# data[].attributes.headline
Possible findings/good classroom practices or strategies related to our AOC

# data[].attributes.subject
Possible findings/good classroom practices or strategies related to our AOC

# data[].attributes.body
1. What are the possible findings/good classroom practices or strategies related to our AOC?

2. To what extend do the idea(s) fit our MK's/children's context?

(Indicate the key resources used)

# data[].attributes.headline
Findings from research about the root causes of our AOC/challenge? 

# data[].attributes.subject
Findings from research about the root causes of our AOC/challenge? 

# data[].attributes.body
1. What does findings from research tells us about the root causes of our AOC/challenge?

Examples:

Why children lack self management and social awareness?

Why they are unable to exercise self-control, express emotions appropriately, take turns during conversations and behave appropriately?

# data[].attributes.body
Social and emotional competencies

Preschool children (4 to 6 years old)

Self management

Social awareness

Self-control

Express emotions

Take turns during conversations

Behave appropriately

strategies or good practices

# data[].attributes.headline
How can I improve my child's social Behaviour?

# data[].attributes.subject
How can I improve my child's social Behaviour?

# data[].attributes.body
Keep reading for some helpful tips on developing social skills in your child!

-Encourage Them To Communicate. ...

-Teach Them To Share. ...

-Help Them Develop Empathy. ...

-Teach Them To Resolve Conflicts. ...

-Encourage Them To ---Make Friends. ...

-Model Good Social Behavior. ...

-Encourage Them To Ask Questions. ...

-Provide Positive Reinforcement.

https://www.beginlearning.com/parent-resources/social-skills-for-kids/

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
8 Important Social Skills For Kids And How To Teach Them - Begin Learning

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Learn eight easy ways to teach your child how to share, listen, cooperate, follow instructions and respect boundaries-with lots of patience!

# data[].attributes.headline
What are the current actions which are being implemented to manage or overcome the challenge?

# data[].attributes.subject
What are the current actions which are being implemented to manage or overcome the challenge?

# data[].attributes.body
1. Constant reminders are given to the children about the expectations and rules

Understood the expectations of 'self-control'

2. Use chants to gather attention when reminders are given

3. Visual reminders

4. Showing consequences of wasting time

5. Online timer

6. Heavy reliance on the teacher to resolve the needs of children or issues faced at class

# data[].attributes.body
Children may struggle with self-management because the areas of the brain responsible for executive function skills are not fully developed in early childhood. This means that children may be impulsive, distractible, and poor at planning, and require high levels of support.

https://theeducationhub.org.nz/supporting-childrens-self-management-skills/#:~:text=Children%20may%20struggle%20with%20self,require%20high%20levels%20of%20support.

# data[].attributes.headline
Emotional control issues as a combination of temperament and learned behavior.

# data[].attributes.subject
Emotional control issues as a combination of temperament and learned behavior.

# data[].attributes.body
“A child’s innate capacities for self-regulation are temperament and personality-based,” he explains. Some babies have trouble self-soothing, he adds, and get very distressed when you’re trying to bathe them or put on clothes. Those kids may be more likely to experience trouble with emotional self-regulation when they’re older.

But the environment plays a role as well. When parents give in to tantrums or work overtime to soothe their children when they get upset and act out, kids have a hard time developing self-discipline. “In those situations, the child is basically looking to the parents to be external self-regulators,” Dr. Rouse says. “If that’s a pattern that happens again and again, and a child is able to ‘outsource’ self-regulation, then that’s something that might develop as a habit.”

https://childmind.org/article/can-help-kids-self-regulation/

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
If you're a parent, chances are you've witnessed a tantrum or two in your day. We expect them in two-year-olds. But if your child reaches school age and meltdowns and outbursts are still frequent, it may be a sign that they have difficulty with emotional self-regulation.

Simply put, self-regulation is the difference between a two-year-old and a five-year-old who is more able to control their emotions. Helping kids who haven't developed self-regulation skills at the typical age is the goal of parent training programs. And many older children, even if they're beyond tantrums, continue to struggle with impulsive and inappropriate behavior.

What is self-regulation?

Self-regulation is the ability to manage your emotions and behavior in accordance with the demands of the situation. It includes being able to resist highly emotional reactions to upsetting stimuli, to calm yourself down when you get upset, to adjust to a change in expectations, and to handle frustration without an outburst. It is a set of skills that enables children, as they mature, to direct their own behavior towards a goal, despite the unpredictability of the world and our own feelings.

What does emotional dysregulation look like?

Problems with self-regulation manifest in different ways depending on the child, says Matthew Rouse, PhD, a clinical psychologist. "Some kids are instantaneous - they have a huge, strong reaction and there's no lead-in or build-up," he says. "They can't inhibit that immediate behavior response."

For other kids, he notes, distress seems to build up and they can only take it for so long. Eventually it leads to some sort of behavioral outburst. "You can see them going down the wrong path but you don't know how to stop it."

The key for both kinds of kids is to learn to handle those strong reactions and find ways to express their emotions that are more effective (and less disruptive) than having a meltdown.

Why do some kids struggle with self-regulation?

Dr. Rouse sees emotional control issues as a combination of temperament and learned behavior.

"A child's innate capacities for self-regulation are temperament and personality-based," he explains. Some babies have trouble self-soothing, he adds, and get very distressed when you're trying to bathe them or put on clothes. Those kids may be more likely to experience trouble with emotional self-regulation when they're older.

But the environment plays a role as well. When parents give in to tantrums or work overtime to soothe their children when they get upset and act out, kids have a hard time developing self-discipline. "In those situations, the child is basically looking to the parents to be external self-regulators," Dr. Rouse says. "If that's a pattern that happens again and again, and a child is able to 'outsource' self-regulation, then that's something that might develop as a habit."

Children with ADHD or anxiety may find it particularly challenging to manage their emotions, and need more help to develop emotional regulation skills.

How do we teach self-regulation skills?

Scott Bezsylko, the executive director of the Winston Prep schools for children with learning differences, says that acting out is essentially an ineffective response to a stimulus. The parent or teacher needs to help the child slow down and more carefully choose an effective response instead of being impulsive.

"We approach self-regulation skills in the same way we approach other skills, academic or social: isolate that skill and provide practice," Bezsylko explains. "When you think of it as a skill to be taught - rather than, say, just bad behavior - it changes the tone and content of the feedback you give kids. "

The key to learning self-regulation skills, says Dr. Rouse, is not to avoid situations that are difficult for kids to handle, but to coach kids through them and provide a supportive framework - clinicians call it "scaffolding" the behavior you want to encourage - until they can handle these challenges on their own.

Imagine a situation that can produce strong negative emotions, like a frustrating math homework assignment. If a parent hovers too much, they risk taking over the regulation role. "Instead of the child recognizing that the work is frustrating and figuring out how to handle it," Dr. Rouse explains, "what they feel is that the parent is frustrating them by making them do it."

Scaffolding in this situation might be helping the child with one problem, and then expecting them to try the rest. If they feel frustrated, they might get up and get a drink. They might use a timer to give themselves periodic breaks. The parent would check in on them at intervals, and offer praise for their efforts.

If a child is prone to melting down when they're asked to stop playing a video game, scaffolding might be practicing transitioning away from the game. "You'd want to practice with a game in which they're not overly invested - you don't want to begin with high-stakes," Dr. Rouse explains. "Have them practice playing for two or three minutes and then handing you the game. They get points towards something they want every time they do it."

Dry runs are another way to scaffold self-regulation. For instance, if you've had trouble with a child reacting impulsively or having a tantrum in a store, make a short visit when you don't need to do serious shopping. Have them practice walking with you, keeping their hands to themselves. They get points towards some goal every time they are successful.

Dr. Rouse says that often parents get discouraged when things don't go well the first time they try skill-building, but consistency and starting at a level that is appropriate for your child are key. Rather than giving up, try paring down the activity so it is more doable, and slowly give your child more and more independence to handle it.

For instance, if brushing their teeth is a problem for your child, you might start by focusing just on putting toothpaste on the brush, and respond with positive feedback and rewards when they do it. Once they've practiced that a few times, add the next step in the chain.

Similarly, if getting out the door in the morning is causing meltdowns, target one step at a time. First, say, getting dressed by 7:15. Once they've mastered that, set a target time for breakfast, and add that. Breaking the chain into small steps allows them to build self-regulation skills in manageable increments.

Help kids become self-reflective

Bezsylko stresses that when parents or teachers approach impulsive, inappropriate behavior calmly and give them time, kids can learn to choose better ways to respond to that situation. The feedback kids need is non-judgmental and non-emotional: what went wrong, and why, and how they can fix it next time.

"When kids are part of an environment that's reflective and analytic as opposed to emotional and fast-paced," Bezsylko explains, "they can learn to make better choices." Slowing down allows children to become more thoughtful, reflective and self-aware. "We need to slow down and model self-reflection and self-awareness and self-regulation for our kids," he notes, "but it's also helpful and good for us, too."

Bezsylko notes that mindfulness and meditation are good for everyone, but especially for children with self-regulation challenges. And Dr. Rouse mentions the many parent training programs available to help them become better coaches for their kids. For older kids, dialectical behavior therapy (DBT) is also an option, as it focuses on distress tolerance and emotion regulation.

At the end of the day, though, nothing can replace the work of the parent. "It seems to me," says Dr. Rouse, "that the family environment is the most important piece."

Frequently Asked Questions

How can I help my child regulate their emotions?

What is self-regulation in child development?

At what age can a child control their emotions?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How Can We Help Kids With Self-Regulation? - Child Mind Institute

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Tips for helping kids improve their self-regulation skills when they need help to control emotions, handle frustration and resist impulsive behavior. Advice from experts.

# data[].attributes.body
Self-control is generally seen as an umbrella term encompassing an attentional, a behavioral and possibly also an emotional component.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0163638317300899

Behavioral: more positive parenting has been suggested to have a protective effect on problem behavior development, especially for children with a difficult temperament. Self-control (i.e., effortful control) moderated the link between positive – but not negative – parenting and child problem behavior

Externalizing problems often emerge during the preschool period, typically include aggressive and noncompliant behaviors, and are thought to be maintained largely through coercive parent–child interactions.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0193397303000431

# data[].attributes.headline
Teach Social and Emotional Skills Intentionally

# data[].attributes.subject
Teach Social and Emotional Skills Intentionally

# data[].attributes.body
Teachers can intentionally support children’s social and emotional health by using children’s books, planning activities, coaching on the spot, giving effective praise, modeling appropriate behaviors, and providing cues.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
In a preschool classroom, some of the 3- and 4-year-old children smile, laugh, and giggle during free play; are curious about what happens next during story time; ask what and why questions while doing hands-on activities; and use words to express feelings and needs. In the toy area, Tom and Juan both reach for a small blue car. Tom says, "May I please have it first, then you have it later?" Juan replies, "You have it for five minutes and then I have it for five minutes." Noticing this exchange, their teacher says, "Tom and Juan, you are talking about taking turns. What a great way to play together!"

Tom, Juan, and their classmates are a model of social and emotional health in preschool. Children who are socially and emotionally healthy tend to demonstrate, and continue to develop, several important behaviors and skills (adapted from McClellan & Katz 2001 and Bilmes 2012). They

Are usually in a positive mood

Listen and follow directions

Have close relationships with caregivers and peers

Care about friends and show interest in others

Recognize, label, and manage their own emotions

Understand others' emotions and show empathy

Express wishes and preferences clearly

Gain access to ongoing play and group activities

Are able to play, negotiate, and compromise with others

Why social and emotional health matters

Children's social and emotional health affects their overall development and learning. Research indicates that children who are mentally healthy tend to be happier, show greater motivation to learn, have a more positive attitude toward school, more eagerly participate in class activities, and demonstrate higher academic performance than less mentally healthy peers (Hyson 2004; Kostelnik et al. 2015). Children who exhibit social and emotional difficulties tend to have trouble following directions and participating in learning activities. Compared with healthier peers, they may be more likely to suffer rejection by classmates, have low self-esteem, do poorly in school, and be suspended (Hyson 2004; Kostelnik et al. 2015). Thus, children's social and emotional health is just as important as their physical health, and affects their capacity to develop and potential to lead a fulfilling life.

Teachers can promote children's social and emotional health in many ways, for example, by organizing a material-rich environment to stimulate social interactions among children. This article focuses on two of the most important practices: building trusting relationships and conducting intentional teaching.

Establish trusting relationships

Young children develop and learn in the context of relationships. A trusting and caring teacher-child relationship is essential for children's optimum development (Raikes & Edwards 2009). Children who have trusting relationships with their teachers are, on average, more willing to ask questions, solve problems, try new tasks, and express their thinking than their peers without such relationships (O'Connor & McCartney 2007). In her work supervising student teachers, Ho (the first author) often sees children developing positive social and emotional health as a result of close relationships with their teachers. For example, children learn to use words to express their feelings-such as Amy saying to Emily, "I am sad when you use hurting words!"-and to show empathy-as when Arjun gently pats Brian's head and says, "Are you okay? Do you want to hold the teddy bear?"

Children benefit socially, emotionally, and academically when teachers intentionally create close, trusting relationships (Palermo et al. 2007). But gaining the trust of every child is not as simple as being nice and engaging. How can teachers create trusting relationships with all of the children? Consistently offering warmth, affection, respect, and caring is essential.

Showing warmth and affection consistently

Warmth and affection-even on bad days and when children are misbehaving-are critical to children's well-being in early education settings (Ostrosky & Jung 2005). They contribute to developing secure relationships between children and adults, provide models of gentle behavior, and are linked with children's ability to interact positively with peers (Twardosz 2005). The preschoolers we observed used gentle hands and kind words and positively interacted with peers most of the time. Their social and emotional well-being was nourished by their teachers' warmth and affection, which is shown in the following examples:

Ms. Johnson displays a pleasant facial expression throughout the day. She smiles when greeting children in the morning, says goodbye in the afternoon, and acknowledges children's appropriate behaviors.

Mr. Logan uses the appropriate tone of voice at all times. His speech is at normal pitch and volume; his tone is relaxed and soft. Even when he has to redirect a child's behavior, he remains calm and warm to convey that his concern is with the behavior-not the child.

Ms. Aragon gives appropriate touches when necessary, such as a pat on the back, a handshake, hugs, and brief tickles.

Ms. Lizama moves physically close to the children and bends or crouches to be at the children's eye level while talking to them.

Mr. Sharma often uses loving comments to show he cares: "I am so happy to see you this morning!," "I missed you yesterday," "I love seeing your smile!" And he is careful to make such comments to all of the children in his classroom.

Respecting and caring about every child

Showing respect is a key way to connect with children and strengthen positive relationships. It helps children feel more confident and competent to explore and learn (Dombro, Jablon, & Stetson 2011). Ms. Carnes establishes and maintains close personal bonds with every child in her classroom by consistently acting in respectful and caring ways. Specifically, she

Listens with full attenti on and restates what children say (often also seizing the opportunity to expose the children to new vocabulary). Jason, a 4-year-old, says, "Look, I made a truck with lots of Legos!" Ms. Carnes replies, "Oh, I see, Jason. You built a truck with dozens of Legos." Jason adds, "I use this truck to deliver apples and bananas to the grocery store." Ms. Carnes responds, "Using a truck to deliver nutritious fruits to the grocery store is helpful." Listening to children attentively and reflectively enhances their self-worth and confidence. When teachers actively listen to children, they convey that they care about what the children have to say, and the children are more likely to share their thoughts, ideas, feelings, and stories.

Accepts and reflects children's feel ings. Frowning, Jasper says to the teacher, "Michael has all the big blocks!" Ms. Carnes responds, "Jasper, you seem upset that there are no more large blocks to build with right now. It is difficult to wait!" Amy says with enthusiasm, "We are about to go outside!" Ms. Carnes answers, "The sparkles in your eyes tell me you can hardly wait to go outside. You are excited." When they accept and reflect children's feelings, teachers exhibit sensitivity and caring in a way children understand. Teachers' acknowledgments make children feel heard and accepted (Duffy 2008). As a result, children feel safe to express their emotions-and receive support in identifying, labeling, and better understanding their emotions.

Spends private, quality time with individual chi ldren through one-on-one activities, such as story reading and game pla ying. Emily is sad when her mom leaves. Ms. Carnes reads her a book in a cozy corner with soft pillows and stuffed animals. Afterward, Emily is ready to explore and play in the classroom. Judy complains that no one wants to play with her at the tactile table. Ms. Carnes sits at the table and plays with Judy until another child joins the play. In addition, Ms. Carnes spends quality time with individual children by putting aside other work, moving to the child's level, and conversing openly with the child. Ms. Carnes keeps track to ensure that she speaks with each child regularly, which deepens their relationship and builds trust (Gartrell 2007). Ms. Carnes finds time for these conversations throughout the day, especially during greeting, free play, snack, lunch, and departure time.

Teach social and emotional skills intentionally

Helping children develop social and emotional skills is the heart and soul of any good program for young children (Gordon & Browne 2014). Teachers (and all caregivers) play key roles in helping children develop social and emotional competence (Kostelnik et al. 2015). Teachers can intentionally support children's social and emotional health by using children's books, planning activities, coaching on the spot, giving effective praise, modeling appropriate behaviors, and providing cues.

Warmth and affection-even on bad days and when children are misbehaving-are critical to children's well-being in early education.

