Maha
Al-Hendawi
Qatar University
Evelyn Reed
Virginia Commonwealth University
Abstract
Individual
differences in temperament can be protective or risk factors that may enhance
or interfere with children’s healthy development and educational success. This study examined the concurrent and predictive
relationships between temperament, school adjustment, and academic achievement
in children at-risk. Seventy-seven children at-risk, ages five to 11 years,
were assessed in this study. The results for the concurrent relationships
showed significant relationships between children's temperament and their
school adjustment; negative emotionality significantly correlated with and
predicted school adjustment. Children's temperament was also found to have a
significant relationship with academic achievement; persistence and activity
level had significant correlations with academic achievement. Implications for practice
and considerations for future research directions are discussed.
Introduction
Educational
research into the role of children’s temperaments began in the 1980s. In
particular, academic achievement and school adjustment were among the first
variables to be examined in educational settings. The significance of
understanding a child’s temperament as it relates to school can be explained by
the concept of goodness of fit (Thomas & Chess, 1977). That is, a
school's environment must be compatible with a child's temperament for the
child to have optimal development, healthy adjustment, and positive educational
outcomes. The environment should work with, not against, the child's
temperament (Kristal, 2005). Children's individual differences in temperament
as well as their teachers’ effectiveness in promoting goodness of fit between
children’s needs and classroom environments are factors that can influence the
children's adjustment as well as their learning and academic achievement
(Keogh, 2003; Martin & Bridger, 1999).
Definition of
temperament. Several theories about child temperament have emerged
and have shaped models of temperament that define it and identify its
traits. There
is no consensus about a definition of the term temperament and its
traits, but almost all models include several constructs, specifically
that temperament (a) has a biological root, (b) appears early in life and can
be identified as early as infancy, and (c) is characterized by behavioral
tendencies rather than by discrete behavioral acts (Goldsmith et al., 1987).
The clinical model by Thomas and Chess (1977) and the developmental model by
Rothbart and Derryberry (1981) are the ones most widely used in educational
research (Zentner & Bates, 2008). In the clinical model, temperament is
defined as biologically based, individual differences in the behavioral
tendencies of an individual that indicate the person's pattern of responding to
others and to situations in the environment. In children, temperament refers to
the behavioral style or tendencies that affect how a child responds to a
situation. It is not so much a matter of why or what, in that why
refers to the motivation behind an action and what involves the
ability of a person to perform a task (Thomas & Chess, 1977). In this model,
three typologies were developed to describe the temperament of a child: the
difficult child, the easy child, and the slow-to-warm-up child. The difficult child was described as showing
behaviors associated with a negative mood, withdrawal, low adaptability, high
intensity, and low regularity; in contrast the easy child exhibited a positive
mood, adaptive reactions to new situations, and mild to moderate intensity; the
third typology was the slow-to-warm-up child who was found to display a mildly
negative response to new situations and a slow adaptability to change. The
developmental model of temperament, however, focuses on emotion and emotion
regulation; a strong emphasis is placed on attentional and neurobiological
mechanisms (Zentner & Bates, 2008). Temperament, in the developmental
model, is defined as constitutional differences in reactivity and
self-regulation. Constitutional refers to biological differences and is
influenced by heredity, maturation, and experience over time. Reactivity refers to biological arousability
(responses) to changes in the environment that can be measured by a threshold
of reactivity, latency and intensity of an individual's reaction, rise time,
and recovery time. Self-regulation
refers to the ability to modulate (regulate) their biological arousability
(reactivity) and is the ability to utilize effortful control in situations to
regulate the biological arousability (Rothbart & Derryberry, 1981).
Multiple dimensions of temperament comprise each
model. Dimensions of temperament are clustered and measured differently by
researchers and have also been used differently depending on what was
appropriate for the specific developmental level of the children. However,
while definitions differ across models of temperament, most of the temperament
dimensions exist across the models but were labeled differently. For instance, reactivity in the clinical
model can be referred to as negative emotionality in the developmental model
(Nelson, Martin, Hodge, Havill, & Kamphus 1999; Sanson et al., 2009).
Temperament Studies in North America (US and Canada)
Research in North America
has demonstrated that a child's temperament influences their teacher’s
attitudes, interactions, and decisions as well as the child’s school adjustment
and academic achievement. A child's intelligence is often overestimated for
children with temperament traits that are perceived as positive and
underestimated for children with traits that are seen as negative (Pullis &
Cadwell, 1982). A child who is inhibited is often underestimated academically,
whereas a child's greater task orientation often influences his/her teacher to
assign higher grades (Martin, Drew, Gaddis, & Moseley, 1988). Teachers’
behaviors towards children with different temperament profiles tend to differ
systematically. For instance, teachers have been found to use task orientation
information across classroom management decision-making situations; that is,
children with a higher level of task orientation were less monitored for
inappropriate or disruptive behaviors than were children with a low level of
task orientation (Pullis & Cadwell, 1982). Children’s temperaments
significantly correlated with the amount of time that teachers spend with
children, in particular with the frequency of teachers' praise and criticism,
physical contact, and directive behaviors (Nelson, 1987).
