Peer relationships and social competence during early and middlechildhood. Annual Review of Psychology, 50(1), 333.

Ladd, G. W., & Hart, C. H. (1992). Creating informal play opportunities: Are parents andprescooler’s initiations related to children’s competence with peers? DevelopmentalPsychology, 18, 1179–1187.

Ladd, G. W., Herald, S. L., & Andrews, R. K. (2006). Young children’s peer relations and socialcompetence. In B. Spodek & O. N. Saracho (Eds.), Handbook of research on the education ofyoung children (2nd ed., pp. 23–45). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.

Layzer, J. L., Goodson, B. D., & Layzer, J. A. (1990). Evaluation of project giant step. Year tworeport: The study of program effects. Cambridge, MA: Abt Assoicates Inc.

Lewis, C., Koyasu, M., Oh, S., Ogawa, A., Short, B., & Huang, Z. (2009). Culture, executivefunctioning, and social understanding. New Directions in Child and Adolescent Develop-ment, 123, 69–85.

Li, H., & Rao, N. (2000). Parental influences on Chinese literacy development: Acomparison of preschoolers in Beijing, Hong Kong, and Singapore. International Journalof Behvaioural Development, 24, 82–90.

Lim, S. M. (in preparation). Young children’s social competence: Iterations between theoryand measurement. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. The University of Queensland,Brisbane, Australia.

Lim, S. M., & Rodger, S. (2008). An occupational perspective on the assessment of socialcompetence in children. British Journal of Occupational Therapy, 71(11), 469–481.

Lim, S. M., Rodger, S., & Brown, T. (2009). Using Rasch analysis to establish the constructvalidity of rehabilitation assessment tools. International Journal of Therapy and Rehabilita-tion, 16(5), 251–260.

Lim, S. M., Rodger, S., & Brown, T. (in press). Learning-related and interpersonal social skillsconstructs in two existing social skills assessments. Occupational Therapy in Mental Health.

Linacre, J. M. (2008). WINSTEPS Rasch measurement computer program. Chicago: Winsteps.com.Liu, H.-C. (2008). The effect of a learning-related social skills (LRSS) physical education training

program on kindergarten children. Dissertation Abstracts International, 69(5) (UMI no.3313914).



Matthews, J. S., Ponitz, C. C., & Morrison, F. J. (2009). Early gender differences in self-regulation and academic achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 101(3), 689–704.

McAllister, S. (2008). Introduction to the use of Rasch analysis to assess patientperformance. International Journal of Therapy and Rehabilitation, 15(11), 482–490.

McClelland, M. M., Acock, A. C., & Morrison, F. J. (2006). The impact of kindergartenlearning-related skills on academic trajectories at the end of elementary school. EarlyChildhood Research Quarterly, 21, 471–490.

McClelland, M. M., Cameron, C. E., Connor, C. M., Farris, C. L., Jewkes, A. M., & Morrison,F. J. (2007). Links betwen behavioral regulation and preschooler’s literacy, vocabulary,and maths skills. Developmental Psychology, 43(4), 947–959.

McClelland, M. M., Cameron, C. E., Wanless, S. B., & Murray, A. (2007). Executivefunction, behavioral self-regulation, and social-emotional competence: Links to schoolreadiness. In O. N. Saracho & B. Spodek (Eds.), Contemporary perspectives on research insocial learning in early childhood education (pp. 83–107). Charlotte, NC: Information Age.

McClelland, M. M., & Morrison, F. J. (2003). The emergence of learning-related social skillsin preschool children. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 18(2), 206–224.

McClelland, M. M., Morrison, F. J., & Holmes, D. L. (2000). Children at risk for earlyacademic problems: The role of learning-related social skills. Early Childhood ResearchQuarterly, 15(3), 307–329.

Merrell, K. W. (1994). Preschool and kindergarten behavior scales. Brandon, VT: ClinicalPsychology Publishing.

Merrell, K. W. (2002). Preschool and kindergarten behavior scales (2nd ed.). Austin: Pro-ED.Messick, S. (1989). Validity. In R. L. Linn (Ed.), Educational measurement (pp. 13–101).

New York, NY: American Council on Education.Miller, E., & Almon, J. (2009). Crisis in the kindergarten: Why children need to play in school.

College Park, MD: Alliance for Childhood.Ministry of Education Singapore. (2009). Nurturing early learners: A framework for a

kindergarten curriculum in Singapore. Singapore: Pre-school Education Unit, Ministry ofEducation.

Mostow, A. J., Izard, C. E., Fine, S., & Trentacosta, C. J. (2002). Modeling emotional, cognitive,and behavioral predictors of peer acceptance. Child Development, 73(6), 1775–1787.

Nyberg, L., Henricsson, L., & Rydell, A.-M. (2008). Low social inclusion in childhood:Adjustment and early predictors. Infant and Child Development, 17, 639–656.

Olson, L. J. (2009). A frame of reference to enhance social participation. In P. Kramer &J. Hinojosa (Eds.), Frames of references for pediatric occupational therapy (3rd ed.,pp. 306–348). Baltimore, MD: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.

Ponitz, C. C., McClelland, M. M., Matthews, J. S., & Morrison, F. J. (2009). A structuredobservation of behavioral self-regulation and its contribution to kindergarten outcomes.Developmental Psychology, 45(3), 605–619.

Pont, K., Wallen, M., Bundy, A., & Case-Smith, J. (2008). Reliability and validity of the testof in-hand manipulation in children ages 5 to 6 years. American Journal of OccupationalTherapy, 62(4), 384–392.

Sabbagh, M. A., Xu, F., Carlson, S. M., Moses, L. J., & Lee, K. (2006). The development ofexecutive functioning and theory of mind: A comparison of Chinese and U.S.preschoolers. Psychological Sciences, 17, 74–81.

Segrin, C. (2000). Social skills deficits associated with depression. Clinical PsychologyReview, 20(3), 379–403.

Singapore Department of Statistics (2008). Population trends 2008. Singapore: Department ofStatistics, Ministry of Trade and Industry.

Spence, S. H., Donovan, C., & Brechman-Toussaint, M. (1999). Social skills, socialoutcomes, and cognitive features of childhood social phobia. Journal of AbnormalPsychology, 108(2), 211–221.

Tan, C. T. (2007). Policy developments in pre-school education in Singapore: A focus on thekey reforms of kindergarten education. International Journal of Child Care and EducationPolicy, 1(1), 35–43.

Tobin, J. J., Wu, D. Y. H., & Davidson, D. H. (1989). Preschool in three cultures: Japan, China,and the United States. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

Uren, N., & Stagnitti, K. (2008). Pretend play, social competence and involvement inchildren aged 5–7 years: The concurrent validity of the Child-initiated pretend playassessment. Australian Occupational Therapy Journal, 56(1), 33–40.

S.M. Lim et al.384


Documents

Assessments of learning-related skills and interpersonal skills constructs within early childhood environments in Singapore