Using children's books

Reading and discussing children's books is an excellent way to invite children to identify the characters' emotions and relate the characters' experiences to their own (Roberts & Crawford 2008). To introduce a new social or emotional skill, Ms. Coz carefully chooses high-quality books to read aloud at circle time. Sometimes she chooses books related to children's recent social and emotional behaviors in the classroom. When she sees some of the children having trouble sharing toys, she reads aloud The Rainbow Fish, by Marcus Pfister. When she finds a child crying because her friend hit her, Ms. Coz reads aloud Hands Are Not for Hitting, by Elizabeth Verdick. (See " Children's Books for Teaching Social and Emotional Skills," for more titles to consider.)

To connect the characters and situations in the book with the children's experiences, Ms. Coz plans to read the book at least twice and also add it to the classroom library. During the second reading, she asks meaningful questions: "What do you think the characters are feeling?," "How would you solve the problem?," "Can you use words from the story to explain how you feel when you . . .?," "What could we do differently if this happens in our classroom?" These open-ended questions enable children to talk about their own experiences, learn new vocabulary words, and practice social and emotional skills.

Planning activities

To extend and apply what children learn from reading stories, Ms. Coz plans follow-up activities, such as hands-on crafts, games, and songs. She often uses Book Nook guides, created by the Center on the Social and Emotional Foundations for Early Learning ( http://csefel.vanderbilt.edu/resources/strategies.html#booknook). These guides help her embed social and emotional development activities into daily routines, including read-alouds. (See " Activities for Supporting Children's Social and Emotional Learning " for some ideas adapted from Book Nook guides.)

Coaching on the spot

When they coach children on the spot, teachers help children realize what they are doing, understand how their actions affect others, and choose positive alternatives (Riley et al. 2008). For example, when Ryan and Ethan build a firehouse in the block area, Ethan grabs the fire truck from Ryan, and Ryan cries. Ms. Coz crouches down at Ethan's level to look into his eyes; calmly and warmly, she says, "Ryan was still using the truck. When you took it away from him, he got upset. What could you do to make Ryan feel better?" After Ethan says he is sorry and gives back the fire truck, Ms. Coz says, "Next time if you want to play with the toy Ryan is using, could you ask if he will share?" Ms. Coz follows up by observing Ethan and providing immediate positive feedback on his desirable behavior.

Giving effective praise

Meaningful feedback pertinent to the task at hand in the form of effective praise is a powerful strategy for fostering children's social and emotional development (Kostelnik et al. 2015). To make praise effective, teachers describe specifically what they see-without generalizing, evaluating, or making comparisons. When Emily finishes her drawing, Ms. Coz notices her picture and her smile. Ms. Coz says, "I see a blue sky, a yellow sun, and green grass around the big brown tree. This picture makes you happy, doesn't it?" This praise is effective because Ms. Coz offers detailed, positive comments immediately after desirable behavior occurs. Noticing Ethan asking Ryan politely for a policewoman figure, Ms. Coz says, "Ethan, you used the magic words May I plea se? to ask for that policewoman while you and Ryan were building the firehouse together. Great job!" Smiling, Ethan responds, "We are friends and we can share things."

Modeling appropriate behavior

Children learn by observing other people, getting ideas about how new behaviors are formed, and using the ideas to guide their actions (Bandura 1977). Many studies have found that modeling-or demonstrating appropriate behaviors-teaches and enhances children's social and emotional skills (Katz & McClellan 1997; Hyson 2004). This research-based conclusion is evidenced in Ms. Coz's and Ms. Carnes's classes. Both teachers implement several noninvasive strategies-including modeling-that their center administrators created to support teachers in promoting socially and emotionally healthy behaviors. They display the strategies on the classroom wall and put them into action by

Moving closer to children, when needed, as a nonverbal cue to rethink behaviors

Modeling appropriate warm and respectful behavior throughout the day and at specific moments when a gentle reminder is needed

Using nonverbal gestures and contact (e.g., nodding the head, giving thumbs-up signs, and touching children gently on the shoulder) to send messages

Employing simple language (e.g., "Walking feet, please" and "Use gentle hands") to set expectations and give reminders

Acknowledging a kind act on the spot or praising a group effort for a job well done

Placing a hand-gently-on a child's hand to redirect attention and behavior

When children see teachers demonstrate these noninvasive strategies, they often smile, use their gentle hands, say please and thank you, give hugs and high fives, and use words to express their feelings.

In addition to being role models, the teachers use the children's appropriate behaviors to model social and emotional skills. They carefully observe and record details about how children apply the target skills, and they share their observations with the children through puppet shows during circle time. Using puppets to demonstrate children's appropriate behaviors helps children learn social and emotional skills meaningfully.

Providing cues

Providing cues to engage children in appropriate social behavior has been shown over time to improve their social behavior with their peers (Bovey & Strain 2005). Ms. Coz and Ms. Carnes often provide verbal cues to help some children participate in activities. Before playtime, for example, Ms. Carnes asks, "James, who are you going to ask to play with you at center time?" During playtime, she suggests, "Saanvi, can you ask Anna to build an airplane with you?" To teach sharing and turn taking, Ms. Coz asks Steven, who has been waiting to play with a toy dolphin for a while, "What magic words could you use to have a turn with the dolphin John is using?"

Both Ms. Coz and Ms. Carnes prominently display visual cues in their classrooms to assist children's social and emotional interactions. For example, they provide teacher-made hand puppets to guide children to use quiet voices, helping hands, and walking feet. To help children calm down, they also created a "push wall"-a designated spot on the wall to push anger out-and use puppets to demonstrate the strategy. These puppets, demonstrations, and explanations are essential for clarifying and modeling appropriate behavior-and the visual cues are essential for reminding the children to practice what they have learned. Long-term visual cues function like a third teacher in the sense that children use the cues to remind one another of solutions and appropriate actions.

Teachers and caregivers promote children's social and emotional health by establishing trusting relationships, created when teachers express warmth, affection, and respect. Teachers can intentionally teach and enhance these skills using evidence-based strategies to teach, model, and reinforce positive behaviors. As evidenced in the preschool classrooms we observed, teachers who prioritize developing children's social and emotional health are richly rewarded with happy, engaged children who learn to avoid and resolve conflicts, share and take turns, and express their emotions in productive ways.

Children's Books for Teaching Social and Emotional Skills

Can You Be a Friend?, by Nita Everly

Care Bears Caring Contest, by Nancy Parent, illus. by David Stein

Fox Makes Friends, by Adam Relf

How Do Dinosaurs Play with Their Friends?, by Jane Yolen and Mark Teague

How I Feel Frustrated, by Marcia Leonard

I Can Do It Myself (a Sesame Street Series), by Emily Perl Kingsley, illus. by Richard Brown

I'm in Charge of Me!, by David Parker, illus. by Sylvia Walker

Mouse Was Mad, by Linda Urban, illus. by Henry Cole

My Many Colored Days, by Dr. Seuss, illus. by Steve Johnson and Lou Fancher

Sharing: How Kindness Grows, by Fran Shaw, illus. by Miki Sakamoto

When I'm Feeling Sad, by Trace Moroney

When Sophie Gets Angry-Really, Really Angry, by Molly Bang

Activities for Supporting Children's Social and Emotional Learning

Helping hands chain: Trace and cut out multiple hands for each child. Place them in a pocket or baggie that is easily accessible. As you recognize a child's helping hand behavior, have the child get a hand from their pocket and connect it to the class's helping hand chain. The hands can be placed on the wall to wrap around the room. On a regular basis, celebrate how long the helping hand chain is getting!

Hand puppets: Create character puppets by having children color or paint the pictures, cut them out, and glue them to craft sticks. Once dry, children can bring their puppets to circle time and act out the story while you read the story aloud. Later, they can take the puppets to the story area or puppet center.

Moving to music: Choose songs with lyrics that encourage movement. Before you start, remind the children that they need to listen closely to the words so they know what actions to take. Classic songs like "Head, Shoulders, Knees, and Toes" work well. Many children's CDs have great songs that involve following directions (try "My Ups and Downs," and "Hands Are for Clapping," by Jim Gill). Do the motions with the children as you listen to the songs. After listening to each song several times, children will build confidence and know which motions to do on their own. Point out to the children that they know what to do because they are being such good listeners.

Pass the feeling bag: Place an assortment of scenario picture cards in a bag. As music plays, the children pass the bag. When the music stops, one child picks out a card and identifies it. Have the child talk about how each scenario or item makes him feel and why. Allow children to take turns pulling out picture cards.

Feeling faces collage: Have children cut out different feeling faces from magazines. Mix nontoxic glue and water together in a small bowl. The children put the pictures on top of a piece of paper, take a paintbrush and dip it in glue solution, and paint over their pictures. They can hang their feeling faces collages on the wall.

Share box: Create a special share box that is only introduced during circle time. Children can decorate the box with primary colors or with a bold pattern. Inside the box, place items that can be shared, such as musical instruments, a box of chunky sidewalk chalk, playdough, or several sensory bottles.

Singing: After a story about sharing with friends, sing "Share, share, share your toys; share them with a friend. Share, share, share your toys, let's all play pretend," to the tune of "Row, Row, Row Your Boat." After a story about feelings, sing "If You're Happy and You Know It" with a variety of emotions and body gestures.

Note: Adapted with permission from Book Nook, created by the Center on the Social and Emotional Foundations for Early Learning. To use Book Nook guides at no cost, visit http://csefel.vanderbilt.edu/resources/strategies.html#booknook.

References

Bandura, A. 1977. Social Learning Theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Bilmes, J. 2012. Beyond Behavior Manage ment: The Six Life Skills Childre n Need, 2nd ed. St. Paul, MN: Redleaf.

Bovey, T., & P. Strain. 2005. "Strategies for Increasing Peer Social Interactions: Prompting and Acknowledgment." Center on the Social and Emotional Foundations for Early Learning. What Works Briefs. http://csefel.vanderbilt.edu/briefs/wwb17.pdf.

Dombro, A.L., J. Jablon, & C. Stetson. 2011. Powerful Interactions: How to Connect with Children to Extend Their Learning. Washington, DC: National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC).

Duffy, R. 2008. "Are Feelings Fixable?" Exchange 30 (6): 87-90.

Gartrell, D. 2007. A Guidance Approach for the Encouraging Classroom, 4th ed. Florence, KY: Thomson Delmar Learning.

Gordon, A.M., & K.W. Browne. 2014. Beginnings and Beyond: Foundati ons in Early Childhood Education, 9th ed. Belmont, CA: Cengage.

Hyson, M. 2004. The Emotional Development of Young Chil dren: Building an Emotion-Centered Curric ulum, 2nd ed. New York: Teachers College Press.

Katz, L.G., & D.E. McClellan. 1997. Fostering Children's Social Competence: The Teacher's Role. Washington, DC: NAEYC.

Kostelnik, M.J., A.K. Soderman, A.P. Whiren, M.L. Rupiper, & K.M. Gregory. 2015. Guiding Children's Social Development and L earning: Theory and Skills, 8th ed. Stamford, CT: Cengage.

McClellan, D., & L.G. Katz. 2001. "Assessing Young Children's Social Competence." Champaign, IL: ERIC Clearinghouse on Elementary and Early Childhood Education. http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED450953.pdf.

O'Connor, E., & K. McCartney. 2007. "Examining Teacher-Child Relationships and Achievement as Part of an Ecological Model of Development." American Educational R esearch Journal 44 (2): 340-69.

Ostrosky, M.M., & E.Y. Jung. 2005. "Building Positive Teacher-Child Relationships." Center on the Social and Emotional Foundations for Early Learning. What Works Briefs. http://csefel.vanderbilt.edu/briefs/wwb12.pdf.

Palermo, F., L.D. Hanish, C.L. Martin, R.A. Fabes, & M. Reiser. 2007. "Preschoolers' Academic Readiness: What Role Does the Teacher-Child Relationship Play?" Early Childhood Research Quarterly 22 (4): 407-22. www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3856866.

Raikes, H.H., & C.P. Edwards. 2009. Exte nding the Dance in Infant and Toddler Caregiving: Enhancing Attachment and Relationships. Baltimore, MD: Brookes.

Riley, D., R.R. San Juan, J. Klinkner, & A. Ramminger. 2008. Social and Emotional Developm ent: Connecting Science and Practice in Early Childhood Settings. St. Paul, MN: Redleaf; Washington, DC: NAEYC.

Roberts, S.K., & P.A. Crawford. 2008. "Real Life Calls for Real Books: Literature to Help Children Cope with Family Stressors." Young Children 63 (5): 12-17.

Twardosz, S. 2005. "Expressing Warmth and Affection to Children." Center on the Social and Emotional Foundations for Early Learning. What Works Briefs. http://csefel.vanderbilt.edu/briefs/wwb20.pdf.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Promoting Young Children's Social and Emotional Health

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Trusting relationships and intentional teaching improve young children's social and emotional health.

# data[].attributes.headline
Brain Development and Reasons for Individual Differences in Self-control in Children

# data[].attributes.subject
Brain Development and Reasons for Individual Differences in Self-control in Children

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.bu.edu/cdl/files/2013/08/Tarullo-Obradovic-Gunnar-2009.pdf

Brain Development

Self control in children is influenced by the development of the brain.

Several brain regions support the skills relevant to self-control. For effective self-control, these regions all need to be interconnected and must communicate with each other. The child’s behavior is determined by a system of checks and balances between different parts of the brain working together.

Children's brains are still developing. Early childhood environment helps to shape self-control pathways in the developing brain.

Reasons for Differences in Self-control in Children

1. Family and culture

Sensitive parenting in early childhood that supports autonomy helps children to develop self-control strategies.

Experience with multiple languages also can affect the development of self-control. Bilingual children do better than monolingual children on attention control tasks that require shifting attention from one feature to another.

Children growing up in cultures that place a high emphasis on the importance of self-control tend to develop self-control abilities faster.

2. Temperament

These temperamental differences are brain based. Individuals who have more brain activity occurring in the left frontal area of their brain tend to be eager to approach and explore unfamiliar situations and objects. In contrast, those who have more activity in the right frontal area tend to (a) avoid unfamiliar situations and objects and ( b) be more fearful, cautious, and easily distressed.

Syah

# data[].attributes.body
Scholars have identified the essentials tenants of ‘play’ including that it must be enjoyable, children must be able to have choice, children are engaged, and if they can modify the activity (Neumann, 1971).

Furthermore, research in the past decade also suggests that self-regulation and play are linked developmentally.

When children are engaged in play, they develop and practice skills that are essential to self-regulated learning.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Research

Open access

Published:

International Journal of Child Care and Education Policy 15, Article number: 8 (2021) Cite this article

12k Accesses

6 Citations

3 Altmetric

Metrics

Abstract

Research has consistently demonstrated that self-regulation is essential for the development and preservation of health and well-being in the early years and across the lifespan. Based on the emerging literature on the important role of self-regulation in promoting healthy child development, policymakers have made efforts to include self-regulation skills in practice and policy documents worldwide. Despite efforts to include self-regulation skills in early years curriculum documents, there is limited understanding by teachers, scholars, and policymakers of what self-regulation is and how best to support it in the day-to-day classroom. This limited understanding is perpetuated by a lack of a unified definition of self-regulation. Thus, it becomes important to examine these efforts in a critical way. In Ontario, where the research was completed, a revised play-based full-day kindergarten program was introduced in 2016. In this research we use a qualitative document analysis approach to compare the conceptualization of self-regulation in Ontario's revised play-based kindergarten program with theory-driven models of self-regulation from empirical research. Analysis was iterative, and themes emerged based upon a coding scheme developed by the research team. Results suggest that co-regulation has a powerful influence on student learning. In addition, the policy document de-emphasizes behavioral regulation and expands cognitive regulation to include more than inhibitory control. Lastly, the kindergarten program discusses metacognition in relation to the use of language to articulate one's thinking with little attention to goal-directed behaviors. In this paper, explicit recommendations for policymakers and practitioners are provided to ensure that emerging conceptualizations of self-regulation are promoted in early years curricula. Further, empirical evidence is needed to support why it is necessary to understand emerging conceptualizations of self-regulation and outline implications for current early years curricula.

Background

Numerous learning benefits resulting from changes to Kindergarten programming include increased instructional time, improved academic outcomes, and a focus on developing self-regulation (Youmans et al., 2018). Self-regulation develops across the lifespan, but there is evidence suggesting that the first five years of life are particularly important for self-regulation development (Timmons et al., 2016, 2019; McCain et al., 2011). Self-regulation skills in kindergarten are related to improved learning outcomes and achievement (Blair & Raver, 2015; Edossa et al., 2017; McClelland & Cameron, 2012). Furthermore, measures of self-regulation in the early years have shown to predict future academic success, physical and mental health, income, occupational attainment, and risk taking behaviors (Blair & Raver, 2015; Duckworth, 2011; McClelland & Cameron, 2012; Moffitt et al., 2011; Pandey et al., 2018; Timmons et al., 2016, 2019; Zimmerman, 2002).

Self-regulation involves the ability to monitor one's behaviors, emotions, cognitive processes, and social interactions within academic contexts (Zimmerman & Schunk, 2001) and within specific academic domains or skills such as mathematics (e.g., Blair & Razza, 2007; Cleary & Chen, 2009) and reading (Becker et al., 2014; Lonigan et al., 2017). The various aspects of self-regulation have different developmental trajectories with emotional regulation typically developing prior to behavioral regulation skills (Howse et al., 2003). Researchers emphasize that by the time children are three years of age, behavioral regulation skills develop at a faster rate than they have previously (Best & Miller, 2010; Rothbart et al., 2006).