Temperament and school
adjustment. Previous studies have examined the relationship
between children’s temperaments and school adjustment (Blair,
Denham, Kochanoff, & Whipple, 2004; Coplan, Bowker, & Cooper,
2003). School adjustment was indicated by school competence, social competence,
and/or internalizing and externalizing behavior problems. Nelson et al. (1999)
found that negative emotionality in parent-rated temperament of five year old
children was a predictor of third grade teacher-rated adjustment
difficulties. Their results showed that
negative emotionality predicted all four adjustment outcome measures: school
performance problems, internalizing problems, positive social behaviors, and
externalizing problems, the last of which had the strongest relationship with
negative emotionality in that it accounted for 16.6% of the variance in teacher
rated externalizing problems. Similar findings that
negative emotionality is a dimension of temperament that fundamentally
influences school adjustment have been reported (Bouffard, Roy, & Vezeau,
2005; Coplan et al., 2003; Reed-Victor, 2004). Children with negative
emotionality are prone to intense emotions, such as intense crying or anger in
response to frustration, prolonged emotional upset as a result of changes in
plans, and a general tendency toward irritability. Those negative emotion patterns were shown to
be associated with both internalizing and externalizing problems which
influenced the children’s adjustment to school.
Research has found that correlations based on parent reports of their
children’s temperaments were stronger than those from teachers. Bouffard et al.
(2005) compared the relationship between children’s
temperaments and school adjustment, as evaluated by parents and teachers. Significant correlations between
parent-rated adjustment and teacher-rated adjustment were found in all dimensions of temperament, and all pairs of relationships were in the same direction.
That is, they were alike in being either positive or negative, but the
correlations that were based on parent reports were stronger than those from
teachers.
Temperament and academic
achievement. Research has examined the relationship between children’s
temperaments and academic achievement by assessing children's performance on
subject matter (e.g., reading, math, writing, and science) using two methods:
standardized achievement tests and/or teacher rated achievement (Bramlett,
Scott, & Rowell, 2000; Martin et al., 1988). Keogh, Pullis, and Cadwell
(1982) categorized the dimensions of temperament into the three categories,
which they considered to be the most significant for academic success: task
orientation, personal-social flexibility, and reactivity. Task orientation
includes the following dimensions: activity level, distractibility, and
persistence; personal-social flexibility includes adaptability,
approach/withdrawal, and positive mood; and reactivity is comprised of three
dimensions of temperament: intensity, threshold, and negative mood. Task orientation has consistently been shown
to have the most significant relationship with academic achievement in studies
that utilized the clinical model. For example, Martin and Holbrook (1985)
examined 104 first graders using both teachers’ ratings achievement and
standardized measures of reading and math and found
that the teachers’ ratings of activity level and persistence were
significant predictors of reading and math achievement. Subsequent studies have found similarly
significant relationships between task orientation and academic achievement
(Bramlett et al., 2000; Guerin, Gottfried, Oliver, & Thomas, 1994; Newman,
Noel, Chen, & Matsopoulos, 1998).
Studies that utilized the developmental model of
temperament reported temperament dimension of effortful control as having the
most significant relationship with academic achievement (Deater-Deckard, Mullineaux, Petrill, & Thompson, 2009).
Both standardized achievement tests and teacher rated achievement have been
found to show significant relationships with children's temperament.
Nevertheless, teacher rated achievement had a more significant relationship
with temperament traits than did standardized achievement tests (Bramlett et
al., 2000; Guerin et al., 1994; Martin et al., 1988; Martin & Holbrook,
1985). This difference in the strength of the relationships may be due to the
nature of each test, in that standardized tests tend to be objective measures
of achievement, whereas teacher rated achievement tends to be a subjective
measure. However, teacher ratings of temperament have been found to be better
predictors of achievement as measured by either assigned grades or standardized
tests than have parent ratings (Bramlett et al., 2000; Neman et al., 1998;
Martin & Holbrook, 1985; Martin et al., 1988) because teachers’ ratings may
be influenced by the teacher's observations of the child's performance. This
may particularly be true when the same teacher provides data on temperament as
well as providing teacher assigned grades (Newman et al., 1998). Environmental
context may influence the strength of such correlations; different temperament
characteristics tend to be salient in the home, whereas others are likely to be
salient in the school setting. For example, task persistence can be more
apparent in the classroom than at home.
In the classroom, the child interacts with peers and teachers and is
expected to work on a task and complete it.
Similarly, task orientation temperament traits may not be as disturbing
or as noticeable in the home as they are in the classroom in which structured
activity and specific rules are in place (Bramlett et al. 2000; Keogh et al.,
1982; Liew, Eisenberg, & Reiser, 2004).
Temperament
Studies in the International Literature
Research
in other regions of the world, including Europe, the Middle East, and Asia, has also examined the relationships between
temperament and academic achievement, and temperament and school adjustment.
For example, Bruni et al. (2006) investigated the relationship between
temperament and academic achievement for 264 children, aged eight to 11, in
urban areas of Rome.
