Do Children in Full-day Kindergartens Learn More than Half-day Kindergartens - Literature review Example

Do Children in Full-day Kindergartens Learn More than Half-day Kindergartens? Introduction This literature review explores the learning advantages offered by full-day learning mode for kindergarten scholars against the alternative half-day learning mode. Full-day kindergarten is a mode of learning where children aged between four and six years are taken to formal learning centers before they enroll to first grade. The children remain in the learning centers for five to six hours a day, and the program runs from Monday to Friday. My interest in the topic draws from my intention to enter the business of offering private daycare and kindergarten services. I am particularly considering Ontario as a viable base to set up the business. In Ontario, full implementation of full-time day care (FDK) is scheduled to commence in September 2015. I plan to eventually roll out the business model to other provinces and possibly countries, and it is possible that FDK will not be in force there. Therefore, it is worth establishing at this point whether the FDK model I intend to roll out has better outcome for learners before confronting the half-day model that has been more popular in many regions. Literature Review Kindergarten learning is widely undertaken from either of two famous modes: full-time kindergarten (FDK) and half-day kindergarten (HDK). In this section, five previous papers that dwelt on the comparison of benefits accruing from adoption of FDK over HDK. The basic difference between FDK and HDK is the number of hours that learners spend in structured learning environments. In FDK, the kindergarten learners spend more time than in the HDK. Gibbs, C. R. (2014). Experimental evidence on early intervention: The impact of full-day kindergarten. Virginia: University of Virginia. The study investigated the impact of full-day versus half-day assignment modes on student literacy skills at the end of the kindergarten year. The abstract clearly outlines the purpose of the paper, and provides an overview of the overall results. However, the abstract does not offer evidence on the research process, the sample/ participants, and the type of analysis undertaken. These aspects comprise some of the crucial highlights of a research study that appear on the abstract and provide the reader with necessary insights into what to expect, and what the research is all about (Boaz & Ashby, 2003). From the onset, the researcher declared the funders of the study, who mainly comprised the Department of Education. He further noted that he did not have conflict of interest in carrying out the study. However, the University of Virginia (the employer) was also a significant funder, which raises questions on objectivity of the researcher in making conclusions that could influence policy implementation. The introduction does not seem to provide an obvious research question. Upon further review of the introduction, the research hypotheses (which are also not clearly outlined) provide a hint into the fact that the research investigated the literacy score benefits that emerge from adoption of the FDK system. Additionally, the study reviewed the cost implications of shifting from HDK to FDK. The literature review shows great relevance to the two research questions, majorly revolving around the earlier estimates provided as the cost implications of the system shift. Apparently, the literature on cost appears heavily divided between those who believe the shift in systems must be accompanied by substantial cost implications and those that think there are ways to avoid the excessive cost burden. This is a boost to the view on objectivity of the researcher since he borrows equally from both sides of the argument. The methodology section is an important part of any research study since it is the machine that could pass or fail the attainment of study objectives (Hussain & Asad, 2012). The methodology is clearly outlined, providing important details about the sample, the selection of participants, the data analysis phase, and the rationale for undertaking the statistical tests. The author’s choice of a quantitative approach to data collection and analysis is informed by the nature of the research question. Dwelling on performance (which is estimated by assessing examination performance in literacy tests) and economic roll-out impact (estimated in terms of dollars spent when different options are adopted), the resultant data is unavoidably quantitative. The study was conducted in the state of Indiana. The schools were drawn from five districts with varying population sizes. The author did not indicate the number of participants for each category. Due to the fact that data collection involved the inclusion of information from minors who do not have the legal authority to consent, the researcher ought to have clearly outlined the ethical considerations made when collecting information from the sample. However, there was no indication of how consents were obtained, or whether parents (who are a party of primary interest) consented to the study. Simple random sampling was used to assign participants to respective study modes. This method of sampling enhances credibility of a study since it potentially eliminates bias in selection. The results are well outlined and detailed to explain the findings thereof. Preliminary analysis was conducted to establish power of the study, which was correctly found to be adequate. Figures on differences in