Research over the past decade has broadened to include an examination of how individuals can support others in regulating their behaviors often referred to as co-regulation and socially shared regulation (e.g., Hadwin et al., 2010, 2011). Co-regulation occurs when one learner is supported by another or multiple learners to perform a specific task and develop self-regulatory skills (McCaslin & Hickey, 2001). Socially shared regulation is the process of multiple learners regulating an activity at the onset of the task which includes co-construction of the goals and strategies used (Jackson et al., 2000). More recently, researchers are beginning to examine the role of motivational beliefs in self-regulation (e.g., Scholer et al., 2018) and conceptually relating self-regulation to classroom assessment (e.g., Chen & Bonner, 2019). Generally, research has focused on connecting one specific aspect of classroom assessment to self-regulation, formative assessment which is the process of collecting data and sharing feedback to further direct student learning. The process of formative assessment can be facilitated by the teacher or by the students. Encouraging students to self-assess, reflect, or peer-assess puts them at the center of the assessment process (Clark, 2012; Panadero et al., 2018). By engaging students in the process of formative assessment they can better understand the learning conditions including the expectations while also providing them with a sense of agency (Clark, 2012; Smith et al., 2016). Formative assessment provides students with the opportunity to select different learning strategies, implement the strategies, and then reflect on the extent to which their strategies allowed them to attain their learning goals (Clark, 2012). Metacognition and self-regulation are related concepts; students need to be able to think about their learning and understand their cognitive processes (metacognition) in order to regulate their behaviors (Zimmerman, 2002). The conceptualization of self-regulation is broadening as it now encompasses the involvement of others as a strategy to help develop regulatory behaviors, thus, there is increased interest in how student involvement in various assessment processes can also encourage co-regulation (Panadero et al., 2018).

Conceptualizations of self-regulation

Traditionally, self-regulation was defined as the ability to control behaviors and emotions (Bandura, 1982, 1986). This conceptualization has evolved to include individual and social aspects including the ability to regulate behavior, cognition, and emotions, when working to accomplish a goal (Bauer & Baumeister, 2011; Diamond & Lee, 2011; Zimmerman, 2000). A facet of self-regulation, termed self-regulated learning, focuses on how a learner plans for their learning, uses various strategies, and engages in ongoing efforts to meet their desired goals. Through a social psychological lens, self-regulated learning can be understood through a cyclical process consisting of the forethought phase, the performance phase, and the self-reflection phase (Zimmerman, 2002). The forethought phase includes processes and an individual's beliefs before they start engaging in the learning process. This might include self-efficacy beliefs or setting goals. The second phase, performance phase is centered around processes that occur during the period of learning such as using strategies and maintaining focus. Lastly, the third phase, termed the self-reflection phase includes processes after the period of learning such as evaluating the extent to which the goal was met, and the amount of satisfaction experienced by the learner.

Despite the models of self-regulation discussed above, self-regulation as a construct remains fragmented and lacks a unified definition across contexts. This lack of a unified definition adds an additional barrier as practitioners work to develop students' self-regulation skills (Boekaerts & Corno, 2005; Burman et al., 2015). Despite the fragmentation of the field, it is well understood that self-regulation is malleable and can be developed from a young age. Thus, early childhood educators and teachers are in a unique position to support the development of self-regulation in students in the early years. More specifically, this can be accomplished by providing students with explicit opportunities to practice regulating their behaviors, emotions, social interactions, and cognitive processes with direct feedback (Meusen-Beekman et al., 2015).

As mentioned earlier, one strategy used to develop students' self-regulatory skills is co-regulation, a type of social regulation and scaffolding strategy (Bailey & Heritage, 2018). Co-regulation is the process of a 'more capable' individual regulating another individual (McCasslin, 2009). Teachers are in an excellent position to act as the 'more capable' other to regulate their students until they are able to self-regulate. A study conducted by Kurki and colleagues ( 2016) examined how early childhood teachers engaged in co-regulation in childcare settings. They collected video data of challenging social and emotional situations and used these videos to guide interviews with teachers 2-4 weeks following the observations. The findings reveal that teachers use a variety of strategies to help students regulate themselves including providing instructions for their behavior, providing a solution verbally, and encouraging discussion of emotions. During instances that were more challenging, teachers would use multiple strategies. The results demonstrated that teachers have some awareness of their use of co-regulation strategies, but could benefit from increased awareness.

Traditionally, researchers did not believe that young children were capable of self-regulating; however, the work of Schunk and Zimmerman ( 1994) revealed that these skills can be developed during the preschool years. By 2007, Whitebread and colleagues moved the field forward by providing classroom observational data suggested that students between three and five years of age were capable of demonstrating early variations of self-regulatory behaviors such as correcting the behaviors of other students by pointing and gesturing or by verbally providing them with corrective instructions. Methodological limitations have been offered as one barrier as to why early research on self-regulation did not showcase the capabilities of young children, including developmentally inappropriate tools for measuring self-regulation in young children (Whitebread et al., 2009). With the development of new tools for measuring self-regulation behaviors in young children (e.g., Perels et al., 2009; Ponitz et al., 2009; Whitebread et al., 2009), we can work towards better understanding how young children are able to regulate their behaviors in the early years.

Early childhood and play

One challenge is that there is controversy over what is meant by play-based learning (Hawes et al., 2012; Pyle & Danniels, 2017). At one end of the spectrum are those that believe that play-based learning means providing children with unstructured play that is free from adult influence or interference (e.g., "free play"), while at the other end of the spectrum are those who see play-based learning as an opportunity to structure play for children with pre-established rules and expectations that should be followed (Hawes et al., 2012). Similarly, Pyle and Danniels ( 2017) found two different profiles in regard to teacher understanding of play-based learning (Pyle & Danniels, 2017). The first profile saw play and learning as separate constructs, these educators reported challenges in meeting academic demands using a play-based approach (children in these classrooms were primarily observed engaging in free play). The second profile included educators who believed that play supported academic learning and that teachers have an important role in supporting learning through play (children in these classrooms engaged in a variety of play opportunities that were situated along a continuum from child-directed to more teacher-directed play).

Self-regulation and play

Self-regulation as a process continues to expand in empirical literature; thus, there is a need to understand the ways in which this expansion is reflected in mandated early learning curriculum and policy documents. In Ontario, where the research was completed, a revised play-based full-day early learning kindergarten program was introduced in 2016 in a time and context in which a growing body of evidence pointed to the importance of play and self-regulation in promoting healthy child development (e.g., Bodrova & Leong, 2008; Durlak et al., 2011; Moffitt et al., 2010). Furthermore, research in the past decade also suggests that self-regulation and play are linked developmentally (Diamond & Lee, 2011; Timmons, 2019). When children are engaged in play, they develop and practice skills that are essential to self-regulated learning. For example, play provides opportunities for children to engage in flexible thinking, sustained attention, and goal-directed behavior. These are the types of behaviors that theorists argue are at the core of self-regulation (Baumeister & Vohs, 2011; Vohs & Baumeister, 2017). Taken together, the above research findings provide robust justification for investment in play-based programming. Despite growing knowledge that self-regulation can be fostered through play, little is known about what differentiates effective forms of play. For example, in 2008, Blair and Diamond noted that although the Tools of the Mind Curriculum (an early childhood curriculum designed to foster children's executive function skills) fosters self-regulation skills, it was unclear what specific aspects of teacher-child and child-child interactions and play actually contribute to the development of self-regulation.

Given the controversy of what is meant by play-based learning it is not surprising that there is a lack of clarity in regards to what types of play foster self-regulated learning. This is further problematized by the lack of unified definition of self-regulation (Burman et al., 2015). Therefore, more research is needed in understanding the ways in which play-based learning and self-regulation are defined and promoted in practice and policy documents while also examining how these conceptualizations map onto definitions found in empirical literature. This research is necessary to ensure that policies involving play-based learning and self-regulation are aligned with theoretical conceptions in order to best equip teachers for success in the classroom using evidence-based practices. Thus, the purpose of this research is to understand and compare practice-oriented conceptualizations of self-regulation in a play-based policy document with theory-driven definitions from empirical literature. This research is important in understanding the extent to which practice-oriented conceptualizations are guided by the theoretical underpinnings of self-regulation. In this research, a qualitative document analysis was conducted to compare the conceptualization of self-regulation in Ontario's play-based Kindergarten program (Ontario Ministry of Education, 2016) with theory-driven models of self-regulation from empirical research. The results of this research indicate a need for policymakers to consider emerging conceptualizations of self-regulation when promoting the development of self-regulatory skills in kindergarten.

Setting the context

Ontario's full-day kindergarten program was phased in over five years, beginning in 2010, with the goal to provide universally accessible Junior and Senior full-day (5 days a week) kindergarten across Ontario. The Kindergarten program is not mandatory in Ontario although the majority of parents/guardians opt to register their children in Kindergarten. There is also no cost for attending Kindergarten in Ontario (Ontario Ministry of Education, 2021a). Enrollment during the 2019-2020 year included 130,230 students in Junior Kindergarten and 136,544 in Senior Kindergarten (Ontario Ministry of Education, 2021b). The purpose of the full-day kindergarten program is to establish a strong foundation for learning that is child-centered, developmentally appropriate, and integrated for four- and-five-year-old children (Ontario Ministry of Education, 2016). A child-centered approach is achieved in the full-day kindergarten program through a play-based environment that promotes the physical, social, emotional, and cognitive development of all children. Six fundamental principles guide the full-day kindergarten program and are reflective of the values, beliefs and best practices of current research in early learning (Ontario Ministry of Education, 2016). Principle 5 specifically acknowledges the link between play and learning for young children, "play is a means to early learning that capitalizes on children's natural curiosity and exuberance" (p. 4). Both child-initiated and teacher structured play-based learning are integral to successful implementation of the program (Ontario Ministry of Education, 2016). Play has an important role in early learning and can be used to further learning in all areas of the full-day kindergarten program (Ontario Ministry of Education, 2016).

Methodology

This study was conducted during the 2018-2019 year. The Ontario Kindergarten curriculum (Ontario Ministry of Education, 2016) was systematically analyzed using a qualitative document analysis technique (Bowen, 2009) to accomplish the research purpose of understanding and comparing a practice-oriented conceptualization of self-regulation with theory-driven definitions from empirical literature. Prior to completing the document analysis, a closer reading of the full-day kindergarten curriculum was completed to allow the team to make note of interesting and relevant content relating to self-regulation. This process represented an approach to content analysis as outlined by Bowen ( 2009) allowing the researchers to ensure the focus was on relevant rather than irrelevant passages of text in relation to the purpose. Next, an in-depth line-by-line reading was completed. The research team modified a previously constructed coding framework based upon work with early years curricular documents and relevant literature published earlier (Timmons et al., 2016, 2019). Literature published in the past decade was examined to better understand how the predetermined codes had been articulated and operationalized. During this process, consistently used terms from the literature were noted. Terms that were regularly discussed in the literature but were not originally included in the coding framework were also recorded. Definitions were constructed individually for each code (see Table 1 for examples of the co-constructed definitions). Each researcher constructed their own definition independently for each key construct as demonstrated in Table 1. After each researcher had their own definition for all constructs, the two researchers met to discuss. During this discussion, the researchers identified common elements between the two definitions. The common elements were then used to develop a 'mutually constructed definition' found in Table 1. This process was repeated for each construct to ensure that the coders had shared understanding of each of the key constructs.

Following the initial scan, the curriculum was examined line-by-line a second time using the coding framework, each code was counted, and example quotes noted. During this process the coding scheme evolved to capture key operationalizations of self-regulation within the curriculum. The research team continued to meet regularly to share the codes, frequencies, and example quotes. During instances where the lead coder was unsure of how to code a sentence, they would make a note of the sentence and discuss with the research team to ensure appropriate coding. The occurrence of a key term was only coded (counted as occurring) if the sentence in which it occurred was considered relevant to the self-regulation category according to our definition. For example, if the word 'focus' came up in a sentence like "This section focuses on literacy", it was not included. However, if it came up in a sentence like "The child is able to focus on a task", it was included. The consensus-built codebook consisted of 154 codes in total organized into 13 categories. An iterative process involved grouping individual codes into categories and these categories were organized into broader themes. These four themes that emerged represented ongoing patterns interpreted across the whole data set focusing on understanding the main ideas around self-regulation and affiliated constructs. Frequencies for each code and example quotations were recorded. The themes were then compared with literature-based conceptualizations of self-regulation and affiliated constructs. The empirical literature was examined for similarities and discrepancies relating to the four emergent themes. Key words used to examine the literature included different combinations of the following self-regulation, self-regulated learning, early years, metacognition, and executive functioning. Additionally, papers from seminal authors in the field of self-regulation were hand searched to compare with the four emergent themes.

The research team met on a bi-weekly basis to discuss individual definitions and identify common elements to mutually construct a definition for each code. Upon further discussion, the research team recognized that there was a need to delve deeper into the literature regarding: inhibitory control, co-regulation, shared regulation, and learning dispositions. Discussions occurred until consensus was reached for each definition. More specifically, the research team co-constructed definitions to enhance the clarity of the key terms before commencing the coding process. Therefore, the development of the consensus-built codebook was an iterative process and continued to be refined until the research team felt that it was accurately capturing the key elements of self-regulation and its related sub-constructs. Each sentence throughout the curriculum was coded using the consensus-built coding framework. If the sentence was not relevant to self-regulation, then it was not coded. See Figs. 1 and 2 for example screenshots of the coding framework. During instances of uncertainty, the sentences of interest and interpretations were discussed by the two researchers until consensus was reached. This was followed by an interpretation of the documented codes and emerging themes. Ten percent of the curriculum was scanned and coded independently by a third rater. There was 95% agreement for the related sub-constructs. We had agreed on a cutoff of 90% for inter-rater reliability and therefore, 95% agreement exceeded our established criteria. The final codebook contained six constructs: cognitive regulation, emotion regulation, approaches to learning, behavior regulation, social regulation, and resilience.

Example screenshot of Cognitive Regulation for the 'Thinking About Literacy and Mathematics' frame of the kindergarten curriculum

Screenshot of Emotional Regulation for the 'Thinking About Belonging and Contributing' frame in the kindergarten curriculum

Research team

The research team has extensive teaching and research experience in the field of early childhood education and self-regulation (an average of 8.5 years). Two primary researchers who are specialized in early years and developmental psychology led this document analysis. A third researcher (who specialized in early years and self-regulation) was consulted to code a sample of the document in order to assess inter-rater reliability.

Data sources

Results

Four themes emerged from the review: (1) the power of co-regulation; (2) a de-emphasis of behavior regulation toward a focus on emotional regulation; (3) cognitive regulation encompasses far more than inhibitory control, and (4) the use of language in supporting metacognition. Resilience and affiliated constructs were discussed to a much lesser extent than the other key constructs hence a full theme did not emerge for resilience.

Theme 1: the power of co-regulation

Theme 2: de-emphasis of behavior regulation toward a focus on emotional regulation

An analysis of the FDK policy document suggests a shift to a more balanced conceptualization of self-regulation including other dimensions such as: metacognition, cognitive regulation, shared regulation, emotion regulation, and co-regulation. This is important as we move beyond the behavioral aspects of self-regulation to support educators in fostering children's abilities to monitor their emotions, cognition, and behavior to accomplish goals.

Theme 3: cognitive regulation encompasses far more than inhibitory control

Throughout the play-based kindergarten curriculum, cognitive regulation is commonly discussed in relation to the sub-constructs of attention and cognitive flexibility (see Table 4 for an overview of Theme 3 with sample quotations). Working memory and inhibitory control were mentioned infrequently. Again, this suggests that the Kindergarten program has shifted to a more holistic conceptualization of self-regulation rather than strictly focusing on managing behaviors. The curriculum used terminology such as cognitive flexibility, as an element of self-regulation, "Self-regulation involves attention skills, working memory, and cognitive flexibility-qualities that provide the underpinning for essential skills needed throughout life, such as planning and problem-solving skills" (Pascal, 2009a, p. 4, as cited in OMOE, 2016, p. 54).

In the literature, cognitive functions are conceptualized as being a component of behavioral regulation (McClelland et al., 2007). More specifically, behavioral regulation includes elements of executive functioning such as: inhibitory control, attention, and working memory (Ponitz et al., 2009). In direct contrast to the literature, the play-based curriculum separated the multiple components of self-regulation (e.g., cognitive, biological and emotional, social, and prosocial) as described here, "For example, a child who attends to another child who has fallen and hurt himself demonstrates cognitive self-regulation (in recognizing the urgency of, and shifting attention to, an external event); biological and emotional self-regulation (in remaining calm enough to attend to the hurt child); and social self-regulation (in recognizing and understanding that a friend needs help and comfort), in addition to prosocial self-regulation (in acting on feelings of empathy and the desire to help a friend)" (pp. 55-56).