This research found that the temperament dimension of task orientation strongly
correlated with school achievement index (SAI) and that personal–social
flexibility moderately correlated with school achievement. They reported that
these two dimensions of temperament accounted for about 51% of the total
variance, making them the most predictive factors for SAI. Reactivity was found
to have a weak negative correlation with the SAI. Bruni et al.,’s findings are
in line with the findings reported in the North American studies discussed
above. Similar findings were found intwo other international studies (Taiwan and Israel). Li, Onaga, Shen, and Chiou (2009) examined 211
Taiwanese elementary level children. Their findings indicated a significant
relationship between science achievement and both persistence and
distractibility. Mevarech (1985) investigated 191 second and fourth grade
Israeli children. Their findings showed significant relationships with math
achievement for all the temperament dimensions that they examined. However,
Mevarech found that correlations between teachers’ rating of achievement and
task oriented behavioral style (adaptability, persistence, distractibility, and
threshold) were higher for second graders than for fourth graders. Another
interesting study by Chen, Chen, Li, and Wang (2009)
examined the relationship between temperament and school adjustment for 200
seven year old children in urban areas of China. They found the temperament
dimension of inhibition correlated significantly with school adjustment, but in
a way that was very different from what is typically found in Western
children. Chen et al. used an observational method
to obtain data on inhibition as a temperament dimension while employing teacher
and peer reports about school adjustment.
Inhibition was positively associated with later cooperative behavior,
peer liking, perceived social integration, school attitudes, teacher-rated
competence, and distinguished studentship.
Inhibition was also negatively associated with later teacher-rated
learning problems. This pattern of relationship between inhibition and later
adjustment outcomes in Chinese children, which was different from those
typically found in Western children, conveys the role of culture and
environmental context. Specifically, inhibition is perceived as a positive
aspect of temperament that Chinese children are encouraged to have.
Gender
Differences in Temperament
Very
few studies have reported gender differences in temperament. In a couple that
did, girls were higher than boys in one dimension of temperament, effortful
control (Liew et al., 2004). Other studies
found no significant differences in gender (Blair et
al., 2004; Bouffard et al., 2005); gender differences, when they were
found to exist, were differences in strength rather than in the nature of the
effects (Prior, Smart, Sanson, & Oberklaid, 2001). Newman et al., (1998)
examined gender as a moderating variable, but their findings did not support
their hypothesis that gender was a moderating variable between any temperament
dimension and reading achievement in first grade. Deater-Deckard et al., (2009) examined the
influence of children's gender on the investigated variables. Only two notable findings were reported for
gender differences, that is, girls were higher than boys in effortful control,
and lower than boys in surgency, which indicates high-energy activation and
includes impulsivity, high intensity pleasure, activity level, and low levels
of shyness.
However,
existing research that investigated the relationship
between temperament, school adjustment, and academic achievement, whether from
studies developed in North America or internationally,
has primarily examined predominantly middle class children who were basically
developing typically (Bramlett et al., 2000; Nelson et al., 1999). Very few
studies have examined children at-risk, those of low income families,
minorities, and/or children with disabilities (Prior et al., 2001). The number
of children at-risk is high in the US
and is increasing; approximately one-third of the children in the US are at risk
for school failure before they even enter kindergarten (Lerner, Lowenthal,
& Egan, 2003). Children at-risk are likely to have single or multiple risk
factors, which can cause serious problems early in life. Sources of early risk
in children's lives can be classified into three categories: biological,
familial, and environmental (Edwards, Mumford, & Serra-Roldan 2007; Werner,
2000). Thus, individual differences in temperament can present potential risks
or protective factors for healthy development. Certain temperament profiles can
be difficult temperaments which can
predict adjustment problems, low achievement, and difficulties for individuals
in later life (Thomas & Chess, 1977). For example, temperament dimensions
such as high activity level, negative emotionality, and impulsivity can add an
additional stressor to at-risk children. However, a child with a difficult
temperament can adjust to the demands of the environment with appropriate
support. If the classroom environment can be made to be compatible with the
child's temperament, the child can be well adjusted and, therefore, academically
and behaviorally competent and more likely to succeed. Therefore, identifying
children's temperaments' profile at an early age so that appropriate
modifications of the classroom environment can occur is necessary.
International data have also indicated that children
at-risk exist in all parts of the world and that these children almost always
encounter obstacles to adequate educational opportunity. For instance, in many
Middle Eastern and African countries children at-risk may be denied opportunities
to learn or may be provided with low equality education and exposed to social
stigmas (UNESCO, 2010). In Germany
and England
children at-risk are usually from immigrant backgrounds and/or have a low
socioeconomic status (Dyson & Gallannaugh, 2008; Werning, Löser, &
Urban, 2008).
This
research examined temperament in children at-risk, who were primarily African
Americans with low income/poverty and/or disability. The purpose of this study
was to identify individual differences in temperament and assess their
relationship to positive school outcomes for children at-risk. Specifically, we
examined children's temperament traits that are associated with and predict
school adjustment and academic achievement for children at-risk. Three research
questions were investigated to determine the concurrent and predictive
relationships between children's temperament, school adjustment, and academic
achievement for children at-risk. The research questions were as follows: 1. What
is the relationship between the four dimensions of temperament (inhibition,
persistence, negative emotionality, and activity level), school adjustment, and
academic achievement among children at-risk? 2. To what extent do these four
dimensions of temperament explain variations in concurrent school adjustment
and academic achievement among children at-risk? 3. Do temperament differences
exist between boys and girls with regards to academic achievement and school
adjustment?
Method
Participants
The participants in this study were 77 children who
were eligible for Title I, special education, and/or homeless education. The
sample consisted of 42 (54.5%) boys and 35 (45.5%) girls; their ages ranged
from five to eleven years. The risk groups included 49 (64%) who were
economically disadvantaged, ten (13%) who had developmental delays, and 18
(23%) who had both economic disadvantage and developmental delay. The majority
of the children were African Americans 57 (74%); 13 (16.9%) were Caucasians;
five (6.5%) were Hispanic; and 2 (2.6%) were other.
