Quality of Research
Documents Reviewed
The documents below were reviewed for Quality of Research. The research point of
contact can provide information regarding the studies reviewed and the availability
of additional materials, including those from more recent studies that may have been conducted.
Study 1Bradley, R. T., Atkinson, M., Tomasino, D., Rees, R. A., & Galvin, P. (2009). Facilitating emotional self-regulation in preschool children: Efficacy of the Early HeartSmarts Program in promoting social, emotional, and cognitive development. Boulder, CA: Institute of HeartMath.
Supplementary Materials Lambert, R. G. (n.d.). The Developmental Continuum Assessment System for ages 3 to 5: The assessment component of The Creative Curriculum for Preschool--Technical report. Charlotte: University of North Carolina. Retrieved from http://www.teachingstrategies.com/content/pageDocs/Dev_Continuum_Technical_Report.pdf
Outcomes
| Outcome 1: Social and emotional development |
|
Description of Measures
|
This outcome was assessed with the 13-item social/emotional development dimension of The Creative Curriculum Assessment (TCCA). The 50-item TCCA measures a child's growth in four dimensions: social/emotional development, physical development, cognitive development, and language development. Items composing the social/emotional development dimension are organized into three categories: (1) sense of self (e.g., "demonstrates appropriate trust in adults," "stands up for rights"), (2) responsibility for self and others (e.g., "takes responsibility for own well-being," "follows classroom routines"), and (3) prosocial behavior (e.g., "plays well with other children," "uses thinking skills to resolve conflicts"). Teachers rate each item in regard to the child's development, using a 4-point scale ranging from 0 (behaviors that may indicate a developmental delay or skills that a child has not previously been exposed to) to 3 (complete mastery). Higher scores indicate better social and emotional development.
|
|
Key Findings
|
Preschool students from 19 urban schools in Utah were assigned to the intervention group (3 schools), which received the Early HeartSmarts Program for Preschool Children in addition to regular classroom instruction, or the control group (16 schools), which received regular classroom instruction without the intervention. Assessments occurred at baseline (in October, at the beginning of the academic year), preintervention (in January, before the intervention was implemented), and "postintervention" (in April, 1 month before the end of the intervention). At the postintervention assessment, children in the intervention group had higher scores than children in the control group for the social/emotional development dimension (p < .001) and for the categories of sense of self (p < .001), responsibility for self and others (p < .001), and prosocial behavior (p < .001), after controlling for baseline and preintervention scores.
|
|
Studies Measuring Outcome
|
Study 1
|
|
Study Designs
|
Quasi-experimental
|
|
Quality of Research Rating
|
2.4
(0.0-4.0 scale)
|
| Outcome 2: Motor skills |
|
Description of Measures
|
Motor skills of children were assessed with the 8-item physical development dimension of The Creative Curriculum Assessment (TCCA). The 50-item TCCA measures a child's growth in four dimensions: social/emotional development, physical development, cognitive development, and language development. Items composing the physical development dimension are organized into two categories: (1) gross motor (e.g., "shows balance while moving," "demonstrates throwing, kicking, and catching skills") and (2) fine motor (e.g., "coordinates eye-hand movement," "uses tools for writing and drawing"). Teachers rate each item in regard to the child's development, using a 4-point scale ranging from 0 (behaviors that may indicate a developmental delay or skills that a child has not previously been exposed to) to 3 (complete mastery). Higher scores indicate better motor skills.
|
|
Key Findings
|
Preschool students from 19 urban schools in Utah were assigned to the intervention group (3 schools), which received the Early HeartSmarts Program for Preschool Children in addition to regular classroom instruction, or the control group (16 schools), which received regular classroom instruction without the intervention. Assessments occurred at baseline (in October, at the beginning of the academic year), preintervention (in January, before the intervention was implemented), and "postintervention" (in April, 1 month before the end of the intervention). At the postintervention assessment, children in the intervention group had higher scores than children in the control group for the physical development dimension (p < .001) and for the categories of gross motor (p < .01) and fine motor (p < .001), after controlling for baseline and preintervention scores.
|
|
Studies Measuring Outcome
|
Study 1
|
|
Study Designs
|
Quasi-experimental
|
|
Quality of Research Rating
|
2.4
(0.0-4.0 scale)
|
| Outcome 3: Cognitive development |
|
Description of Measures
|
This outcome was assessed with the 16-item cognitive development dimension of The Creative Curriculum Assessment (TCCA). The 50-item TCCA measures a child's growth in four dimensions: social/emotional development, physical development, cognitive development, and language development. Items composing the cognitive development dimension are organized into three categories: (1) learning and problem solving (e.g., "approaches problems flexibly," "explores cause and effect"), (2) logical thinking (e.g., "classifies objects," "shows awareness of time concepts and sequence"), and (3) representation and symbolic thinking (e.g., "takes on pretend roles and situations," "makes believe with objects"). Teachers rate each item in regard to the child's development, using a 4-point scale ranging from 0 (behaviors that may indicate a developmental delay or skills that a child has not previously been exposed to) to 3 (complete mastery). Higher scores indicate better cognitive development.