Theme 4: a strong emphasis on the use of language in supporting metacognition

The most frequent reference to metacognitive thinking in the play-based curriculum involves the use of language to articulate student thinking. The reference to awareness, planning skills, and reflection were less evident throughout the curriculum (see Table 5 for an overview of Theme 4 with sample quotations). Theoretically, the term metacognition encompasses much more than the capacity to use language to articulate your thinking. Multiple conceptualizations of metacognition exist in the literature, but metacognition can be understood as the knowledge that an individual has about their thinking and the control of their cognitive processes in relation to their thinking (Baker, 2010). Metacognition can be further broken down into three components: metacognitive knowledge, metacognitive regulation, and metacognitive experiences. Metacognitive knowledge are the general thoughts and beliefs that a learner has about their cognitive processes (Efklides, 2006; Flavell, 1979). For example, these may include thoughts about their strengths, weaknesses, and knowledge of strategies. Metacognitive regulation is the active process of monitoring and controlling one's learning (Flavell, 1979). For example, this includes setting goals, identifying resources, seeking clarification from the teacher. The third component, metacognitive experiences, includes the judgments and affective feelings that a learner have in relation to their learning (Ben-David & Orion, 2013; Efklides, 2006). For example, a metacognitive experience could be when a student has a 'gut' feeling that something is not correct, and they change their answer. The metacognitive experiences have not been well-researched despite their practical applications of suggesting the need for a learner to change their process and strategy-use while learning (Efklides, 2006). All three components of metacognition are useful for learners and should be modeled by educators. The policy document suggested using language to talk about your thinking and learning as an important part of demonstrating metacognitive knowledge and regulation. However, it is well articulated throughout the literature that in order for students to develop their metacognition they need to have explicit instruction and opportunities for ongoing practice (Marulis et al., 2019; Sylva et al., 2010). Part of this modeling involves the use of language to articulate an individual's thinking. The curriculum elaborates further, "They share the language that enables children to identify and understand what they are doing" (p. 42). The use of questioning is also discussed as a way to encourage students to articulate their thinking which is the metacognitive process. At times this is discussed in relation to a specific curriculum area. For example, "The following are some examples of ways in which educators can engage the children: asking the children questions that elicit explanations of their mathematical thinking processes in various contexts" (p. 83). Despite the use of language being an important part of metacognition, teachers also need to understand the connection to goal-directed behaviors such as planning, monitoring, and evaluating as part of metacognition (metacognitive regulation). This theme suggests the need to move towards a more holistic conceptualization of metacognition aligned with the three components outlined in the literature above.

Discussion and conclusion

Despite consistent efforts to include self-regulation in early years curricula worldwide there is limited practical understanding of what self-regulation is and how best to support it in the day-to-day functions of a classroom. Ontario's innovative play-based kindergarten curriculum with a focus on self-regulation provided a unique opportunity to compare the practice-oriented conceptualization of self-regulation within the kindergarten curriculum with theory-driven models of self-regulation. In order to capture and evaluate these efforts in a critical way our team utilized a qualitative document analysis approach. Overall, the results demonstrate that the conceptualization and operationalization of self-regulation is evolving in both empirical literature and play-based kindergarten curricula. Specific findings from our research include the emergence of four overarching themes: (1) the power of co-regulation; (2) a de-emphasis of behavior regulation toward a focus on emotional regulation; (3) cognitive regulation encompasses far more than inhibitory control, and (4) the use of language in supporting metacognition. In analyzing the themes that emerged from this research, we acknowledge the efforts that the Ontario program has made to include empirically supported practices into the curriculum and recognize where more work is necessary. As such, we first highlight what the Ontario program is doing well to foster evidence-based self-regulation practices. Next, we provide explicit recommendations to ensure that emerging conceptualizations of self-regulation are promoted in early years curricula.

Ontario's success

Ontario's play-based kindergarten curriculum includes clear connections to empirical literature on self-regulation. The curriculum makes direct reference to Stuart Shanker's research (2013) on the five domains of self-regulation (biological, emotional, cognitive, social, and prosocial). In using Shanker's model of self-regulation, the curriculum moves beyond a limited operationalization focusing only on behavioral aspects such as self-control and compliance that are too often the focus of regulation in the early years, toward a more holistic conceptualization. For example, the self-regulation and well-being frame not only discuss the importance of students adapting to distractions, the curriculum also discusses children's learning and development of self-regulation skills with reference to regulating emotions, assessing consequences of actions in ways that allow students to engage more fully in learning opportunities, the interrelatedness of students self-awareness, sense of sense and the ability to self-regulate, and the role of the learning environment in supporting students attention (OMOE, 2016).

Two additional highlights of the Ontario program include acknowledgement of the role of play and the importance of socially shared co-regulation in the development of self-regulation skills in the early years. The need for students to be provided with multiple opportunities throughout the school day for co-regulation to occur was emphasized throughout the play-based curriculum. This process of co-regulation was described between students and educators, but also between students and their peers. Engaging techniques including the use of questioning are suggested as ways to support co-regulation through play interactions. Another example includes co-constructing the play environment as a strategy to purposefully engage students in their learning.

In discussing the role of play-based learning in the development of self-regulatory skills, the curriculum makes reference to the work of Vygotsky ( 1978) and connects socio-dramatic play ("pretend" play) and co-regulatory processes to children's developing self-regulation skills (OMOE, 2016).

During socio-dramatic play, children naturally engage in learning that is in their "zone of proximal development"-in other words, learning that is at the "edge" of their capacities. Evidence may be seen in various play contexts in the classroom-children may be noticing for the first time that they can influence how water moves through a tube, that their shadow moves when they move, or how it feels to move a paintbrush over a canvas. As they notice and build on their insights, they are regulating their own learning. In socio-dramatic play, language becomes a self-regulatory tool. Children's private speech, or self-talk, is a mode through which they shift from external regulation (e.g., by a family member or educator) to self-regulation. Children begin to assimilate adult prompts, descriptions, explanations, and strategies by incorporating them into their self-talk. As they integrate the language they have heard into their own private speech, they are activating complex cognitive processes such as attention, memory, planning, and self-direction (Shanker, 2013b). Participants in socio-dramatic play communicate with each other using language and symbolic gestures to describe and extrapolate from familiar experiences, and to imagine and create new stories (OMOE, 2016, p. 20).

Overall, we acknowledge that the Ontario play-based kindergarten curriculum has made great efforts to include empirically supported self-regulation practices; however, given the expanding field of self-regulation we also want to provide explicit recommendations for policymakers and practitioners to ensure that emerging conceptualizations of self-regulation are promoted in early years curricula worldwide.

Recommendations

Despite many similarities between theory-driven conceptualizations and the play-based curriculum in Ontario, more work is needed to ensure that curriculum documents are promoting self-regulation skills and practices that are grounded in empirical findings. Moving forward, policymakers need to ensure that policy documents in the early years fully and accurately represent the abundance of literature surrounding the conceptualization of self-regulation. It is important that educators have explicit examples in policy documents (e.g., curriculum) demonstrating how they can encourage the development of all facets of self-regulation and not just those that have been the focus traditionally such as behavioral aspects of regulation. More specifically, educators may be more inclined to focus on the behavioral, social, and emotional facets of regulation as guided by their policies. Therefore, policies need to embed concrete examples of how to encourage cognitive regulation such as metacognitive thinking through think aloud and goal-setting. One mechanism that can be used to develop goal-directed learning is through the use of self-assessment. Young children in Kindergarten are capable of engaging in self-assessment, but it may look different to how it has been conceptualized in the literature with older students. Policy should consider ways to encourage educators to share how they use self-assessment in their Kindergarten programs to promote self-assessment as more of a widespread practice across Kindergarten classrooms.

Additionally, greater emphasis should be placed on the shift towards co-regulation especially given the context of early years where young students may be incapable of regulating their behaviors, emotions, and cognitive processes independently when they first start formal schooling. As such, it is imperative that co-regulation becomes a hallmark of Kindergarten programming. Given the important role that co-regulation can play in the early years, policymakers need to provide explicit (and theory based) definitions of co-regulation and social shared regulation. Further, these definitions need to be accompanied by direct examples of how educators can facilitate co-regulation between themselves and students but also between students.

Lastly, given that self-regulation is a part of many Kindergarten policy documents and curricula, it is important that teachers have examples of how they can assess self-regulation in the early years. Therefore, educators need tools to aid them with assessing self-regulation in real-time while observing students. These tools should aim to collect quantitative (e.g., frequency) and qualitative (narrative) data surrounding each component of self-regulation. Providing educators with these tools may also help them to promote more well-rounded self-regulation behaviors (e.g., cognitive). This study provides insight into how early years policy documents could be further aligned with empirical literature on self-regulation.

Availability of data and materials

The datasets used and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

References

Download references

Funding

The data analysis and development of the manuscript was supported by a Queen's University, Faculty of Education, 2018 Seed Grant.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Faculty of Education, Queen's University, Duncan McArthur Hall, 511 Union Street, Kingston, ON, K7M 5R7, Canada

Heather Braund & Kristy Timmons

Contributions

HB and KT developed the analysis plan and co-constructed the codebook. HB was the lead coder for the analysis while KT was a second coder and helped with interpretation of the data. HB and KT co-wrote the manuscript.

Authors' information

HB completed her PhD at Queen's Faculty of Education as a member of the Assessment and Evaluation Group and the Early Childhood Education lab. She is a mixed methodologist with expertise in formative assessment and understanding cognitive processes across the learning continuum. Her doctoral research explored the relationship between assessment and self-regulation in Ontario Kindergarten classrooms.

KT is an assistant professor in Early Childhood Education at Queen's Faculty of Education and the head of the Early Childhood Education lab and associated with the Assessment and Evaluation Group. She is also a mixed methodologist who explores early childhood development, kindergarten, play-based learning, educator expectations, and self-regulation.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Heather Braund.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Braund, H., Timmons, K. Operationalization of self-regulation in the early years: comparing policy with theoretical underpinnings. ICEP 15, 8 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40723-021-00085-7
Download citation

Received:

Accepted:

Published:

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s40723-021-00085-7

Keywords

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Operationalization of self-regulation in the early years: comparing policy with theoretical underpinnings - International Journal of Child Care and Education Policy

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Research has consistently demonstrated that self-regulation is essential for the development and preservation of health and well-being in the early years and across the lifespan. Based on the emerging literature on the important role of self-regulation in promoting healthy child development, policymakers have made efforts to include self-regulation skills in practice and policy documents worldwide.

# data[].attributes.headline
Using Centers to Foster Social Foundations and Inquiry-Based Learning

# data[].attributes.subject
Using Centers to Foster Social Foundations and Inquiry-Based Learning

# data[].attributes.body
Center activities and teacher interactions are instrumental in the development and practice of social foundations, a domain of learning that includes social-emotional, approaches to learning, and executive functioning skills.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Early Childhood Pedagogy: Using Centers to Foster Social Foundations and Inquiry-Based Learning

# data[].attributes.headline
4 Components of Baumeister’s Self-Regulation Theory

# data[].attributes.subject
4 Components of Baumeister’s Self-Regulation Theory

# data[].attributes.body
Baumeister et al. (Citation2007) connected monitoring and willpower to the executive function, which is the brain mechanism that “enables us to plan, focus attention, remember instructions, and juggle multiple tasks successfully … [while] working memory, mental flexibility, and self-control are the three types of executive function” (Center on the Developing Child, Harvard University, Citation2022, p.1) that bridge the psychology and neuroscience of self-regulation.

# data[].attributes.body
Lack of guidance, support, and intervention from parents when the issue arises at home.

# data[].attributes.body
Why children lack self management and social awareness?

“A child’s innate capacities for self-regulation are temperament and personality-based,” Dr Rouse says. (https://childmind.org/article/can-help-kids-self-regulation/) But the environment plays a role as well. When parents give in to tantrums or work overtime to soothe their children when they get upset and act out, kids have a hard time developing self-discipline.

Why they are unable to exercise self-control, express emotions appropriately, take turns during conversations and behave appropriately?

Sensory Processing Disorder. (https://www.understood.org/en/articles/trouble-with-self-regulation-what-you-need-to-know ) In most cases, these children have one or more senses that either react too much or too little to stimulation. This disorder can cause problems with a child's development and behavior. (https://www.healthline.com/health/sensory-overload ) How sensory processing issues affect children in school - (https://childmind.org/article/how-sensory-processing-issues-affect-kids-in-school/ )

Hidayah

# data[].attributes.headline
Using Mindfulness-Based Interventions to Support Self-regulation in Young Children

# data[].attributes.subject
Using Mindfulness-Based Interventions to Support Self-regulation in Young Children

# data[].attributes.body
Letchmi

The COVID-19 pandemic has caused a rise in stress, mental health concerns, and externalizing behaviors in children and their caregivers across the globe and illuminated the need to reduce stress levels and support self-regulation skills in even the youngest of children.

Self-regulation is defined as the deliberate use of skills to respond to demands of the environment in a contextually appropriate way and to achieve desired goals (Montroy et al., 2014). Self-regulation is the ability to control one’s emotions, body, and attention in

order to function and achieve goals and well-being.

Steps to uncover self-regulation:

arousal to external

stimuli, intentional awareness of this arousal, and deliberate

thoughtful response that balances cognition and emotion to

act towards a desired goal.

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
Young children may lack self-management skills as they are ruled by their immediate desire and find it difficult to control their impulses. This leads to sudden outbursts and tantrums when things do not go their way. It is important for children to acquire and develop self-regulation skills from a young age as stronger self-regulation has been shown to predict better performance in school and beyond, better relationships with others, and fewer behavioural difficulties

# data[].attributes.headline
Why do young children lack self-management skills 

# data[].attributes.subject
Why do young children lack self-management skills 

# data[].attributes.headline
Adopting a more holistic approach and intentionally targeting SR and EFs

# data[].attributes.subject
Adopting a more holistic approach and intentionally targeting SR and EFs

# data[].attributes.body
Letchmi

1. Play: engaging children in activities that are inherently fun, engaging and has potential to engage EF and/or SR, consisting of (i) mediated structured play or (ii) semi-structured creative play approaches.

2. Social-Emotional: enhancing children’s awareness of themselves and their interconnectedness with others, consisting of (iii) mindfulness or (iv) social-emotional learning (SEL) programs.

3. Curricula and Pedagogy: supplementing teacher knowledge and capacity to embed SR/EF training in domain specific contexts, consisting of (v) curricula, (vi) multicomponent training, (vii) music, (viii) mathematics, (ix) language training or (x) integrated arts programming.

4. Non-routine Activities: engaging children in novel activities or unique adaptations to everyday activity that are purposefully designed to promote SR/EF learning, consisting of (xi) task training (including digitalised) and (xii) physical activity.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Interventions and Approaches Targeting Early Self-Regulation or Executive Functioning in Preschools: A Systematic Review

Abstract

This systematic literature review sought to reconcile the evidence of efficacy for interventions and approaches to enhancing self-regulation and/or executive function in preschool settings. Following PRISMA methodology, a comprehensive search of 20 years of intervention research identified 85 studies that met inclusion criteria. Interventions were categorised by intervention approach and coded for their characteristics (e.g. sample size, dose, duration, interventionist, intervention activities), outcomes (e.g. significance, size of effects) and study quality (i.e. risk of bias). Reconciliation of intervention results indicated (1) within intervention approaches, some approaches had more consistent and robust evidence of efficacy (e.g. mindfulness, mediated play, physical activity) and (2) across intervention approaches, characteristics that had greater (or exclusive) presence amongst the higher efficacy interventions (e.g. cognitive challenge, movement, as well as interventionist, fidelity and dose considerations). Implications for future intervention (re)design, and for theorising about mechanisms of self-regulation and executive function change, are discussed.

Similar content being viewed by others

Article Open access

Anna Leyland, Lisa-Marie Emerson & Georgina Rowse

Dana Charles McCoy

Article Open access

Kate E. Williams & Steven J. Howard

Introduction

Rationale

Achievement gaps during the schooling years can be largely traced back to differences in pre-academic and cognitive skill performance at school entry (Duncan & Magnuson, 2013). It is thus increasingly important that early childhood education provide children with the cognitive, social, emotional and physical foundations on which further skills can be built. The intentional development of self-regulation (SR) and executive function (EF) abilities appear particularly pertinent in this regard, given that research demonstrates that these domain-general constructs can be enhanced in preschool settings, nd underpin academic and social emotional competence (Baron et al., 2017; Blewitt et al., 2018, 2020; Carson et al., 2016; Maynard et al., 2017; Melby-Lervåg & Hulme, 2013; Scionti et al., 2020; Wood et al., 2020). Indeed, some researchers have considered SR and EFs to be the biological foundation for school readiness (Bierman et al., 2008; Blair, 2002) given that many of the skills associated with a successful transition to a formal school environment - such as being able to remember and follow rules, shift and maintain attention on the teacher or task at hand, get along with others and control emotions - rely on these abilities (Lyons & Zelazo, 2011; McClelland et al., 2017; Pianta & Rimm-Kaufman, 2006; Zimmerman, 2008). The demands and expectations of formal schooling for regulation-related behaviours adds impetus to the preschool period being an important time to target SR and EF development. Research positions this period as a window of opportunity for the cultivation of these important skills (Garon et al., 2008; Zelazo et al., 2016). As a consequence, the last two decades have seen intensified research efforts to develop, implement and evaluate short-term and long-term interventions targeting these abilities. Despite this attention, however, there remains little clarity about the early intervention approaches or characteristics for improving EFs and/or SR that yield greater consistency and strength of effects. The current review reconciles available evidence concerning preschool interventions targeting SR and/or EFs, to identify the process mediators (Jones et al., 2013), that are likely to promote successful and sustainable skills. We review programs that were implemented with typically developing children in pre-school settings. These programs focused on supporting continued SR or EF growth and preventing the emergence of developmental concerns.

Conceptualising Self-Regulation and Executive Functions

Self-regulation and executive functions have been conceptualised in a variety of ways, depending on the discipline (e.g. developmental psychology, neuroscience) (Schmitt et al., 2015). This has led to a range of terminology being used to describe both constructs, resulting in the 'jingle-jangle fallacy', where conceptual clarity is obscured, and confusion and ambiguity remain. For instance, several constructs have been linked to SR, including self-control (Boutwell & Beaver, 2010), effortful control (Rothbart & Jones, 1998) and EF (Garon et al., 2008). Yet there is little clarity regarding the distinctions or relations between these constructs, such as whether, when and how EFs relate to SR.