The
children were identified as being at risk based on school system data that
included their eligibility for specific educational programs, i.e., Title 1
(based on low family income), Special Education (based on identified
disabilities), and/or Homeless Education (based on instability of family
housing). Risk group eligibility was determined based on categorical risk
related programs as identified by Virginia Department of Education regulations
and local education agencies' policies.
Measures
The Temperament Assessment Battery for
Children -Revised (TABC-R; Martin & Bridger, 1999). The TABC-R
was designed to assess four temperament traits of children and contains both
parent and teacher forms. The current study used the teacher form of the TABC-R,
which includes 29 items describing behaviors reflective of four dimensions of
temperament: Activity Level, Inhibition, Negative Emotionality, and Task
Persistence. The inhibition scale assesses the child’s tendency to physically
withdraw or to become emotionally upset when in an unfamiliar social situation.
The negative emotionality scale measures individual differences in the tendency
for children to become emotionally upset. For example, it shows whether the
child cries, screams, or subtly expresses upset emotions such as by an angry
look or a frowning face (Martin & Bridger, 1999). The activity level scale
assesses the child’s energetic gross motor activity, such as active/quiet play
and difficulty/ease of controlling gross motor activity to complete a task. The
task persistence scale measures attention and the ability to continue a task
that is difficult. A high score on each scale is indicative of a high tendency
toward negative behavior. Specifically, a high score on the inhibition scale
indicates a high tendency to withdraw and feel stressed, a high score on
negative emotionality is indicative of intense emotional expression, and a high
score on the task persistence scale indicates a short attention span and a low
ability to continue a difficult task (Martin & Bridger, 1999).
The Likert-type ratings that were used are based on
the frequency of behaviors for individual children (1 = ‘hardly ever’ through 7
= ‘almost always’). The items that were used represent bipolar aspects of
temperament dimensions (e.g., high and low activity levels). Temperament
dimension raw scores were calculated for the students based on the factor
analyses and scoring procedures outlined in the most recent TABC-R manual
(Martin & Bridger, 1999).
The Adaptive Skills Scale of the Behavior Assessment System for
Children-Teacher Rating Scales (BASC-TRS) (Reynolds & Kamphaus, 1992). The BASC-TRS is a multidimensional measure that
assesses aspects of personality, behavioral function, externalizing,
internalizing problems and adaptive skills. For the purpose of this study, only
the adaptive scale was employed to measure school adjustment. The adaptive
scale measures positive behaviors of children from preschool to adolescence,
using three different forms for three age levels: preschool ages from four to
five, child ages from six to eleven, and adolescent ages from twelve to
eighteen. For the purpose of this study the version that measures children’s
age from six to eleven was used. The adaptive skills scales used four
indicators (a) the adaptability scale assesses the ability to adjust to changes
in routine, tasks, people, and situations, (b) the social skills scale assesses
individual prosocial behaviors such as helping and/or complementing others, and
admitting mistakes, (c) the leadership scale measures behaviors that may be
associated with leadership potential, such as participating in extracurricular
activities, and (d) the study skills scale relates to learning and academic
behavior skills, such as completing homework (Reynolds & Kamphaus, 1992).
High scores on those scales indicate positive or desirable behaviors. Teachers
were asked to rate the children on a four point scale ranging from Never to Almost Always. The BASC-TRS provides three different norm samples
for scoring: general norms, female and male norms, and clinical norms. For this
study, the general norms scoring was employed because these were normalized
using large populations of United States children across wide categories of
gender, race/ethnicity, and clinical or special education needs (Reynolds &
Kamphaus, 1992).
Academic
achievement measure. Data on children's academic achievement was gathered
by asking the teacher to rate the children on a four point scale: failing,
below average, average, or above average in the following core subjects:
reading or language arts, math, science, and social studies. Scoring for each
question ranged from failing = 1, to above average = 4. Subsequently, a total
academic achievement score was calculated by summing a child's score in all the
subjects. This total academic achievement score was used in the statistical
analyses and throughout this study to indicate academic achievement. Academic
Achievement is defined as the academic performance of students in specific
subject matters (reading or language arts, math, science, and social studies).
Procedures
With
the approval of school administrators, the current teachers of these children
were asked to participate in this study. Of those contacted, 72 teachers agreed
to participate by completing the TABC-R rating scale, the Adaptive Skills
Scale, and the academic achievement rating for a total of 77 children in their
public school classrooms. The classroom teachers completed the ratings during a
two to three week period. The data collection procedures were conducted in the
second semester of the school year in order to allow sufficient time for the
teachers to get to know the children and to have sufficient interactions with
them in order for the teachers to be able to provide credible information about
the children’s temperaments and their academic and social behaviors.
Design
This
study employed a non-experimental correlational design to examine the
concurrent and predictive relationships between four dimensions of temperament
(inhibition, persistence, negative emotionality, and activity level), and two
educational outcomes (school adjustment and academic achievement). Two
statistical analyses were used to address the research questions: bivariate
correlations and multiple regressions.