literacy tests’ performance indicate that kindergarteners enrolled in the FDK performed significantly better than those who enrolled in HDK. Similarly, a suitable regression model for determining the minimal establishment cost was developed. The model showed little variation to the existing costs of running a HDK model. The discussion explores every aspect of the results, providing insights into variations between the present results and those explored in the literature review. Equally, the conclusion borrows directly from the discussion, providing recommendations on applicability of the model, and the relevance of the literacy test results. Lash, A., Bae, S., Barrat, V., Burr, E. & Fong, T. (2008). Full-day kindergarten and student achievement: A literature review. Regional Education Laboratories. The research study was also funded by the U.S. Department of Education. The authors did not declare whether they had conflicting interests in the results. The abstract clearly outlined the purpose of the study. The study aimed at examining and summarizing the results of previous research studies; and explaining how the quality of a study design influences the strength of its findings. The criteria for selection of the studies included in the study was outlined in the abstract. Further, it provides an overview of the nature of results obtained from the analysis. The researcher remarks that the results consistently indicate significant improvement in performance among learners who undergo FDK. The introduction provides a highlight of the need to re-evaluate research designs even after articles and other publications undergo peer review. This emerges as the key determinant to telling whether the study is indeed appropriate for the research question or not. The inclusion and exclusion criteria are well outlined. For instance, studies that rely on similar data are eliminated on the basis of duplication. The inclusion criteria includes aspects of vigor of the research design and the academic relevance of the study. Similarly, the sample had to comprise exclusively pre-primary kindergarten learners. The studies explored took a FDK-HDK comparison mode. The final number of studies included 6 academic research papers and 8 reports. Ultimately, there was strict adherence to the selection criteria, which ensured relevance to the aims and that only adequately vigorous research studies were evaluated. From them, the researchers established that FDK has dominantly greater advantages HDK. Top among them is the promotion of higher levels of literacy, especially in language and mathematics. In conclusion, the researchers appear to draw from their experience where very few tests on the topic could pass for competent to highlight some of the important factors top consider when designing and implementing an analysis. For instance, the use of random sampling over subjective sampling is highlighted as a major boost to the credibility of a study. The conclusion is relevant based on the selection criteria adopted, that was in itself an important part of the analysis. Lee, V. E., Burkam, D. T., Ready, D. D., Honigman, J. & Meisels, S. J. (2006). Full-day versus half-day kindergarten: In which program do children learn more? American Journal of Education. 112(2): 163-208. The article was sponsored by the U.S. Department of Education. There is no note on authors’ lack of conflict of interest. The abstract provides an overview of the research questions that the study pursues. The research aims at showing that FDK yields higher levels of literacy. This shows that the researchers had a preconceived ideology that they were going to pursue. This opens the research to bias, as the results are meant to be a ‘stamp’ to some preconceived theoretical ideology other than providing a rigorous evaluation of the data from a neutral standpoint. This depletes credibility of the entire study and could represent a conflict of interest (Jeanfreau & Jack, 2010). Further bias in opinions is presented in the introduction, with the authors clearly indicating that they advocate for ‘greater preparation of kindergarteners’. This potentially provides a hint into the biased aim, since the standpoint of the researcher is clear. For instance, what could be the implications of finding that the results from the data used represent a different view from theirs? There is a high likelihood that the resulting results would be falsified to fit into the preconceived ideology. Besides these obvious shortfalls, the study clearly outlines the two research questions. Further, the researchers appear to selectively highlight literature that only supports their intended outcome, segregating studies that do not offer support for their findings to a section that talks about non-compared benefits of HDK. Again, this unfair presentation of facts. A conceptual model is developed along studies on school fees, characteristics of learners, and schools characteristics. This conceptual model is used to offer credence to the adoption of a multi-level approach to data analysis. There is a strong conviction in how the model leads to the type of analysis adopted. According to Van Houdt, Heyrman, Vanhaecht, Sermeus and De Lepeleire (2013), where a conceptual model is applied, it should present an outlook of the methodological approach used to investigate a phenomenon. The data was derived from the Early Childhood Longitudinal Study – Kindergarten cohort (1998-1999). The sample’s needs and educational standards could have revolutionized significantly since this data was collected, rendering