In line with broad, yet prominent conceptions of SR as, "the regulation of processes by the self" (Baumeister et al., 2007, p.6), there is an implicit understanding that a cognitive control element (EFs) needs to be involved in order to intentionally and effortfully regulate our thoughts, emotions and behaviours, which makes SR possible (Blair & Raver, 2014; Huizinga et al., 2006; Zelazo & Carlson, 2012). This differs from regulation of the self, which may involve external influence: by someone or something else, such as a parent, teacher or the environment. According to this conception, self-regulation refers to an ability to control thoughts, behaviours and emotions in pursuit of goals, despite contrary impulses or distractions. EFs are higher-order cognitive process - to hold and work with information in mind, resist impulses and distractions and flexibly shift attention - that enables the control aspects of self-regulation.

Baumeister et al. ( 2007) posited that much of SR is subsumed under the EF term impulsive control, but note that, "strictly speaking, a person does not control the impulse itself, rather the behaviour that would follow from it" (p.17). They identify three factors upon which they theorise SR is dependent: (1) commitment to standards - there needs to be a goal, or an idea, of how the self ought to be; (2) monitoring by self and its behaviours in pursuit of that goal - a behaviour outside of conscious awareness is less likely to be a target for change or regulation; and (3) what is needed to change the self's responses - the capacity to make the necessary changes to reactions and responses, (often in response to impulses that are tied to emotions), which is the role ascribed to EFs. It is this integral and integrated role of EFs which is necessary, but not sufficient for successful SR that points to the need for an integrative approach to be taken to the development of SR and EF abilities. Adopting a combined approach may, therefore, allow for less conceptual confusion, particularly at the classroom level, where cognitive and behavioural regulation can be intentionality developed simultaneously.

Evidence in Support of Adopting an Integrated Approach to Self-Regulation and Executive Functions

Although there is low consensus regarding exactly how SR and EF abilities are related, numerous studies demonstrate a bi-directional relationship across their development (Blair, 2016; Blair & Ursache, 2011; Becker et al., 2014; Howard et al., 2021a, 2021b). This is not surprising if viewed from a relational development systems theory perspective, which asserts that skills do not develop in isolation, and all development represents a bidirectional and dynamic process between the development of increasingly complex skills over time and across contexts (Blair & Raver, 2015; McClelland et al., 2015). While these results are correlational, they are suggestive of a critical link in a possible causal sequence, such that improving EFs could lead to an improved capacity for SR. Similarly, improving SR might allow children to engage in a wider range of EF-promoting activities, thereby providing opportunity to further develop EF.

Another plausible alternative to the bi-directional model is that proposed by McClelland and Morrison ( 2003), and empirically supported by Davis et al., ( 2021), that SR and EF are simply "manifestations of the same underlying self-regulation construct" (p. 631), referred to as 'the common factor model' (Finkel, 2011). The distinctions between the two constructs are a by-product of their different theoretical origins, rather than opposing frames of reference.

Therefore, adopting a more holistic approach and intentionally targeting SR and EFs concurrently, children's capacity to thrive might be more likely, efficiently or effectively increased; setting children up for success as they transition to more formal learning environments.

Findings of Previous Reviews

Previous systematic literature reviews of intervention studies have tended to take either a broader approach in terms of included age range (Diamond & Ling, 2019; Jacob & Parkinson, 2015; Pandey et al., 2018), or a narrower approach, electing to focus on studies that developed either one or more distinct component of SR/EF in preschool contexts. The latter is evidenced in previous reviews on SR (Pandey et al., 2018; Robson et al., 2020); training of working memory using digital technology (Scionti et al., 2020; Melby-Lervåg & Hulme, 2013); mindfulness-based interventions (Bockmann & Yu, 2022; Maynard et al., 2017; Sun et al., 2021); physical activity (Carson et al., 2016; Wood et al., 2020); and specific curricula (Baron et al., 2017; Marshall, 2017). In addition, systematic reviews have also been conducted into the effectiveness of social and emotional (SEL) curriculum-based interventions in preschool settings to improve aspects of SR for both teachers and students (Blewitt et al., 2018, 2020; Stefan et al., 2022). These reviews provide evidence that it is possible to enhance SR/EF skills by targeted interventions, however, in all cases, results from interventions were mixed.

As such, there is a need to understand intervention characteristics that are associated with more likely and robust effects, merging SR and EF literatures given their seeming overlap. Focusing on either alone, or some subset of interventions targeting one ability, obscures the bigger picture, leading to siloed thinking. Amalgamating lessons learnt from both literatures has the potential to benefit the development of both concepts, particularly at an operational level within the preschool classroom.

Objectives of the Current Review

This review sought to address this issue through a systematic review of existing research on interventions specifically designed to enhance the development of SR/EF in preschool settings. Since they stem from different disciplines of research, they have rarely been investigated together (Neuenschwander et al., 2012). However, there is emerging recognition of the benefit of their integration (Hofmann et al., 2012; Sankalaite et al., 2021).

Given increasing ubiquity of preschool attendance and thus the opportunity to ensure practices in these settings optimise children's developmental progress, the current review focused on interventions with preschool children in formal preschool services and settings. It aimed to synthesise the evidence from various approaches that have been taken to enhance SR/EF skills, additionally examining type, duration and intensity of intervention, facilitation of the intervention and outcomes considered and achieved. From these factors, the review sought to identify intervention characteristics associated with more likely and robust effects, to inform future intervention (re)design and for theorising about mechanisms of SR and EF change.

Methods

Information Sources

This review followed the PRISMA-P guidelines (Moher et al., 2015). Scoping searches were carried out to determine the current state of the research field and to fine tune the search terms. Subsequently a literature search was performed on 28 September 2020, and re-searched January 2021, to capture all the SR/EF intervention studies conducted with preschool age children in a preschool setting, that were published in peer reviewed journals between 2000 and 2020. A total of six electronic databases were accessed: A + Education, ERIC, Proquest, PyscINFO, SCOPUS and Web of Science, using the Boolean terms:

"executive function*" OR inhibition OR "inhibitory control" OR "impulse control" OR "effortful control" OR "behaviour* control" OR "behaviour* regulation" OR "executive control" OR "self-regulat*" OR "self-control" OR "executive attention" OR "working memory" OR switching OR "cognitive flexibility".

AND kinder* OR "early childhood" OR "pre-school*" OR preschool* OR "childcare" OR "day care*" OR nursery*.

AND intervention* OR program* OR Curriculum.

Inclusion Criteria

Studies were included in this review if the intervention aimed to enhance preschool children's SR/EF; this included both direct training (e.g. a working memory computer training) and indirectly promoting them (e.g. physical activity). Studies focused on self-regulated learning (SRL) were also included since SRL falls within the wider construct of SR (Davis et al., 2021), being defined as the application of SR to academic learning. Studies had to take place in a preschool setting, with typically developing children between the ages of 3 and 6 years old. Within these samples, there were likely to be children with learning difficulties, however, studies focusing exclusively on children with documented disabilities, such as Attention Deficit Disorder, were excluded. Individual studies needed to include a control group (either active or passive), and pre and post measures of one or more EF (i.e. inhibitory control, working memory, cognitive flexibility) and/or SR outcome (e.g. behavioural, social-emotional) using validated tools for assessment, including task-based measures and behaviour questionnaires. All studies needed to be published in English, in a peer-reviewed journal between January 2000 and December 2020. We selected our date parameter to coincide with the publication of Miyake et al. ( 2000) seminal paper identifying three core executive functions. Theory and research to reconcile self-regulation and executive functions - in the manner conceptualised for this review - emerged following this publication.

Search Strategy

The initial search across the six databases generated 9115 results. These were imported into Covidence ( www.covidence.org) for further review, this process identified 3288 duplicates. A single researcher screened each of the remaining 5827 studies by title and abstract against eligibility criteria. If a study appeared to meet the eligibility criteria, or the relevance of the study was uncertain, then full texts were obtained (n = 641). A randomly selected 321 (50%) were also independently screened by a second researcher, generating a Kappa score of 0.71 indicating substantial agreement (McHugh, 2012). Discrepancies were discussed and in those instances that a decision remained uncertain (1.38%), the studies were referred to the second author of this paper for mediation. From the original search, 78 studies were included in the final analysis. Seven further studies were added as a result of a final search for papers published in 2020, identified from the January 2021 re-search and a 'snowball search' branching backwards using Google Scholar.

Data Charting & Data Items

The 85 studies included in the review were then recorded in a PICO table and coded according to: date of publication, sample age, sample size, country where the study was conducted, study design, length and intensity of intervention, personnel leading delivery of the intervention, the measure(s) of SR/EF used, significance and size of the intervention's SR/EF effects and any other significant non-SR/EF outcomes. Interventions were delivered by diverse interventionists: classroom teachers, psychologists, research facilitators and/or staff trained in a specific curriculum or speciality area. For ease of reporting, these were consolidated into external facilitator and teacher. The child outcomes from each study were recorded as being either statistically significant or non-significant for SR/EF, as reported by the authors. From the 85 studies, 73 reported an effect size or provided sufficient data to calculate an effect size from means and standard deviations.

For the remaining 12 studies, effect sizes were requested from the authors but were not acquired. Effect size reported or computed using established rules of thumb to interpret these as small, moderate or large (Cohen, 1992; Hedges, 1985). All final studies were assessed for study quality using the AXIS tool (Downes et al., 2016). This scale is designed to critically appraise the reporting quality of cross-sectional studies. It consists of 20 items such as justifying the sample size, using validated measures and reporting funding and conflicts of interest (see Supplementary Table 1). A random 12% of studies were independently assessed by two researchers using this tool, yielding a Kappa inter-reliability rating of 0.68 ( p < 0.002), indicating substantial agreement (McHugh, 2012). Risk of bias was considered as another factor, in addition to intervention and study characteristics, by which to reconcile differences in intervention effects.

Synthesis of Results

Although there are various taxonomies that could be applied to classify SR and EF intervention approaches (e.g., those that intervene directly on children's SR or EF versus those that aim to achieve this indirectly, such as training and influencing parent/educator practices with children), the current review builds on the work of Takacs and Kassai ( 2019) by using more nuanced categorisations. Specifically, four higher-order categories comprised of 12 distinct intervention approaches were identified, namely:

1. Play: engaging children in activities that are inherently fun, engaging and has potential to engage EF and/or SR, consisting of (i) mediated structured play or (ii) semi-structured creative play approaches.

2. Social-Emotional: enhancing children's awareness of themselves and their interconnectedness with others, consisting of (iii) mindfulness or (iv) social-emotional learning (SEL) programs.

3. Curricula and Pedagogy: supplementing teacher knowledge and capacity to embed SR/EF training in domain specific contexts, consisting of (v) curricula, (vi) multicomponent training, (vii) music, (viii) mathematics, (ix) language training or (x) integrated arts programming.

4. Non-routine Activities: engaging children in novel activities or unique adaptations to everyday activity that are purposefully designed to promote SR/EF learning, consisting of (xi) task training (including digitalised) and (xii) physical activity.

It should be noted that two studies could have been assigned to more than one category when both were components of the intervention, namely: physical activity and digitalised training (Xiong et al., 2019); and music and Lego building (Bugos & De Marie, 2017). A further 13 studies evaluated two interventions that could be classified into different categories. In each of these cases, these multi-arm interventions reflected incremental gradations of a target intervention (e.g. mathematics with EF challenge, mathematics only and business-as-usual control) to better understand mechanisms of effect. As such, the category of assignment (and effects evaluated) was based on the stated emphasis and intent of the authors' paper, to assign the one most appropriate category. Study results were synthesised separately for each of the 12 approaches. Where there was a discrepancy in the results, differentiating factors (i.e. EF vs SR intervention; program content/nature/delivery; dose and/or duration; interventionist, measure type/number) were evaluated to identify possible reasons for this discrepancy. The pattern of results for each of the 12 intervention approaches was then further reconciled in the Discussion to identify EF/SR intervention approaches, content and features that have comparatively more robust evidence for generating child-level effects.

Results

Study Characteristics

Of the 85 intervention studies included in this review, 59 (69.4%) had an exclusive focus on developing one or more EF abilities, 17 exclusively targeted SR and 9 studies targeted both SR and EF. Interventions that targeted SR and EF tended to target not only the EF components of SR, but also the nonexecutive components of SR (e.g. motivation and goal setting). That is, they took an integrative approach. The dose and duration of interventions varied widely, from a single period of 15 min to curricula running daily across an entire school year. The median intervention dose was 9 h (the mean was not possible to accurately estimate given unclear dose for full-year curriculum approaches). EF interventions tended to have a smaller dose and duration than those targeting SR (Fig. 1).

PRISMA flow diagram to illustrate article selection

A variety of measurement approaches were used to assess SR/EF outcomes: exclusively task-based measures ( n = 47 studies); exclusively behaviour rating questionnaires ( n = 10 studies); a combination of both ( n = 20 studies); observation plus task-based measures ( n = 5 studies); observation supplemented by a questionnaire ( n = 2 studies); and one study supplemented task-based measures with electroencephalogram (EEG) data to further assess children's inhibitory control. A further breakdown shows that task-based measures were used in 51 (86.4%) EF-only studies, four (23.5%) SR studies and in all studies ( n = 9) that aimed to improve both SR and EF. Head, Toes, Knees, Shoulders was the most frequently adopted task-based measure ( n = 20) and was variously conceptualised as assessing EF ( n = 9), SR ( n = 8) or both ( n = 4). Of the studies that used a behaviour rating questionnaire, 26 were completed by a teacher and nine by parents (some used both). A variety of questionnaires were used, however, the most common was the BRIEF-P ( n = 7), which was construed as measuring either SR ( n = 1) or EF ( n  = 6).

Intervention Efficacy

Statistically significant results (for at least one outcome) were reported in 60 (70.6%) of the studies; 43 (72.8%) EF interventions, 11 (64.7%) SR interventions and 6 (66.7%) of the combined SR/EF interventions. Across these studies, 208 effects were evaluated and 102 of these (49.0%) were statistically significant immediately following the intervention. Only four studies (Clements et al., 2020; Keown et al., 2020; Poehlmann-Tynan et al., 2016; Rosas et al., 2019) - all EF intervention evaluations - included follow-up assessments several months after the end of the interventions. The rest exclusively evaluated acute effects immediately on completion of the intervention. The effect sizes across all the studies (immediately following the intervention), included small ( n = 29), small to moderate ( n = 12), moderate ( n = 7) small to large ( n = 12), moderate to large ( n = 3) and large effects ( n  = 10). Insufficient reporting precluded calculation of effect sizes for a further 12 studies. Interventions were characterised as comparatively higher in efficacy if they achieved: significant effects for at least 50% of the measured outcomes, at least one of with a moderate effect size; and/or a significant, large effect for at least one measured outcome and did not have a low risk of bias rating. Discussion of intervention efficacy follows, organised by the category and approach to intervention.

Play

A total of 1936 participants across 19 studies, adopting either a mediated or semi-structured play approach, are included in this category. They included activities that are inherently fun and engaging which have the potential to engage EF and/or SR.

Mediated Structured Play

Studies adopting this approach ( n = 16) involved the direct teaching of SR ( n = 4), EF ( n = 11) or both EF and SR ( n = 1) skills and strategies to children using games and stories. The average sample size was 99.25, ranging between 43 and 276. To ensure easy accommodation in preschool settings, activities in these interventions were usually undertaken in small groups and/or whole class in the classroom. Sessions were sometimes structured and sequenced, and at other times flexible and spontaneous; however, activities were commonly designed to enable an increase in cognitive complexity as children became more experienced with them. Interventions adopting this approach had an average dosage of 17.60 h, ranging from 1.75 h (1 × 15 min per week, over a 7-week period) to 72 h (3 × 2 h a week for 12 weeks). The majority of studies ( n = 14) involved multiple sessions per week. Of the studies adopting this approach, 68.8% ( n  = 11) used external facilitators to implement the intervention.

Statistically significant effects acutely after intervention were reported for 75.00% ( n = 12) of the interventions. Of the four exceptions, Rosas et al. ( 2019) reported significant effects 8 months after the intervention. Across these studies, 41 effects were evaluated, of which 26 (63.41%) were significant. Consolidating the results for each study, the effects reported were small ( n = 5), small to moderate ( n = 4), moderate ( n = 1) and small to large ( n  = 4). Two studies did not provide sufficient data to calculate effect sizes.

Six of 16 interventions evaluated were characterised as comparatively higher in efficacy, based on the applied thresholds of significance and sizes of effects. One of these studies (Sezgin & Demiriz, 2019) was ultimately excluded from this group, given it had amongst the smallest sample sizes ( n = 54 children), used sub-optimal analysis strategies (analysing post-test differences between intervention and control groups, rather than differences in change), and was rated comparatively high for risk of bias (13/20). This leaves open the possibility that effect size estimates were not directly comparable with those of the other studies. Indeed, although their intervention lasted 8 weeks at high intensity (3 times per week), this was comparable to two other studies adopting this approach that reported non-significant results (McClelland et al., 2019; Tominey & McClelland, 2011). Contrasting the higher- and lower-efficacy groups, there was little clear distinction in dose (low-dose interventions were overrepresented amongst the high-efficacy studies - max. 15 h over 6 weeks - although there were also low-dose studies outside this group). Factors that did appear to better distinguish higher-efficacy results were interventionist, target and measured outcome(s). Specifically, all studies reporting high efficacy used an external facilitator; there were also studies outside this group that used external facilitators, but it is notable that none of the teacher-led interventions achieved high-efficacy. There was also distinction in terms of the intervention target and the measured outcomes. All high-efficacy interventions targeted EF exclusively. There was also a pattern by which significant (and often larger) effects were found for WM and CF, with less consistent evidence for effects on IC, global EF or SR.

Overall, based on the rate and size of significant effects, the evidence is relatively robust in favour of this approach. However, the efficacy of interventions adopting this approach appeared to vary by interventionist, target and measured outcome.