Results
Table
1 presents the means and standard deviations for the predictive variables. For
the outcome variables, the academic achievement scores of the participants
ranged from 4 to 16 (M = 10.18, SD = 3.14) indicating an average
achievement across all subjects of a below average grade. The adaptive skills
ranged from 43 to 148 (M = 80.62, SD = 23.43) indicating that the
children had inadequate skills on adaptability, study skills, social skills,
and leadership skills. Both means indicate low adaptive skills and low levels
of academic achievement. These results were expected as at-risk children have
been shown to have adjustment difficulties and achievement problems (Hamre
& Pianta, 2005; Edwards et al., 2007). Additionally, means and standard
deviations were obtained by gender for the examined variables. Only activity
level was found to be higher in boys than in girls (M = 17.98, SD
= 4.06) and (M = 15.80, SD = 4.58), respectively. All other
temperament dimensions showed no significant differences between the girls and
boys.
Table 1. Means and Standard Deviations of the TABC
scale
TABC Scale
|
Mean
|
Standard
Deviation
|
Inhibition
|
36.60
|
9.96
|
Persistence
|
29.86
|
9.62
|
Negative Emotionality
|
31.04
|
10.87
|
Activity Level
|
16.99
|
4.41
|
Note. N = 77.
Table 2 shows that negative emotionality had a
significant correlation with adaptive skills (r = -.23, p < .05).
When correlations were performed by gender, adaptive skills significantly
correlated for girls with negative emotionality, persistence, and activity
level. No significant correlations were found for boys.
Table 2. Correlations between TABC Scale and the Adaptive Skills for the Total
Sample and by Gender
TABC Scale
|
||||
Adaptive Skills
|
Inhibition
|
Negative Emotionality
|
Persistence
|
Activity Level
|
Total
|
-.18
|
-.23*
|
.22
|
-.19
|
Boys
|
-.09
|
.06
|
-.01
|
.26
|
Girls
|
-.25
|
-.46**
|
.38*
|
-.52**
|
Note. N = 77 (Boys = 42; Girls = 35).
* p < .05, ** p < .01.
Table
3 shows that persistence (r = .31, p < .01) and activity level (r = -.27, p < .05) were found to have significant relationships with
academic achievement. Three significant correlations were found for girls:
negative emotionality, persistence, and activity level (r = .39, .42, ps <
.05) and (r = -.62, p < .01), respectively.
Table 3. Correlation Coefficients between TABC Scale and Academic Achievement
for the Total Sample and by Gender
TABC Scale
|
||||
Achievement
|
Inhibition
|
Negative Emotionality
|
Persistence
|
Activity Level
|
Total
|
-.10
|
-.12
|
.31**
|
-.27*
|
Boys
|
.06
|
.13
|
.19
|
.08
|
Girls
|
-.30
|
-.39*
|
.42*
|
-.62**
|
Note.
N = 77 (Boys = 39; Girls = 33).
* p < .05, ** p < .01.
Two
stepwise multiple regression analyses were performed to examine the predictive
relationships. The first was for the academic achievement score against the
four temperament dimension scores, and the second was for the adaptive skills
against the four temperament dimensions. Prior to conducting these procedures,
the assumptions relating to these analyses were checked for multicollinearity
and for linear relationships between the predictors and the outcome variables.
The results indicated the presence of linear relationships between the
variables and detected no multicollinearity problems.
Table
4 shows that persistence was the only predictor which entered the first
regression model for academic achievement against the four temperament
dimensions; it had a statistically significant direct influence on academic
achievement, accounting for 9.8% of the variance (R2 = .098,
adjusted R2 = .085, p < .01). The remaining
variables (inhibition, negative emotionality, and activity level) failed to
significantly predict academic achievement.
Table 4. Stepwise Multiple Regression for TABC Scale
Predicting Academic Achievement
TABC Scale
|
B
|
Standard
Error of B
|
β
|
Persistence
|
2.95
|
1.07
|
.314
|
Note: N = 72, R2
= .098, adjusted R2 = .085, p < .01.
Table
5 shows that negative emotionality was the only predictor which entered the
regression model in the second stepwise regression in which adaptive skills
were regressed against the four temperament variables; it had a statistically
significant direct influence on the adaptive skills scale, accounting for 5.3%
of the variance (R2 = .053, adjusted R2 =
.040, p < .05).
Table 5. Stepwise Multiple Regression for TABC Scale
Predicting School Adjustment
TABC Scale
|
B
|
Standard
Error of B
|
β
|
Negative
Emotionality
|
-.006
|
.003
|
-.230
|
Note. N = 77, R2
= .053, adjusted R2 = .040, p < .05.
Discussion
The aim of this study was to investigate the
concurrent and predictive relationships between temperament, school adjustment,
and academic achievement. In this study, we examined children from low income
families, minorities, and/or children with disabilities; the majority of the
participants were African Americans. Three major findings were consistent with
previous research, which has primarily examined middle class children (Blair et
al., 2004; Liew et al., 2004; Martin et al., 1988).
First, significant relationships were found for both areas of interest, school
adjustment and academic achievement, in relation to children's temperament. Second,
the magnitude of the relationships primarily fell within a weak to moderate
range. Third, negative emotionality and persistence were found to be the most
significant and predictive variables for school adjustment and academic
achievement, respectively.