|
|
Key Findings
|
Preschool students from 19 urban schools in Utah were assigned to the intervention group (3 schools), which received the Early HeartSmarts Program for Preschool Children in addition to regular classroom instruction, or the control group (16 schools), which received regular classroom instruction without the intervention. Assessments occurred at baseline (in October, at the beginning of the academic year), preintervention (in January, before the intervention was implemented), and "postintervention" (in April, 1 month before the end of the intervention). At the postintervention assessment, children in the intervention group had higher scores than children in the control group for the cognitive development dimension (p < .01) and for the categories of learning and problem solving (p < .001), logical thinking (p < .05), and representation and symbolic thinking (p < .05), after controlling for baseline and preintervention scores.
|
|
Studies Measuring Outcome
|
Study 1
|
|
Study Designs
|
Quasi-experimental
|
|
Quality of Research Rating
|
2.4
(0.0-4.0 scale)
|
| Outcome 4: Language development |
|
Description of Measures
|
This outcome was assessed with the 13-item language development dimension of The Creative Curriculum Assessment (TCCA). The 50-item TCCA measures a child's growth in four dimensions: social/emotional development, physical development, cognitive development, and language development. Items composing the language development dimension are organized into two categories: (1) listening and speaking (e.g., "hears and discriminates the sound of language," "asks questions") and (2) reading and writing (e.g., "enjoys and values reading," "uses emerging reading skills to make meaning from print"). Teachers rate each item in regard to the child's development, using a 4-point scale ranging from 0 (behaviors that may indicate a developmental delay or skills that a child has not previously been exposed to) to 3 (complete mastery). Higher scores indicate better language development.
|
|
Key Findings
|
Preschool students from 19 urban schools in Utah were assigned to the intervention group (3 schools), which received the Early HeartSmarts Program for Preschool Children in addition to regular classroom instruction, or the control group (16 schools), which received regular classroom instruction without the intervention. Assessments occurred at baseline (in October, at the beginning of the academic year), preintervention (in January, before the intervention was implemented), and "postintervention" (in April, 1 month before the end of the intervention). At the postintervention assessment, children in the intervention group had higher scores than children in the control group for the language development dimension (p < .001) and for the categories of listening and speaking (p < .01) and reading and writing (p < .001), after controlling for baseline and preintervention scores.
|
|
Studies Measuring Outcome
|
Study 1
|
|
Study Designs
|
Quasi-experimental
|
|
Quality of Research Rating
|
2.4
(0.0-4.0 scale)
|
Study Populations
The following populations were identified in the studies reviewed for Quality of
Research.
|
Study
|
Age
|
Gender
|
Race/Ethnicity
|
|
Study 1
|
0-5 (Early childhood)
|
51% Female
49% Male
|
54% Hispanic or Latino
29% White
7% Race/ethnicity unspecified
5% Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander
3% Black or African American
2% Asian
1% American Indian or Alaska Native
|
Quality of Research Ratings by Criteria (0.0-4.0 scale)
External reviewers independently evaluate the Quality of Research for an intervention's
reported results using six criteria:
For more information about these criteria and the meaning of the ratings, see Quality of Research.
|
Outcome
|
Reliability
of Measures
|
Validity
of Measures
|
Fidelity
|
Missing
Data/Attrition
|
Confounding
Variables
|
Data
Analysis
|
Overall
Rating
|
|
1: Social and emotional development
|
3.3
|
3.3
|
1.6
|
2.0
|
2.5
|
2.0
|
2.4
|
|
2: Motor skills
|
3.3
|
3.3
|
1.6
|
2.0
|
2.5
|
2.0
|
2.4
|
|
3: Cognitive development
|
3.3
|
3.3
|
1.6
|
2.0
|
2.5
|
2.0
|
2.4
|
|
4: Language development
|
3.3
|
3.3
|
1.6
|
2.0
|
2.5
|
2.0
|
2.4
|
Study Strengths Internal consistency reliability for the TCCA outcome measurement instrument was high for the study sample at each of the three assessment points. The TCCA has face validity, and construct validity has been established by independent investigators and confirmed in the study by a factor analysis. Intervention teachers were trained and monitored by an early childhood specialist who was also a licensed HeartMath trainer with over 10 years of teacher training experience. To minimize an expected level of attrition in the target preschool population, the study included a school administration mandate that all participating preschoolers be interviewed with verification tracking of the number of preschoolers interviewed by each study teacher following assessments. Seventy-eight percent of the baseline study sample had complete data at all three assessment points, and statistical analysis confirmed no gender or racial bias in the final sample. The statistical modeling of the data was comprehensive in its attempt to adjust for pretest differences between groups in family socioeconomic status, ethnic composition, and class size and on all developmental progress subscales of the TCCA.
Study Weaknesses Interrater reliability for the TCCA was not established in the study, and the subjective nature of the teacher TCCA ratings coupled with a large variance in teacher TCCA ratings weakened the instrument's validity in the absence of establishing agreement with other measures of student developmental progress (concurrent validity). Evidence of intervention fidelity was weak; no standardized fidelity measurement instrument was used. Intervention teachers were trained by one teacher who also observed delivery only five times during the year of the study; there was no other assessment of intervention teacher performance. Potential confounding factors included the use of a nonrandom design and no true postintervention outcome measurement, since the intervention was still being delivered at the time of the final assessment. Although addressed by the researchers, prior exposure of some teachers in the control group to HeartMath training and teacher rating bias on the TCCA cannot be ruled out as potential confounding variables. The statistical modeling of the data did not address the nesting of students within classrooms and schools. There was no apparent correction in the experimentwise alpha level for significant, between-group differences as recommended for the numerous statistical comparisons, and the absence of a power analysis makes it difficult to separate statistical from meaningful significance in outcome differences between groups.
|
|