Semi-structured Creative Play

Interventions taking a semi-structured creative play approach ( n  = 3) all sought to enhance EFs. These studies had sample sizes averaging 116 participants (range 59-179). The three studies differed in terms of their content; one was centred around block play and two on fantasy play. Their common thread was their emphasis on small group creative play activities where children were required to collaborate and regulate their actions towards a goal. Children were encouraged to be self-directed, which required them to plan, problem solve and negotiate with peers in a creative play-based context. Interventions were comparatively short in duration; individual sessions lasted 15-20 min, multiple times per week over a 5- to 7-week period (totalling 4.6 to 6.25 h). Intensity ranged from twice a week to daily sessions. All interventions were facilitated by external facilitators who started each session with a prompt in the form of a theme or challenge. Facilitators were not actively involved in the play, although they intervened to ensure engagement in the activities.

Significant effects after intervention were reported in 33.3% ( n = 1) of the studies. Across the three studies 7 effects were evaluated, of which 2 (28.6%) were significant. Effects reported for each of the studies were small ( n = 1), small to moderate ( n = 1) or small to large ( n  = 1). One of the three intervention evaluations yielded evidence of high efficacy. There was no clear distinction between the high-efficacy and other interventions in terms of interventionist (all external facilitators), target (all EF), dose or duration. In terms of outcomes, WM was uniquely assessed in the high-efficacy study (yielding a large effect). As earlier, IC and global EF effects were not found. There was less consistent evidence for CF, which had a large significant effect in the high-efficacy study and a non-significant moderate effect in one less-efficacious intervention.

Albeit limited by the number of interventions and effects evaluated, there is not currently robust evidence in favour of this approach. However, high efficacy was possible and demonstrated, specifically in relation to WM.

Social-Emotional

A total of 4255 participants across 20 studies, adopting either a mindfulness or social-emotional learning approach, are included in this category. These approaches had an emphasis on enhancing children's awareness of themselves and their interconnectedness with others.

Mindfulness

Mindfulness interventions ( n = 12) sought to enhance EFs ( n = 7), SR ( n = 2) or both ( n = 3) through developing socio-emotional competencies such as self-awareness, self-management, social awareness, relationship management and responsible decision making. A typical feature of these interventions was sequenced activities involving the inclusion of self‐regulation of attention, by including one, or a combination of the following: mindfulness of the breath, body scan, mindful movement or mindful eating. All included studies were conducted since 2015, suggesting a recent growth in interest in this approach. The average sample size was 157.17, although this was highly variable across studies (ranging from 21 to 584). Similarly, the duration and intensity showed considerable variability (from a single 15-min training session to daily guided meditation sessions for 1 year), with a median of 10 h (as dose of the year-long intervention is problematic to quantify). Just over half of the studies ( n = 7) encouraged further practice of techniques outside of the formal training sessions; they made extension activities available for the classroom and recommended teachers integrate techniques into the curriculum, such as pausing during transitions to focus on mindful breathing. Although the majority of interventions were led by teachers ( n = 7), they all received prior training that ranged from a full day to an extensive 200-h certification course, with the mean dose of 16 h (2 full days) training. There was a further expectation in two studies that teachers would themselves be practising mindfulness for up to 20 min/day (Jackman et al., 2019; Kim et al., 2020).

Significant outcomes were reported in 10 (83.3%) of the studies. Across the interventions, 26 outcomes were evaluated, of which 17 (65.4%) were significant. Effect sizes ranged from small ( n = 7), moderate ( n = 1), small to large ( n = 2) and large ( n  = 1). One study did not report sufficient data to calculate this.

Overall, the rate of significance and size of effects suggest this to be an efficacious approach, although in this case higher efficacy was more consistently found in outcomes that required integrated mobilisation of EFs and/or SR.

Social Emotional Learning (SEL) Programs

Eight studies adopted a social-emotional approach to improving children's EFs ( n = 4), SR ( n = 2) or EF and SR ( n = 2). The average sample size was 296.13, the largest of all the approaches reviewed (range 91-623). Interventions adopting this approach were characterised by their explicit approach to teaching social-emotional skills (two used the CASEL framework; Kats Gold et al., 2020; Wu et al., 2020) and their application in the classroom on an ongoing basis. To implement this, studies were teacher led, with one exception (Honoré et al., 2020) was led by an external facilitator in the presence of the class teacher, who was expected to embed new knowledge and skills into the daily practice between sessions. All interventions emphasised the importance of inhibitory control to manage emotions. There were also additional foci that differed by program (e.g. Chicago School Readiness Program), around supporting the teacher to implement consistent practices for behavioural management, nurturing supportive teacher/child relationships, and receptive emotional knowledge (e.g. Kats Gold et al., 2020). The duration of interventions ranged from 6 h over a 6-week period (2 × 30-min sessions a week) to embedding intervention elements across a year.

Six of the studies (75.0%) reported at least one significant outcome, with 23 effects evaluated across all studies ( n = 11, or 47.8%, significant). Effect size ranges within each study were reported as small ( n = 4), small to moderate ( n = 1), small to large ( n = 1), moderate to large ( n = 1) or large ( n  = 1).

Four of the 8 interventions were classified as high efficacy, all conducted in 2020. There was no clear distinction between more and less efficacious studies in terms of interventionist (virtually all used teachers). The four most efficacious interventions targeted EFs exclusively, whereas the others all targeted SR in isolation or in conjunction with EF. In contrast to previously profiled approaches, significant and moderate (or better) effect sizes were achieved for IC, albeit for only half of IC outcome measures. Other unique characteristics across these studies were that: three of the four included a meta-cognitive component (whereas none of the less-efficacious interventions did); and all tended to be shorter in duration (ranging from 6 weeks to 6 months, whereas the less efficacious interventions were all 9-12 months in duration).

Overall, the rate of significance and size of effects suggests that interventions adopting a SEL approach, where skills are explicitly taught and practiced regularly in real-life situations there, can be effective for promoting EF including, perhaps, IC.

Curricula & Pedagogy

A total of 3959 participants across 21 studies, adopting a curricular, multi-component or subject-area-embedded approach, are included in this category. These approaches supplemented teacher knowledge and capacity to embed SR/EF training in domain specific contexts.

Curricula

Three different curricula were evaluated across five studies, namely Tools of the Mind, Montessori, and the Intervention Program for Self-Regulation and Executive Functions (PIAFEx). Two interventions had a focus on SR, two on EFs and one on SR and EF combined. These studies had some of the largest sample sizes amongst the approaches considered in this review, ranging from n = 55 to 877 ( M = 286.00). The defining characteristic of curricula interventions was the "unifying pedagogy woven across all classroom practices, schedule, environment and activities", with activities that engage EF in a variety of tasks, situations and contexts (Dias & Seabra, 2015, p.3). In some respects, the longevity of the programs (three lasted a full school year, one for 4.5 months and one for 7 months), combined with the ongoing daily practice of skills across a variety of contexts, make them more of a pedagogical approach than an intervention per se. All curricula intervention studies were led by teachers who had received extensive professional development (e.g. up to 120 h for the Montessori training) to implement the program.

Two of five interventions met criteria as comparatively higher in efficacy evidence. Both had a focus on EF exclusively, whereas the others targeted SR exclusively ( n = 2) or in tandem with EF ( n  = 1). There was little to differentiate high efficacy from other interventions on the basis of dose, duration or interventionist. In an emerging trend, effects were achieved more commonly for attention and CF (as well as global EF, in one study), but not for IC or SR.

Overall, the evidence suggests that curricula focusing on EF can generate measurable and moderate (or better) improvement in certain EFs, although the aggregate evidence is less robust for this approach, and challenges around sustaining fidelity and effects over longer durations remained.

Multicomponent training (Teacher and Child)

Multicomponent interventions ( n = 5) targeted SR ( n = 2), or EF ( n = 2), or SR and EF ( n  = 1). Sample size averaged 172.80 participants with a range of 53-473. These studies focused on training both the teacher and the child, similar to a curricula approach, but lacked the structured teaching materials of a curriculum. Teacher professional development included training for at least 4 h, with an emphasis on building a theoretical understanding of EF and/or SR and teacher proficiency to lead implementation. This resulted in two intervention strategies: (1) directly intervening with children by teaching SR strategies and/or implementation of activities designed to engage and extend EF/SR; and/or (2) an indirect approach whereby teachers were expected to create ideal conditions to promote SR/EFs, through the intentional creation of high-quality learning environments and positive child-educator relationships. Where child activities were included, their selection, number and timing were suggested rather than prescribed, giving teachers agency to make decisions based on the needs of the children in their class. Intervention dose ranged from 7.5 h across 5 weeks to 9 months with daily practices embedded in all aspects of the preschool day. Teachers were trained by external facilitators, but in all cases, teachers were then tasked with program implementation.

Two of the five studies were classified as having greater evidence of high efficacy. There was little clear distinction between these interventions and the others in terms of target, dose, duration or interventionist. What was distinct about these interventions was the professional development for the teacher interventionist. Perels et al. ( 2009) employed face-to-face, full-group training for 2 h every week for 5 weeks, between sessions teachers would practice their new learnings through prescribed pedagogical 'assignments'. Walk et al. ( 2018) employed even more face-to-face training hours, which included time in individual preschools to provide support implementing learning. While other programs also used professional development sessions, these tended to be fewer, shorter and/or online and thereby less bespoke (e.g. able to address specific or emergent questions/issues).

Overall, the current corpus of evidence provides limited support for the overall efficacy of this approach; however, there was some evidence for its potential to generate effects, particularly on global EF, and when more extensive and individuated training was provided to teachers tasked with implementing the intervention.

Music

Interventions in this category ( n = 6) targeted EF ( n = 5) or SR and EF ( n = 1). The studies had an average sample of 77.17 (range 34-160). To be considered 'musical,' the program's activities required musical elements such as pitch and/or the organisation of sound. In addition, five of the six studies (83.3%) included a rhythmical movement element. Average intervention duration was 14.20 h, ranging from 5.3 h (40 min/week over an 8-week period) to 45 h (daily 45-min sessions over 12 weeks). One study (Shen et al., 2019) involved daily practice, whereas three studies held a session once per week. Individual music sessions lasted an average of 40 min, which is longer than typical session times of other approaches. All the interventions in this category were small-group-based, led by external facilitators.

All studies reported at least one outcome that achieved statistical significance. Across the studies 23 effects were evaluated, of which 12 (52.2%) were significant. There was considerable variation in effect sizes reported: small ( n = 1); small to moderate ( n = 1); small to large ( n = 2); moderate to large ( n = 1). It was not possible to compute the effect size for one study (Bolduc et al., 2020), due to insufficient data being available.

Four of the six interventions met the requirements for classification as high efficacy. There was little to distinguish between these groups on the basis of interventionist (all external), target (EF-only appeared in both groups), dose and duration. Despite few clear patterns to identify features unique to higher efficacy interventions, two observations were possible. First, this approach had amongst the most consistent (five of seven effects significant) and strongest (moderate or larger effects) effects for IC amongst the approaches evaluated. Second, the study reporting the most efficacious results (four of four effects significant, all moderate or large) uniquely involved daily practice for amongst the longest durations (12 weeks).

Overall, there is moderately strong evidence for the efficacy of this approach to generate EF change, including IC, and these effects may be more pronounced with increased intensity and longevity of music training.

Mathematics

Mathematics interventions ( n = 4) - all targeting WM - had an average sample size of 249.25 (median = 56), ranging from 48 to 837. Unique to this approach was the frequent use of multiple intervention arms (e.g. Mathematics only, Mathematics + WM), to determine the specific components that generated an effect, which were then contrasted with a control group. Interventions using Mathematics to improve EF used counting and numeracy games both in whole class and small group contexts. EF-engaging and age-appropriate mathematics activities were structured, such that over the course of the intervention larger numbers were introduced - up to 100. Typical activities were game based, such as "I went to market" and board games that required children to not only count but also remember sequences and rules. Dosage for these four studies varied: one lasted a year with short, daily practice averaging 70 min per week; the remaining three studies were shorter in length, lasting a total of 4-10 h across two 30--60-min sessions per week for 4 or 5 weeks. Mathematics experts led 75% ( n = 3) of the interventions. In the larger study, lasting a full school year (Clements et al., 2020), teachers received extensive PD prior to delivering the program and then ongoing coaching thereafter.

Two of the four studies were classified as having greater evidence of high efficacy. There was little to differentiate between these studies in terms of target (both classifications had EF-only targets, while the intervention targeting EF and SR was lower in efficacy), dose, duration or interventionist (most led by external facilitator, while the teacher-led program was lower in efficacy). Amongst the higher-efficacy interventions, training was adaptive with feedback at the level of the individual. While this was also the case for Clements et al.'s ( 2020) large study of 837 children, which was classified as less efficacious, this study used teachers to implement the program and over a more protracted period (a first pilot year, plus a second year given their speculation that it would take more than a year for teachers to master the program to fidelity).

Overall, the aggregate evidence supporting this approach is amongst the weakest profiled in this review, although even here there were large and consistent effects generated by at least some of the programs.

Integrated Arts

One intervention adopted an integrated arts approach to fostering SR. This program was implemented by class teachers, incorporated music, dance and visual arts in the daily schedule to accomplish curricular goals over a 9-month period. The sample, although fairly large (n  = 205), was imbalanced with 174 children in the intervention group and only 31 in the control. The study reported a significant outcome on a SR behavioural rating scale and generated an overall moderate effect size for SR.

The uniqueness of this study and limited evidence related to this approach does not allow for identification of common efficacious features. Nevertheless, the high efficacy achieved for SR outcomes is promising.

Non-routine Activities

A total of 2445 participants across 25 studies adopted this approach. In these interventions, educators were asked to do something unlike what they or children would normally do. While physical activity is routine, EF/SR interventions adopting this approach rarely ask children to just engage in routine physical activity. Rather, the physical activity is modified to inject EF/SR challenge into activities, which renders the activity unlike children's habitual physical activity. Similarly, digitalised training involves computerised training programs that remove children from their routine activity.

Digitalised Task Training

Five studies (55.55%) reported statistical significance for at least one EF outcome. In all, 21 effects were evaluated, of which 7 (33.33%) were significant. Within each study, the effect size range reported was small ( n = 1), moderate ( n = 1), small to large ( n = 1) or moderate to large ( n  = 1). No effect sizes could be computed for four studies due to insufficient data available, with three of these reporting non-significance for the outcomes evaluated.

Three interventions met criteria as comparatively higher in efficacy evidence. There was little to distinguish these interventions from the others in target (all targeted EF), interventionist (virtually all were external facilitator), dose or duration. In terms of the programs themselves, those characterised as higher in efficacy all involved adaptive training and points-based feedback/motivation, whereas others tended to guide children through set levels of complexity. The only other trend that could be identified in the program features and results was the relatively high rate of success in achieving effects on WM (5 of 6, or 83.3%, significant, often with moderate or larger effects), yet more limited evidence for efficacy on other EFs or global EF.

Overall, given the highly inconsistent evidence in relation to this approach, it may be the case that this approach is particularly suited or tailored to improving WM.

Non-Digitalised Task Training

Corsi Block training was used to enhance WM in four studies, all reported in a manuscript by Gade et al. ( 2017). Specifically, children were required to reproduce prescribed patterns with increasing complexity using Corsi blocks. All of the studies used external facilitators for implementation. The average sample size was 22.75, ranging from 20 to 31. Intervention periods were comparatively low in total number of hours (up to 3.5 h), but intense (daily practice over 11-12 days). No significant effects were reported for any of the 12 WM outcomes/measures in the studies. Effect sizes were small ( n = 2) or small to moderate ( n  = 2). However, when the data from all four studies was aggregated, the increase in statistical power indicated significant effects of the training. Still, there remains little evidence in support of this approach for generating consistent and sufficient effect on EF and/or SR.

Physical Activity

Studies adopting a 'cognitively injected' physical activity approach ( n = 12) targeted EF ( n = 9) or SR ( n = 3). The average sample size was 80.17 (range 30-189). A variety of structured physical activities were included in this category (including some that might not ordinarily be found in a preschool setting), from Street Dancing (Shen et al., 2020), to a gross motor skill intervention (Mulvey et al., 2018), to an Evergaming digital consul (Xiong et al., 2017). Consistent across most of these studies was the inclusion of a cognitive element integrated into group-based physical activities, which often required children to work collaboratively. The exception, in Wen's study (2018), asked children to individually jump on a mini trampoline for 20 min a day for 10 weeks, with no mediation or added EF/SR challenge. Paralleling the range of activities, the duration and dosage ( M = 24.90 h) ranged from a one-off 15-min intervention to 30 min per day for 3 months (150 h). Sessions most often lasted a minimum of 20 min at least 3 times per week (for n  = 7 studies). Ten (83.3%) of the interventions were led by external facilitators and two were led by the classroom teacher after 4-8 h of training.

Overall, statistical significance was reported for at least one outcome in 83.33% ( n = 10) of the studies. In total, 20 effects were evaluated, of which 14 (70.0%) were significant. The range of effect sizes within each study were as follows: small ( n = 3); small to moderate ( n = 1); moderate ( n = 3); and large ( n  = 3). For two studies the effect size could not be calculated.

Six of the 12 studies were classified as having greater evidence of high efficacy. Notable is that these studies were diverse in their approach to involving children in cognitively engaging physical activity, from dance to energetic egames to structured motor skill programs. There was little in common that characterised these interventions as distinct from the others, either in terms of target (EF-only and SR-only appeared in both classifications), interventionist (though the two teacher-led interventions were in the less-efficacious category), dose, or duration (most were short sessions for 5-9 weeks). This diversity, however, could be construed as the most prominent pattern amongst these results - diverse approaches to cognitively engaging physical activity yielded significant and moderate or better effects.