Temperament and School
Adjustment
Temperament was found to have
a significant association with school adjustment. Specifically, negative
emotionality had a significant negative correlation (r = -.23, p < .05)
with school adjustment. This level of correlation is considered weak. The
findings of this study are in line with previous research (Blair et al., 2004;
Liew et al., 2004). This finding of the influence of negative emotionality on
school adjustment is expected because a child with negative emotionality can
present a challenge in social situations such as the classroom. According to
Martin and Bridger (1999), negative emotionality is the most single predictive
temperament trait for negative social outcomes and is often associated with
externalizing and internalizing behaviors. Children with this temperament are
more likely to exhibit inappropriate behaviors and have difficulty regulating
their emotions in ways that would allow them to adhere to the demands of the
classroom environment. Such classroom demands often require some level of
regulation of emotion and the ability to delay the fulfillment of individual
desires, both of which may be difficult for children with higher negative
emotionality.
Temperament and Academic Achievement
Similar to the findings about school adjustment in
relation to temperament, the results of the influence of temperament on
academic achievement were found to be consistent with those found in previous
research (Bramlett et al., 2000; Li et al., 2009; Martin
et al., 1988; Martin & Holbrook, 1985). Significant associations
were found between temperament and academic achievement. Specifically,
persistence and activity level were significantly correlated with academic
achievement at r = .31, p < .01 and r = -.27, p < .05, respectively,
yet both correlations are considered weak. Persistence was found to be the only
predictor of academic achievement, accounting for 9.8% of the variance (R2
= .098, adjusted R2 = .085, p < .01). Both
persistence and activity level can be expected to have significant
relationships with academic achievement because achievement in the academic
realm requires a child's attention as well as his/her ability to continue in a
task that is difficult. In addition, academic success requires that a child be able
to control their gross motor activity so that they can sit still to complete a
task. Research has indicated that the abilities to focus attention, persist at
tasks, and regulate emotions are essential for healthy development and academic
success (Kerns, Esso, & Thompson, 1999; Semrud-Clikeman, Nielsen, &
Clinton, 1999). Children at-risk who can self-regulate their emotions and
behaviors have higher scores in reading, math and vocabulary (McClelland et
al., 2007).
Temperament and gender. Differences based on gender were found in this study,
as described in the results section. Gender differences have been found across
countries and cultures, with boys rated with higher levels of activity,
impulsivity, emotional intensity, and lower levels of shyness (Blair et al.,
2004; Nelson et al., 1999; Prior et al., 2001; Whiting & Edwards, 1988).
The significant correlations that were found for girls may be explained by
common perceptions about gender differences, which have also been supported by
empirical research. Girls are rated higher in effortful control skills than
boys as well as higher in social competence and adjustment (Liew et al., 2004).
Girls have also been rated higher in cooperative behavior, peer liking, and
positive school attitudes (Chen et al., 2009). As a result, teachers may be
more tolerant of boys with high levels of activity and negative emotionality;
therefore those behaviors may go unnoticed when boys exhibit them and may be
considered within the normal acceptable range. If a girl, on the other hand,
displays similar tendencies toward hyperactivity and negative emotionality, the
teacher may easily notice it and consider it to be unacceptable behavior.
Implications
for Practice
This
study investigates research into children's individual differences in
temperament, specifically for children at-risk, including those with family
poverty, low income, and/or disabilities. Our results indicate that certain
temperament traits can have a positive or a negative association with
children's educational outcomes. For
educational practitioners, therefore, a knowledge of a child's temperament is
essential. Practitioners must understand that children's behaviors have
biologically-based, individual differences which appear in their behavioral
patterns. These behavioral patterns vary from one child to another, but even
some extreme patterns may be considered to be within the normal range. This
understanding increases awareness of the fact that not all inappropriate
behaviors indicate disorders. Practitioners also need to understand that
variations in temperament are characteristic of children, including those with
disabilities (Gosling et al., 2003). A child with a disorder can display a
range of temperament characteristics, and no single temperament profile exists
for all children with disabilities. Practitioners’ awareness of individual
differences in children’s temperament may help them understand that the same
environment will be experienced differently by children based on their
individual differences in temperament characteristics (Rothbart, Ahadi, &
Hershey, 1994). For example, some children will be more easily overwhelmed by
intense levels of stimulation, such as noise or fast paced activities, than
others. The resulting feeling of
discomfort during classroom instruction can influence engagement and
learning. Children with a positive
affect, however, may become excited about upcoming positive events and engage
in learning and classroom activities more than children with other temperament
dimensions (Rothbart & Jones, 1998). Temperament-based behaviors and
interactions can also form the basis for children's affective memories and
evaluations of the classroom.
Accordingly, children will perceive and evaluate teacher behaviors based
on their own personal appraisal, so that some children will be tuned into their
teacher's cues about discipline, whereas others may fail to interpret these
correctly and as a result may miss the point of what the teacher is saying and
doing (Rothbart & Jones, 1998). Finally, teachers' perceptions about the teachable
child must be revised based on their understanding of their students’
temperaments. Teachers tend to have
certain ideas about what constitutes a teachable child. However, an understanding of the goodness
of fit concept that undesirable behavior, such as possessing a high level
of activity or negative emotionality, can be controlled with modifications in
the classroom's demands and can lead to successful learning. A child who is high in persistence can
present difficulties for the teacher, peers, and classroom management, as this
child is more likely to have difficulty switching between tasks and
transitioning from one lesson to another.
Such a child can easily be frustrated if he has to stop a task that he
wants to complete. This child may act
out as a result of his frustration or may become anxious in the classroom.
Therefore, a sensitive teacher may select an activity that requires a shorter
time to complete when there is a need for transitioning. In this way, knowledge of the influence that
a child’s temperament may bring into the classroom should be embedded in
teacher education and preparation programs.