the result obsolete by today’s standards. However, it draws relevance from the fact that it represents one of the developmental stages that kindergarten learning has undergone, highlighting perceptions and major characteristics. It provides worthy basis for evaluation against currently existing standards. The sample comprised over 8000 kindergarteners from 500 public schools. The criterion for selection of schools is clearly explained as the need to focus on institutions that experience greater effects due to changing policy on public education. As hypothesized, the results indeed show that students in the FDK program garner more benefits in terms of literacy gains and better quantitative skills. School setting and their impacts are also shown. For instance, the implication of being in a suburban locality over a relatively rural one has positive impact on the levels of literacy attained by learners. Besides an outline of the several findings, the study does not provide a discussion or a conclusion. This leaves the study looking incomplete as there is no harmonization of the aims, literature, and analysis; and recommendations are impossible to give (Vance, Talley, Azuero, Pearce & Christian, 2013). Indeed, this study appears to present more challenges of credibility and structure than the previous two. Milligan, C. (2012). Full-day kindergarten effects on later academic success. SAGE Open. 2(1): 1-11. The author was not funded for this research and provided a note on no conflict of interest. The abstract provides clear segmentation outlining the key stages and aspects of the study. For instance, it provides the aim as investigating the role of FDK as a means of improving academic performance in subsequent years. The introduction provides insight into the reason why the study was undertaken, pointing a gap in literature and alluding to the academic nature of the paper. Consequently, the research is highly credible having undergone peer review before publication. The introduction further provides a state-to-state outlook of regulation on FDK and its preference over HDK. Furthermore, the section provides notes on statement of the problem, historical overview, research question and significance of the study, further raising the criteria for its evaluation and ensuring clear engagement with the reader. A literature review delving further into the highlights of the introduction is provided as a separate section. The methods are clearly outlined, highlighting issues on sampling criteria, the setting and methods of analysis. The data collection procedure and the characteristics are also explained. Ethical forms for commissioning of data collection were filled and duly signed. As such, there was full compliance with ethical requirements for research. The use of quantitative data analysis method is suitable since the data available for the study, in line with the aims, is quantitative. The analysis shows the basic characteristics of the data, including racial segmentation, age, and gender comparisons. The sample comprised 208 kindergarten students from the state of California. The study establish no significant differences between the performance indexes of students who attended FDK and those who attended HDK. The discussion reflects upon some of the expectation drawn from the review of literature; literature littered with signs of significantly higher success for the FDK groups. The researcher recommends further review of the data and other data sources from different states to provide insight into whether any position is consistently correct or the results from any analysis would be merely random. This conforms to expectations for a reflective conclusion that provides recommendations based on major highlights of the study. References Boaz, A. & Ashby, D. (2003). Fit for purpose? Assessing research quality for evidence based policy and practice. London: ESRC UK Centre for Evidence Based Policy and Research. Gibbs, C. R. (2014). Experimental evidence on early intervention: The impact of full-day kindergarten. Virginia: University of Virginia. Hussain, B. & Asad, A. Z. (2012). A critique on feminist research methodology. Journal of Politics and Law. 5(4): 202-207. Jeanfreau, S. G. & Jack, L. (2010). Appraising qualitative research in health education: Guidelines for public educators. Health Promotion Practice. 11(5): 612-617. Lash, A., Bae, S., Barrat, V., Burr, E. & Fong, T. (2008). Full-day kindergarten and student achievement: A literature review. Regional Education Laboratories. Lee, V. E., Burkam, D. T., Ready, D. D., Honigman, J. & Meisels, S. J. (2006). Full-day versus half-day kindergarten: In which program do children learn more? American Journal of Education. 112(2): 163-208. Milligan, C. (2012). Full-day kindergarten effects on later academic success. SAGE Open. 2(1): 1-11. Robin, K. B., Frede, E. C. & Barnett, W. S. (2006). Is ‘more’ better? The effects of full-day vs. half-day pre-school on early school achievement. National Institute for Early Education Research Working Paper. New Jersey: Rutgers. Van Houdt, S., Heyrman, J., Vanhaecht, K., Sermeus, W. & De Lepeleire, J. (2013). An in-depth analysis of theoretical frameworks for the study of care coordination. International Journal of Integrated Care. Vol. 13, ISSN: 1568-4156. Vance, D. E., Talley, M., Azuero, A., Pearce, P. F. & Christian, B. J. (2013). Conducting an article critique for a quantitative research study: Perspectives for doctoral students and other novice readers. Nursing Research and Reviews. 3: 67-75. Read More