This, taken with the strong pattern of significance and the rate/size of significant effects, indicates amongst the strongest support for this approach relative to the others profiled.

Discussion

The current review contributes to the current state of knowledge by bringing together the literature on SR and EF interventions conducted in preschool settings. This is important given increased interest in reconciling the two constructs, and the findings of bi-directional associations between them (Blair, 2016; Blair & Ursache, 2011; Howard et al., 2021a, 2021b). This review is additionally important for highlighting the need for better theory of change for SR and EF, and particularly for their integration. This gap in theoretical grounding exacerbates the wide variability across intervention approaches and complicates clear, unassailable conclusions and recommendations for informing future intervention design, implementation and research.

From a practical perspective, the findings of this review support common and approach-specific mechanisms by which children's SR/EF is enhanced in the preschool classroom. There is unlikely to be an approach with uniformly high effect for all children and all contexts, so consideration needs to be given to target outcome(s), content and implementation-related mechanisms of change, the context of the intervention and the expertise of the interventionist.

Conclusions drawn from this systematic literature review are, therefore, drawn with an understanding that the approach per se is not the sole (or even primary) determinant of outcomes; different levels of efficacy may be realised by changing any of the 'what, whom, where, when and how' of the intervention context. Indeed, it is plausible (perhaps likely) that various vehicles may be suitable for achieving SR and/or EF-promoting conditions. Nevertheless, it is helpful to identify the consistencies amongst studies achieving comparatively more-positive outcomes. Deriving from the reconciliation of studies in this review, several patterns emerged amongst studies achieving more, more consistent and comparatively stronger efficacy results.

Learning Experiences

Group Size

Intervention group size is an important consideration for training effectiveness. Studies in this review ranged from whole class interventions (e.g. curricula,) to small groups (e.g. music and creative play) or individualised instruction (e.g. digital). Whilst it may be argued that there are benefits to interventions targeting groups of children, in terms of increased opportunities for social interaction, co-regulation and greater demands on self-regulation, the downside is that the cognitive challenge may not be suitable for everyone working in the group, resulting in unequal training intensity (Marcovitch et al., 2007). In the current results, effects of whole-group curricula training of SR/EF, for example, were small. That said, digital training of individuals, which consumed more resources (in terms of equipment, personnel and time), fared little better. This suggests the possibility that small groups may be an effective means of working with preschool-aged children (see also Scionti et al., 2020). For preschoolers, small groups provide benefits of social interaction, co-regulation and self-regulation, whilst also allowing for greater individuation of cognitive challenge than do whole class approaches.

Movement & Engagement

The inclusion of a movement element, or 'motor creativity' (Bugos & DeMarie, 2017), was evident in 53 studies (62.35%). The rate of significance in these studies was high (77.4% of these interventions achieved one or more significant effects) and 23 of the interventions were classified as being highly efficacious (representing 63.88% of all high-efficacy interventions). Movement was an international feature in music, mediated structured play, mindfulness and mathematics interventions. Movement may help to not only consolidate SR/EF gains, through practice and collaborative co-regulation, but may additionally mitigate detrimental factors such as stress (Liston et al., 2009; Schoofs et al., 2009). Furthermore, it has the potential to cultivate a sense of connectedness and social support, as well enjoyment and engagement, which have each been implicated in supporting EF/SR growth (Ahn & Fedewa, 2011; Diamond & Ling, 2016). Even in low-impact activities such as mindfulness, there was suggestion that movement-based activities, such as belly breathing, may have supported children's focused attention, particularly when used with a prop to help the visualisation (Poehlmann-Tynan et al., 2016). This supports previous research that identified physical activity as being a mechanism to enhance attention (Bidzan-Bluma & Lipowska, 2018; Wood et al., 2020), although perhaps the mechanism of effect is related more to movement, than intensity or amount of activity. However, as with EF/SR challenge, this is likely to interact with other intervention characteristics; multi-component interventions, for instance, also often involved movement, but were unable to achieve the same consistency or strength of results. This may be related to challenges to implementation fidelity, for instance, rather than ineffectiveness of the movement components of these programs. This complexity notwithstanding, the current findings point to this being a beneficial inclusion within the current corpus of studies.

Personnel Leading the Intervention

Perhaps related to the inconsistency in results from interventions involving movement, the current results further suggest that the level of expertise of the personnel leading an intervention is influential. The use of external facilitators, for instance, ensures that the interventionists will be highly trained, experienced and have high self-efficacy and commitment to the fidelity of the intervention (Diamond & Ling, 2016). There is also the potential for 'novelty effect', wherein having an unfamiliar person lead the intervention may garner more child attention and engagement (perceived as something 'special'). Conversely, external facilitators have no prior relationship with the children with whom they are working, and thus differentiating, engaging and sustaining attention in activities will require with, the children.

In the higher efficacious studies led by teachers, a feature common to all was the level of professional development (PD) provided. One of the most efficacious studies reviewed was that by Razza et al. ( 2015), which required the teacher to complete a 200-hour certificate course in mindfulness yoga prior to implementing the program. This highlights the importance of providing teachers with PD into high-quality practices and supporting their implementation to achieve high fidelity, consistency, mastery and investment in intervention implementation. All studies in this review required teachers to attend some sort of training, usually for a few hours, just prior to the implementation of the program; however, the outcomes were comparatively stronger in studies that spaced out face-to-face training over an extended period (Perels et al., 2009; Walk et al., 2018), providing teachers the opportunity to implement and reflect upon new knowledge, in manageable chunks.

Equally, the ongoing use of coaching to support teachers to embed new practices was seen as a positive feature in several of the effective, longer-term interventions (e.g. Clements et al., 2020; Howard et al., 2020); however, since this was not employed in many studies, nor was it specifically evaluated within the study designs that did, the impact of this inclusion is unclear. Yet anecdotal evidence suggested that coaching may be an important consideration to "build [teacher's] experience and confidence, to become efficacious in his space" (Wu et al., 2020, p.794), and maximise intervention impact as soon as possible. Prior research similarly asserts that efficacy of classroom interventions vary with teachers' ability to incorporate appropriate strategies to support SR/EF development in their classrooms (Clark, 2010; Little, 2016; Vasseleu et al., 2021), which is often a specific target of coaching. Indeed, teacher knowledge and understanding of how to develop SR and EFs is considered more important than expensive equipment (Tominey & McClelland, 2011). Where teachers can be trained to, or near to, the implementation standard and investment of an external facilitator, teachers would have the advantage of their existing knowledge (of needs) and relationships with the children. As earlier, where this pattern did not hold was for interventions that were comparatively long in duration, such as those embedded across an entire school year.

Dosage

No clear perfect dosage recommendations emerged within or across approaches, however, the opportunity to practise taught skills was evident in the more efficacious studies. This supports prior research indicating the importance of practising targeted abilities (Blair & Raver, 2014; Ericsson & Towne, 2010), and that the best way to enhance these is by performing enjoyable activities in which children are active and involved (Diamond & Ling, 2016; Zosh et al., 2018).

Aligning Approach to the Change that is Sought

Results from the reviewed interventions clearly highlight discrepancies in outcomes across the approaches. For instance, results of this review point to some approaches being better suited to developing specific abilities than others. For instance, results imply that mediated structured play may be more suited to developing CF, whereas adopting a music approach may be better suited to enhancing IC.

Moreover, several studies noted that children with the lowest baselines gained most from the intervention (e.g. Gerholm et al., 2019; McClelland et al., 2019; Romero-Lopez et al., 2020; Schmitt et al., 2018; Tominey & McClelland, 2011), paralleling previous findings (Blair & Raver, 2014; Diamond & Ling, 2016). Still other studies noted better outcomes for boys (Kats Gold et al., 2020; Williams & Berthelsen, 2019), for children from higher income families (Thibodeau-Nielsen et al., 2020), or for English Language Learners (Schmitt et al., 2015). While perhaps intuitive, this emphasises the need to align the intervention approach with the target abilities and population, as mechanisms of change likely differ across approaches and intervention characteristics. At present there appears insufficient consideration of how an adopted approach is well suited to growing targeted abilities. Instead, foci are more commonly on characteristics for growth in more global EF/SR ability, acceptability and scalability, minimising dose requirements, and other similar considerations.

Other Implicated Characteristics for Intervention Effectiveness

Indirect Influences

Teachers' own social and emotional wellbeing is recognised as influencing their capacity in the classroom and impacting their practices (Blewitt et al., 2020; Neuenschwander et al., 2017). Comparatively few interventions targeted teachers' wellbeing in the current review, although those that did (e.g. Jones et al., 2013; Raver et al., 2011) found that supporting teachers to create positive classroom climates and develop high quality teacher-child relationships not only improved children's SR/EF, but also teachers' capacity to support their children. Just as a child is better prepared to learn and grow when more-basic needs are met (Bernier et al., 2012; Lawson et al., 2018; Wenzel & Gunnar, 2013), intervention effects and implementation are likely to be improved if children's (and teachers') emotional, social and physical needs are also considered (Diamond, 2013; Diamond & Lee, 2011; Diamond & Ling, 2016) when designing interventions. Broadening the approach to SR/EF development to include a focus on intentionally reducing likely sources of stress for children remains an area requiring further attention, particularly in light of the strong outcomes achieved in the SEL and mindfulness interventions.

Sustainability

Ease of accommodating an intervention within existing preschool routine is a characteristic also warranting further consideration, if change is to be scalable, sustainable and effective. This is particularly important if interventions seek to reduce inequalities of access for children and reduce effects of poverty (Raver et al., 2011). The most widely used approach to deliver intervention 'training' was through games. In addition to the mediated structured games, a play-based approach was a feature in many of the identified approaches. This is not surprising given the age of the children involved and the ease with which games may be integrated into daily routines at low cost; both in terms of resources required and teacher training. Furthermore, games can be easily adapted to scale their cognitive challenge. Since games are played in groups, they may also be a vehicle to strengthen skills in teamwork and cooperation through co-regulation. However, small effect sizes reported for the interventions that had an obvious game-based approach ( n = 16) suggest that the group context may not provide sufficiently tailored challenge at an individual level. Nevertheless, several studies reported on children's increased engagement, enjoyment and agency as a by-product of these interventions (Keown et al., 2020; Schmidt et al., 2020). This has implications for children's levels of joy, stress, connectedness and autonomy, which have been highlighted as influential to EF/SR (Center on the Developing Child, 2016; Diamond & Ling, 2016).

Limitations and Future Directions

For many approaches reviewed, the often-limited number of studies using that approach (and often constrained sample sizes within these studies) means that caution needs to be taken when drawing conclusions about the effectiveness of a particular approach. Non-significant effects might be due to 'underpowered analyses', instead of truly no effect (Takacs & Kassai, 2019, p. 691). Furthermore, three of the studies for which an effect size was unable to be computated used a digital approach, and the exclusion of these studies might have may have impacted the overall findings of this approach. However, even with their inclusion, the rate of significance of effects could not have exceeded 50%.

It is also unclear from this review the impact a (lack of) sample diversity had on results. Reporting of demographic characteristics is often not comprehensive or consistent enough to be comparable across studies (e.g. different studies report different selections of indices for, and quantities of, demographics). Considering the demographic data that were available, child backgrounds were not homogeneous, as evidenced by the range of early childhood centres from around the globe, from Head Start services (a U.S.-based program providing for low-income families) to centres linked to universities. While methods such as meta-analyses are well placed to address some of these issues, there were analytic, and study aim considerations that led us to undertake a systematic review. First, meta-analysis is not advised where there is high disparity between studies (i.e. interventions, even within an approach) (Crowther et al., 2010; Garg et al., 2008), as in the current corpus of data. Second, our study aimed to investigate the characteristics of effective EF or SR intervention; while we also were interested in the comparative efficacy of different approaches, aggregating within these would obscure our finding that high efficacy is possible from any of the reviewed approaches (even if this is not the most prevalent outcome for interventions adopting a given approach).

The studies included in this review were not evaluated for fidelity of implementation given this is often unreported and when it is, it is rarely in a common reported form. This is a criteria worth addressing in future studies, given that the fidelity with which any intervention is implemented is likely to affect outcomes. Where this criterion was a consideration, with fidelity checks built into the design and implementation of the study (Lillard, 2012), strong EF outcomes were only achieved by children whose teachers had implemented the Montessori curriculum with a high degree of fidelity.

A number of programs were high in efficacy, yet were also high in burden (e.g. cost, time or resources). Given equivalent effects, we may want to privilege those lower in burden and more easily accommodated into the preschool day. While cost-benefit analysis would require fuller accounts of program requirements that are conventionally reported, the higher efficacy yet lower burden approaches from this review may include physical activities, mediated structured play and mindfulness activities. All of these could be implemented in small groups or whole class, readily integrated throughout the day, and can be delivered by a classroom teacher after relatively brief training. These are important considerations for policy makers who must balance financial investments against return on investment in the form of improved child or educator outcomes.

How long potential gains last, and how well these gains transfer to other outcomes and abilities related to SR/EFs, remains under-evaluated. Only four of the included studies included follow-up assessments several months after the conclusion of the intervention. This is a limitation not only for the current review, but also for SR and EF intervention research more broadly. There is a need for studies to track child outcomes for longer periods, post-intervention, to establish whether acute gains are sustained, or if they 'fade out' over time, a phenomenon that is widespread in education interventions (Bailey et al., 2017, 2020). Likewise, the incremental benefits of specific intervention components, characteristics or features is an area of high opportunity for future research.

References

Bierman, K., Nix, R., Greenberg, M., Blair, C., & Domitrovich, C. (2008). Executive functions and school readiness intervention: Impact, moderation, and mediation in the Head Start REDI program. Development and Psychopathology, 20(3), 821-843. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0954579408000394

Article Google Scholar

Bockmann, J. O., & Yu, S. Y. (2022). Using mindfulness-based interventions to support self-regulation in young children: A review of the literature. Early Childhood Education Journal, 1-11.

Center on the Developing Child at Harvard University (2016). From best practices to breakthrough impacts: A science-based approach to building a more promising future for young children and families. Retrieved from www.developingchild.harvard.edu

Center on the Developing Child (2007). The Science of Early Childhood Development (InBrief). Retrieved from www.developingchild.harvard.edu.

Center on the Developing Child. (2012). Executive function: Skills for life and learning.

Clark, A. (2010). Transforming children's spaces: Children's and adults' participation in designing learning environments. Routledge.

Book Google Scholar

Diamond, A., & Ling, D. S. (2019). Review of the evidence on, and fundamental questions about, efforts to improve executive functions, including working memory. Cognitive and working memory training: Perspectives from psychology, neuroscience, and human development, 145-389.

Ericsson, K. A., & Towne, T. J. (2010). Expertise. WIREs Cognitive Science.

Finkel, S. E. (2011). Casual analysis with panel data. Sage.

Google Scholar

Hedges L, O. I. (1985). Statistical methods for meta-analysis (Orlando, FL: Academic). Hedges Statistical Methods for Meta-Analysis1985.

Howard, S. J., Vasseleu, E., Neilsen-Hewett, C., De Rosnay, M., & Williams, K. E. (2021b). Predicting academic school readiness and risk status from different assessment approaches and constructs of early self-regulation. In Child & Youth Care Forum (pp. 1-25). Springer US.

Jones, S. M., Bailey, R., Barnes, S. P., Partee, A., Bailey, R., Barnes, S., & Partee, A. (2016). Executive function mapping project.

McClelland, M. M., John Geldhof, G., Cameron, C. E., & Wanless, S. B. (2015). Development and self‐regulation. Handbook of child psychology and developmental science, 1-43.

McClelland, M. M., Tominey, S. L., Schmitt, S. A., & Duncan, R. (2017). SEL interventions in early childhood. The Future of Children, 33-47.

Pianta, R. C., & Rimm-Kaufman, S. (2006). The social ecology of the transition to school: Classrooms, families, and children.

Stefan, C. A., Dănilă, I., & Cristescu, D. (2022). Classroom-wide school interventions for preschoolers' social-emotional learning: a systematic review of evidence-based programs. Educational Psychology Review, 1-40.

Vasseleu, E., Neilsen-Hewett, C., Ehrich, J., Cliff, K., & Howard, S. J. (2021, February). educator beliefs around supporting early self-regulation: Development and evaluation of the self-regulation knowledge, attitudes and self-efficacy scale. In Frontiers in Education (Vol. 6, p. 621320). Frontiers Media SA.

Vygotsky, L. S., & Cole, M. (1978). Mind in society: Development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

Google Scholar

Zelazo, P. D., Blair, C. B., & Willoughby, M. T. (2016). Executive function: Implications for education. NCER 2017-2000. National Center for Education Research.

Download references

Funding

Open Access funding enabled and organized by CAUL and its Member Institutions

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

School of Education, The University of Wollongong, Wollongong, NSW, 2522, Australia

Rosalyn A. Muir, Steven J. Howard & Lisa Kervin

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Rosalyn A. Muir.

Ethics declarations

Declarations

This Systematic Literature was registered with PROSPERO: Jul 10, 2021. No: CRD42021260214.