Directions for Future Research
Recommendation for future research stem from the fact
that this study, as well as previous studies, employed a correlational research
design. The findings of this type of study are descriptive in nature; they do
not report functional relationships and only allow causal inferences. Therefore
multiple research designs are needed, especially ones that examine other
possibly contributing variables, such as the role of classroom context,
including teacher behavior (e.g., praise, reprimands), instructional
strategies, and/or difficulty/ease of tasks, or any interactions between those
variables. Second, an attempt was made to obtain data from various information
sources (parents, students, school records). However, the participating school
systems restricted the researchers’ access to only the children’s teachers, and
that was based on principal and teacher consent. Therefore, the limited sources
of information as well as the methods that were used to measure the examined
variables may have influenced the results. Third, identifying the profile of
children's temperaments can be most effective if it is integrated into other
educational interventions. That is, re-evaluating educational interventions in
light of individual differences in temperament may be able to contribute to
some of the unexplained variations in their results. Individual differences in
temperament can direct the selection of interventions based on children's
individual differences and their needs.
Information
about a child’s temperament profile is useful for prevention and intervention
approaches that promote goodness of fit for each child in the classroom.
Future studies should address areas such as helping the child understand
his/her own responses to various experiences, and providing teachers with
strategies for changing the environmental demands to more effectively accommodate
children’s individual differences (Reed-Victor, 2004). Future studies should also address the cultural
context of children’s temperament and the role of the interaction between the
child and the environment. Exploring children’s temperaments within various
cultural contexts is essential. For example, inhibition is a temperament’s
dimension which has been shown in the US and western culture to have a
negative influence on a child’s adjustment and achievement. However, research
has shown that these negative effects that inhibition may present to a western
child do not necessarily apply to Chinese children (Chen et al., 2009).
Inhibited Chinese children were found to have a higher level of academic
achievement and a higher level of school adjustment. Examining the role of the
interaction between children’s temperament and the classroom environment can
help in understanding factors in the classroom environment that can promote positive
temperament qualities which are associated with good adjustment and learning
and factors that can minimize the effects of negative temperament
qualities (Putnam, Sanson, & Rothbart, 2002).
In
conclusion, temperament can be a biological risk factor that can add additional
stressors or can be a protective factor that can either increase or minimize
the negative effects of other risks that a child at-risk may have. An
understanding of children’s temperaments is necessary if the teacher is to
provide a classroom environment that is compatible with that temperament. The
environment should work with, not against, the child's temperament (Kristal,
2005). If goodness of fit (Thomas
& Chess, 1977) exists between the demands and expectations of the
environment and a child's temperament, healthy development is likely to occur
(Kristal, 2005). Although the findings of this study were in line with previous
studies that examined children's temperaments for predominant, middle class
groups, this study helps to pinpoint the particular need for temperament
evaluations in at-risk children early in their school career.
References
Blair,
K. A., Denham, S. A., Kochanoff, A., & Whipple, B. (2004). Playing it cool:
Temperament, emotion regulation, and social behavior in preschoolers. Journal
of School Psychology, 42, 419-443.
Bouffard,
T., Roy, M., Vezeau,
C. (2005). Self-perceptions, temperament, socioemotional adjustment and the
perceptions of parental support of chronically underachieving children. International
Journal of Educational Research, 43, 215-235.
Bramlett,
R. K., Scott, P., & Rowell, R. K. (2000). A comparison of temperament and
social skills in predicting academic performance in first graders. Special
Services in the Schools, 16,
147-158.
Bruni, O., Ferini-Strambi, L., Russo, P. M.,
Antignani, M., Innocenzi, M., Ottaviano, P., Valente, D., & Ottaviano, S. (2006). Sleep disturbances and teacher ratings of
school achievement and temperament in children. Sleep Medicine, 7, 43-48.
Chen,
X., Chen, H., Li, D., & Wang, L. (2009). Early childhood behavioral
inhibition and social and school adjustment in Chinese children: A 5- year
longitudinal study, Child Development, 80(6), 1692-1704.
Coplan,
R. J., Bowker, A., & Cooper, S. M. (2003). Parenting daily hassles, child
temperament and social adjustment in preschool. Early Childhood Research
Quarterly, 18, 376-395.
Deater-Deckard, K., Mullineaux, P., Petrill, S. A., &
Thompson, L. A. (2009). Effortful control,
surgency, and reading skills in middle childhood. Reading and Writing, 22, 107-116.
Dyson,
A. & Gallannaugh, F. (2008). Disproportionality in special needs education
in England
The
Journal of Special Education, 42,
26-46.
Edwards,
O. W., Mumford, V. E., & Serra-Roldan, R. (2007). A positive youth
development model for students considered at-risk. School Psychology
International, 28, 29-45.
Goldsmith,
H. H., Buss, A. H., Plomin, R., Rothbart, M. K., Thomas, A., Chess, S., Hinde,
R., & McCall, R. (1987). Roundtable: What is temperament? Four approaches. Child
Development, 58, 505-529.
Guerin, D. W., Gottfried, A. W.,
Oliver, P. H., Thomas, C. W. (1994). Temperament and school functioning during
early adolescence. Journal of Early Adolescence, 14, 200-225.
Hamre,
B. K., & Pianta, R. C. (2005). Can instructional and emotional support in
the first grade classroom make a difference for children at risk of school
failure? Child Development, 76, 949-967.
Keogh, B. K. (2003). Temperament in
the classroom: Understanding individual differences. Baltimore: MD: Paul H. Brookes.
Keogh,
B. K., Pullis, M. E. & Cadwell, J. (1982). A short form of the teacher temperament
questionnaire. Journal of Educational Measurement, 19(4), 323-327.
Kerns,
K. A., Esso, K., & Thompson, J. (1999). Investigation of a direct
intervention for improving attention
in young children with ADHD. Developmental
Neuropsychology, 16, 273-295.
Kristal, J. (2005). The Temperament
Perspective: Working with Children's Behavioral Styles. Baltimore: Brookes.
Lerner,
J.W., Lowenthal, B., & Egan, R.W. (2003). Preschool children with
special needs: Children at risk and children with disabilities. (2nd
ed.). Boston:
Allyn and Bacon.
Li, I., Onaga, E., Shen,
P. S., & Chiou, H. H. (2009). Temperament
characteristics and science achievement: A longitudinal study of elementary
students in Taiwan.
International Journal of Science Education, 31, 1175-1185.
Liew,
J., Eisenberg, N., & Reiser, M. (2004). Preschoolers’ effortful control and
negative emotionality, immediate reactions to disappointment, and quality of
social functioning. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 89,
298–313.
Martin, R. P., & Bridger, R. C.
(1999). The Temperament Assessment Battery
for Children-Revised. Athens: University of Georgia.
Martin,
R. P., & Holbrook, J. (1985). Relationship of temperament characteristics
to the academic achievement of first grade children. Journal of
Psychoeducational Assessment, 3, 131-140.
Martin,
R. P., Drew, D., Gaddis, L., & Moseley, M. (1988). Prediction of elementary
school achievement from preschool temperament: Three studies. School
Psychology Review, 17, 125–137.
McClelland,
M. M., Cameron, C. E., Connor, C. M., Farris, C. L., Jewkes, A. M., & Morrison, F. J. (2007). Links
between behavioral regulation and preschoolers’ literacy, vocabulary, and math skills. Developmental Psychology, 43,
947-959.
Mevarech,
Z. R. (1985). The relationships between temperament characteristics,
intelligence, task-engagement and mathematics achievement. British Journal
of Educational
Psychology, 55, 156–163.
Nelson,
J. N. (1987). Child temperament, gender and teacher-child interactions: An
observational study. Early Child Development and Care, 29, 343-365.
Nelson,
B., Martin, R. P., Hodge, S., Havill, V. & Kamphus, R. (1999) Modeling the
prediction of elementary school adjustment from preschool temperament, Personality
and Individual Differences, 26, 687–700.
Newman,
J., Noel, A., Chen, R., & Matsopoulos, A. S. (1998). Temperament, selected
moderating variables and early reading achievement. Journal of School
Psychology, 36, 215–232.
Prior,
M., Smart, D., Sanson, A., & Oberklaid, F. (2001). Longitudinal predictors
of behavioural adjustment in pre-adolescent children. Australian and New Zealand
Journal of Psychiatry, 35, 297-307.
Pullis,
M. & Cadwell, J. (1982). The influence of children's temperament
characteristics on teachers' decision strategies. American Educational
Research Journal, 19(2), 165-181.
Reed-Victor,
E. (2004). Individual differences and early school adjustment: teacher
appraisals of
young
children with special needs. Early Child Development and Care, 174,
59–79.
Reynolds, C. R., & Kamphaus, R. W.
(1992). The Behavior Assessment System for Children. Manual. Minnesota: American
Guidance Service.
Rothbart,
M. K., & Derryberry, D. (1981). Development of individual differences in
temperament. In M. E. Lamb & A. L. Brown (Eds), Advances in developmental
psychology (Vol. I, pp. 37-86). Hillsdale, N. J.: Erlbaum.
Sanson, A. V., Letcher, P., Smart, D.,
Prior, M., Toumbourou, J. W., & Oberklaid, F (2009). Associations between
early childhood temperament clusters and later psychosocial adjustment. Merrill
Palmer Quarterly, 55(1), 26-54.
Semrud-Clikeman,
M., Nielsen, K. H., & Clinton, A. (1999). An intervention approach for
children with teacher and parent-identified attentional difficulties.
Journal of Learning Disabilities, 32, 581–589.
Thomas,
A., & Chess, S. (1977). Temperament and Development. New York: Brunner-Mazel.
UNESCO (2010). Reaching the
marginalized. Retrieved from http://www.unesco.org/fileadmin/MULTIMEDIA/HQ/ED/GMR/pdf/gmr2010/gmr2010-ch3.pdf
Werner, E. E. (2000).
Protective factors and individual resilience. In J. P. Shonkoff & S. J.
Meisels (Eds.), Handbook of early childhood intervention (2nd ed.,
pp. 115-132). New York: Cambridge University
Press.
Werning, R., Löser, J.M. & Urban, M. (2008). Cultural and
social diversity: an analysis of minority groups in German schools. The
Journal of Special Education, 42, 47-54.
Whiting,
B. B. & Edwards, C. P. (1988). Children of different worlds: The
formation of social behavior. Cambridge, MA: Harvard
University Press.
Williams Institute.
Zentner,
M. & Bates, J. E. (2008). Child
Temperament: An integrative review of concepts, research programs, and
measures. European Journal of Developmental Science, 2, 7-37.
No comments:
Post a Comment