Competing Interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Muir, R.A., Howard, S.J. & Kervin, L. Interventions and Approaches Targeting Early Self-Regulation or Executive Functioning in Preschools: A Systematic Review. Educ Psychol Rev 35, 27 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-023-09740-6
Download citation

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Get shareable link

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

Keywords

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Interventions and Approaches Targeting Early Self-Regulation or Executive Functioning in Preschools: A Systematic Review - Educational Psychology Review

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This systematic literature review sought to reconcile the evidence of efficacy for interventions and approaches to enhancing self-regulation and/or executive function in preschool settings. Following PRISMA methodology, a comprehensive search of 20 years of intervention research identified 85 studies that met inclusion criteria. Interventions were categorised by intervention approach and coded for their characteristics (e.g.

# data[].attributes.body
What are the possible findings/good classroom practices or strategies related to our AOC?

1. Classroom accommodations for sensory processing challenges (understood.org)

2. 12 Self-Regulation Strategies for Young Children | Heart-Mind Online (heartmindonline.org) – Name It to Tame It Process (Notice, Name and Respond)

3. Actionable Classroom Strategies for Reinforcing Appropriate Behavior - Illuminate Education

(Start from a foundation of positivity, empathy, and care)

To what extend do the idea(s) fit our MK's/children's context?

To a certain extent the ideas fit MK children’s context as it depends on the way of facilitation / execution by teachers - language and tone used with the children and the profile of each child.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
We can help the young children in our lives manage challenging feelings by strengthening their red hearts. Feeling Alert & Engaged is linked to recognizing and naming emotions and self-regulation. While toddlers and pre-school aged children are learning to notice their feelings and exercise self-control, the adults in their lives are still essential co-regulators. During this developmental phase, children need their parents, teachers, and caregivers to respond appropriately to their emotional cues, help them manage disruptive behaviors, and model safe, healthy ways to navigate big feelings.
Adults can help children follow a 3-Step Recipe for Self-Regulation based on Dr. Daniel Siegel's "Name it to tame it" process:
Step 1: Notice the feeling - Help the child tune into how their body is feeling. Ask questions like: What is going on in your body right now? How does your tummy feel? How does your throat feel? Do your muscles feel tight or relaxed? Is your heart beating quickly? Are your eyes making tears?

Step 2: Name the feeling - Invite the child to name how they are feeling. Affirm their answer ("yes, I can see from your tears that you're feeling sad right now") and extend upon it to build their emotional vocabulary and awareness ("I bet you might be feeling disappointed too, I know you really wanted to keep playing at the park").

Step 3: Respond to the feeling - This is when the dance of co-regulation really begins. Taking into account the child's present state, temperament, and preferences, engage them in a brief activity to boost self-regulation. Tell the child that you are going to do something special together now to help their red Alert & Engaged heart feel better, such as one of the activities described below.

12 Self-Regulation Strategies for Young Children

Download the infographic below!

1) Take a time-in. Spend 5 minutes in a calm, quiet space with the child. Offer to hold the child, talk, sing, sway, or just sit together in silence. Connection is a key component of self-regulation, as is described in Dr. Daniel Siegel's connect and redirect approach.

2) Pause for a listening break. Listen to a kid-friendly meditation with the child, such as one developed by child mindfulness expert Susan Kaiser Greenland. Auditory stimulation such as a meditation, soothing music, or an audio book can help re-focus children's attention without the overstimulation of staring at a screen.

3) Do the rainbow breath. Face the child and begin with your hands at your sides. As you inhale, slowly raise your arms until your palms touch above your head with straight arms, imagining that you are painting a rainbow with your finger tips! As you exhale, gently lower your hands to your sides, painting a rainbow from the top down. Repeat with the child until they feel ready to move on. Long, slow breathing helps soothe the nervous system by regulating the vagus nerve.

4) Sing vowel sounds together. Take turns choosing an open vowel sound to sing, such as "ahhh" or "ohhhhh." Inhale deeply and as you exhale, sing the vowel sound for as long as is comfortable. Repeat several times. This exercise, called toning, helps balance sympathetic and parasympathetic nervous systems by slowing down and deepening the breath.

5) Paint their face. Use a clean, dry paint brush, feather, or the tip of your finger to pretend to "paint" the child's face in imaginary hues. Invite them to close their eyes and imagine beautiful colours being swept across their cheeks. This activity uses light tactile stimulation and visualization to regulate the nervous system.

6) Cool things down. Offer the child a cool glass of water, some frozen fruit or a popsicle, or run their wrists under cold water (you could even offer a cold shower or bath for the brave at heart!). Exposure to tolerable cold can act as a mini "shock" to the nervous system and help it reset.

7) Smell the flowers. The scent of lavender can decrease anxiety and reduce stress. It can be safe to use lavender essential oil for kids over age 5; for younger children, smell fresh or dried lavender flowers together instead, focusing on how the scent makes them feel.

8) Move like an animal. Ask the child what animal they feel like right now, then invite them to move how that animal moves (eg. a grumpy bear might stomp around the room, or a sad snake might slowly slither on their stomach). Then ask them what animal they would rather feel like, and invite them to move that way instead (eg. a happy bird might flit around the room on tip toe ). This activity, inspired by somatic therapy, helps children shift their emotions by moving in a way that matches their desired emotional state.

9) Have a smiling contest. Face the child with your cheesiest grin, and have them do the same. See how long you can both keep smiling for. Research shows that facial expressions can have a small, but significant, impact on our emotions: turning your frown upside down can really make you happier!

10) Tense then release. Invite the child to clench their fists as tight as they can, then exhale to release. Repeat several times, or see what it feels like to tense different body parts like their legs, arms, or even their face! This exercise is a form of progressive muscle relaxation, which has been proven to decrease heart rate and reduce cortisol levels.

11) Play a mindful game. Play frog jumps, shake it up, balloon arms, or freeze dance together. By connecting children's movements to their senses, these games help children to regulate their bodies, sensations, and thoughts. Playing with a supportive adult gives young children the confidence and support they need to try something new.

12) Reflect together. Fostering a self-reflective environment can help children learn to make better self-regulation choices in the future. Ask children to reflect on questions like: "how did my body feel before? How does it feel now? How did I help myself when I was feeling ____? How can I help myself next time I feel this way?"
Download Infographic

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
12 Self-Regulation Strategies for Young Children

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
We can help the young children in our lives manage challenging feelings by strengthening their red Alert & Engaged hearts. Feeling Alert & Engaged is linked to recognizing and naming emotions and self-regulation. While toddlers and pre-school aged children are learning to notice their feelings and exercise self-control, the adults in their lives are still essential co-regulators.

# data[].attributes.headline
Another perspective on our impact on children's SEC (Article used SEL) 

# data[].attributes.subject
Another perspective on our impact on children's SEC (Article used SEL) 

# data[].attributes.body
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sel.2024.100030

Teachers may unintentionally and without awareness communicate differential performance expectations by providing more acknowledgment to students they have higher expectations of and less acknowledgment for those they have lower expectations of (Glock et al., 2019, Scott et al., 2019). Ironically, lower expectations may also result in the teacher promoting or engaging in less elaboration, offering fewer access points from which students can make rich connections and form effective associations (Pellegrino, 2020).

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
About ScienceDirect
Shopping cart
Contact and
supportTerms and
conditionsPrivacy policy

# data[].attributes.body
Self-regulation is defined as “the ability to manage one’s behavior, so as to withstand impulses, maintain focus, and undertake tasks, even if there are other more enticing alternatives available” (Boyd, Barnett, Bodrova, Leong, & Gomby, 2005, p. 3)

# data[].attributes.body
Cognitive self-regulation occurs between 3 and 6 years of age where young children exhibit significant gains in the ability to use rule-based reasoning and to monitor their behavior (Diamond & Taylor, 1996; Frye, Zelazo, & Palfai, 1995).

# data[].attributes.body
Computer games and concentration-style card games can help young children develop their working memory. More active games like Red Light Green Light and Freeze, in which children dance while music plays and freeze when it stops, require participants to exert self-control. During music time, the teacher can guide students to play rhythm instruments or kazoos faster or slower in time with a beat he or she establishes. A wide variety of games and activities give children opportunities to take charge of their bodies, voices, and minds—and they think they’re just having fun.

https://www.edutopia.org/article/simple-ways-to-help-young-kids-develop-self-control-donna-wilson-marcus-conyers

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The first five years of life are a period of significant brain development, but some regions of the brain mature more slowly than others. The prefrontal cortex, which is the home base of executive function, is one such region, which explains why impulse and emotional control can be difficult for young children.

Still, aspects of executive function, including the ability to focus attention and working memory and to self-regulate actions, can be improved with explicit teaching, support, and practice, even among preschoolers. And there is good reason for parents and early childhood educators to work with young children to help them develop these abilities. Several major longitudinal studies show that preschoolers who exhibit self-regulatory behaviors go on to experience more success in school and are more likely to avoid risky behaviors in adolescence than their peers who have a hard time with self-control.

Green Light for Self-Regulation

Many children make big gains in their ability to take charge of their behavior and emotions between the ages of 3 and 7. Adults can help preschoolers make the most of their developing brains by serving as "cognitive coaches," driving home the message that kids can become better listeners, learn to focus their attention, persist in learning tasks, and interact in more positive ways with peers if they think about and aim to control their actions.

Adopting these strategies can help young children develop their self-regulatory abilities:

Talk clearly, simply, and often about behaviors that matter. "Reading time is quiet time." "Take turns with favorite toys." "Now is the time to listen and follow directions." "Being helpful can make you and others feel happy." Keep rules and expectations simple, and remind children often when it's time to follow them.

Establish routines. Young children may not be able to tell time, but they do become accustomed to the cadence of a regular schedule. When they know that story time will be followed by outdoor play, active children may be more able to sit quietly while their teacher reads.

Build in time for happy movement throughout the day. Acknowledge that young children have limited attention spans by alternating learning activities that require quiet, focused attention with opportunities for independent play and learning activities that include movement.

Call attention to attention. The ability to focus attention on learning tasks is a crucial executive function for future school success. Newborns are drawn to the stimulus that is most noticeable in their environment. In the course of normal development, infants begin focusing their attention on specific stimuli emphasized by parents and other caregivers. Toddlers and preschoolers at times have seemingly endless attention for activities they enjoy-building with blocks, creating art, or participating in favorite playground games. The challenge is presenting other learning activities in ways that elicit that same level of engagement-reading with emotion and enthusiasm, developing playful, hands-on lesson activities, and providing individual attention and support to get and keep children involved.

Make a game out of it. Computer games and concentration-style card games can help young children develop their working memory. More active games like Red Light Green Light and Freeze, in which children dance while music plays and freeze when it stops, require participants to exert self-control. During music time, the teacher can guide students to play rhythm instruments or kazoos faster or slower in time with a beat he or she establishes. A wide variety of games and activities give children opportunities to take charge of their bodies, voices, and minds-and they think they're just having fun.

Encourage prosocial behaviors. Another form of gaining self-control is learning to take others' feelings and welfare into account. By doing so, children interact in more positive ways with peers. Prosocial behavior is defined as voluntary interactions with the aim of helping others. An essential attribute in its own right, prosocial competence also correlates with academic and social-emotional skills. Parents and early childhood educators can encourage young children to adopt prosocial behaviors by setting clear expectations frequently for sharing and helping others, by modeling those actions themselves, and by giving each child individual, positive attention. Emphasize the message that when we help others, we feel happy-and so do they.

Of course, like all of us, young children have their ups and downs. Positive attention from caring adults when they're feeling sad or angry can help young children begin to understand that they can take charge of their feelings. Acknowledge when children feel angry or left out, talk with them about their emotions without being dismissive, and explore how they might cope with those feelings in ways that make them feel better without hurting others.

Building their working memory can help young children make the leap from prereader to reader and enhance their problem-solving abilities by enabling them to hold key information in their minds as they calculate answers. Attending to learning tasks, remembering and observing class rules, and engaging with classmates in positive ways are other aspects of executive function that increase the likelihood that children will flourish as they begin school and throughout their years in the classroom.

For Further Reading

Donna Wilson & Marcus Conyers, Flourishing in the First Five Years: Connecting Implications From Mind, Brain, and Education Research to the Development of Young Children.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Simple Ways to Help Young Kids Develop Self-Control

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The first five years of life are a period of significant brain development, but some regions of the brain mature more slowly than others. The prefrontal cortex, which is the home base of executive function, is one such region, which explains why impulse and emotional control can be difficult for young children.

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
Mindfulness & Sensory (AUTISM): Successful Strategies

# data[].attributes.headline
Mindfulness & Sensory (AUTISM): Successful Strategies

# data[].attributes.subject
Mindfulness & Sensory (AUTISM): Successful Strategies

# data[].attributes.body
Letchmi

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Mindfulness & Sensory (AUTISM): Successful Strategies

# data[].attributes.body
Negative early experiences can impair children’s mental health and effect their cognitive, behavioral, social-emotional development.

Parents and caregivers play an important role in supporting children’s healthy development.

Research shows that family risk factors, particularly maternal risk factors such as substance use, mental health conditions and domestic violence exposure, can impact parents’ ability to support children’s development, and may contribute to behavioral problems among young children as early as age 3.

Poor attachment, especially maternal attachment, can negatively impact children’s social-emotional health, and development.

# data[].attributes.body
Talk Move strategy is a way of communicating that seeks to include everyone in a discussion and ensure that all students in a classroom environment are actively participating in the discussion. It promotes listening and communicating using words.

# data[].attributes.body
Kids can struggle with self-control for lots of reasons. Some kids take longer than others to develop self-control. So it’s sometimes a matter of catching up— especially when kids are young for their grade.

But trouble with self-control isn’t always just a matter of catching up. It can be a sign of the frustration and anxiety that come with struggling in school. ADHD can also cause challenges with self-control.

And sometimes what looks like a lack of self-control is actually a lack of social skills. It’s hard for kids to follow social rules if they don’t know when they’re breaking them.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Kids can struggle with self-control for lots of reasons. Some kids take longer than others to develop self-control. So it's sometimes a matter of catching up- especially when kids are young for their grade.

But trouble with self-control isn't always just a matter of catching up. It can be a sign of the frustration and anxiety that come with struggling in school. ADHD can also cause challenges with self-control.

And sometimes what looks like a lack of self-control is actually a lack of social skills. It's hard for kids to follow social rules if they don't know when they're breaking them.

With the right support, kids can improve their self-control. Learn more about what can cause trouble with self-control, and how to help.

ADHD and self-control

What it is: A common condition that makes it hard to focus. It can also cause trouble with impulse control, organization, and other skills called executive functions.

The self-control connection: ADHD affects the brain's ability to "hit the brakes" and think through consequences before doing something. So kids may do or say something before they've had a chance to consider their options. ADHD can also make it hard to manage emotions.

Fidgeting, interrupting, and trouble taking turns can be signs of ADHD, too. There are also symptoms of ADHD that show up at different ages.

Learning differences and self-control

What they are: Trouble with reading, writing, or math. Kids who struggle in these areas are as smart as their classmates but are often misunderstood. Others may think kids aren't trying hard enough or that they can't improve their skills.

The self-control connection: Kids with learning differences often get frustrated when they don't do well at something, even when they're trying really hard. It's also common for them to feel anxious about school. That can lead them to quickly give up on homework and tests.

Kids may break pencils, crumple up homework, or refuse to go to school. What looks like lack of self-control could be a sign that kids are feeling overwhelmed by school.

Sensory processing challenges and self-control

What it is: Trouble processing sensory information like sights, sounds, flavors, smells, and textures. Kids with sensory processing challenges may also have trouble knowing when they feel full, hungry, thirsty, hot, or cold. It can affect how kids move, too.

The self-control connection: Kids might try to run away from situations that are overwhelming. They might refuse to wear certain clothes or try new foods. Or they might have a sensory meltdown that they can't control.

Some kids seek out sensations in ways that annoy other people, like tapping them or pacing around the room. Or they might pull back from a hug or erupt in anger after getting bumped into.

Trouble with social skills and self-control

What it is: Difficulty understanding social cues like body language, facial expression, and tone of voice. Some kids may have trouble communicating in ways that are appropriate for a situation.

The self-control connection: It's hard to follow social rules when you don't understand them or don't notice that you're breaking them. Kids who struggle with social skills might stand too close to people, cut in line, or ask too many questions. They might talk a lot or have trouble "reading the room" and taking part in conversations.

Other kids might get fixated on a topic or idea and have trouble moving on to something new.

Trouble with motor skills and self-control

What it is: Motor skills help people make physical movements. Gross motor skills involve large muscles in the arms, legs, and torso. Fine motor skills involve small muscles in the hands and wrists.

The self-control connection: Trouble with motor skills makes it hard to move gracefully. Kids may drop things or bump into or push people. In some cases they might speak too loudly.

These difficulties are often misunderstood. Others may think kids are being disruptive on purpose.

No matter what's causing the trouble with self-control, there are ways to help. Families and educators can work together to understand why kids are struggling. Start by sharing notes on what you're seeing. Talk together about strategies to try at school and at home.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
There are many different reasons why kids might struggle with self-control. Learn what can cause self-control problems. Get tips on how to help.

# data[].attributes.headline
Why does the challenge occur (Based on teacher's observations and experiences)?

# data[].attributes.subject
Why does the challenge occur (Based on teacher's observations and experiences)?

# data[].attributes.body
Children:

Instant gratification (Prefer to get what they want faster)

Language barrier: Unable to have the right vocabulary to communicate or understand expectations clearly

Developmental milestones: Children are still more self-centered.

Teacher:

Lack of skills to facilitate

Need to communicate consequence and expectation to children (pre-empt for teacher's facilitation)

Others:

Time: Insufficient time to address issues

Habit: Behaviour at home is the same and therefore it poses a challenge at school as well.

# data[].attributes.body
Majority of children lack social and emotional competencies such as self management and social awareness. They are unable to exercise self-control, express emotions appropriately, take turns during conversations and behave appropriately.