Evidence Brief – Ideal Learning Environments for Young Children

Children are born learning, exploring and growing.

How they will develop depends on us. We know that during the first few years of life, more than 1 million neural connections are formed every second. Young children develop through rich, daily interactions with nurturing caregivers and educators, building brains and shaping physical, socioemotional and cognitive development for life. These early years represent a unique, flexible period of human development and a finite window for high-impact investment.

Because children are born learning, any environment can become an ideal learning environment

Early learning environments shape children’s present and future through mechanisms scientists continue to discover — from statistical learning to nervous system attunement to epigenetics. Because children are born learning, any environment can become an ideal learning environment — whether at home, in family- or center-based child care, or at school. While every child should have access to ideal learning environments from birth, far too many do not. With growing public investment, we now have the opportunity to create equitable ideal learning environments serving children, families and educators in any setting.

This brief summarizes scientific research aligned with the principles of ideal learning environments — a unifying framework underlying equitable, developmental, relational models of early childhood education. Rather than prescribing a uniform vision of “quality,” these principles allow community leaders to adopt a comprehensive early learning approach that serves their children and communities.⁽¹⁾

What makes an ideal early learning environment?

Introduction
Our context
Guiding insights
Principle 1: Decision-making reflects a commitment to equity
Principle 2: Children construct knowledge from diverse experiences to make meaning of the world
Principle 3: Play is an essential element of young children's learning
Principle 4: Instruction is personalized to acknowledge each child's development and abilities
Principle 5: The teacher is a guide, nurturing presence, and co-constructor of knowledge
Principle 6: Young children and adults learn through relationships
Principle 7: The learning environment intentionally facilitates exploration, independence, and interaction
Principle 8: The time of childhood is valued
Principle 9: Continuous learning environments support adult development
Conclusion
References

Our context

Early childhood is a crossroads of inequity and investment in our future

Childhood is a unique period in human development, and children born today sit at a nexus of inequity and opportunity. Historically, millions of children in the U.S. have been formally denied access to high-quality learning environments on the basis of racialized identity, gender, native language, immigration status and perceived ability. Systematic dehumanization of indigenous people, African Americans, immigrants, women, girls and non-binary people and people with disabilities has had profound influence on essential conceptions of children and childhood in the U.S.⁽²⁾

Children born today sit at a nexus of inequity and opportunity

Over the last century, advocates have worked to overturn explicitly racist, sexist and ableist laws, but children continue to face unequal learning opportunities from and even before birth.⁽³⁾ While the opportunities and outcomes of white and well-resourced children in the U.S. are often considered the implicit standard for all, learning and socioeconomic outcomes are low across the board.⁽⁴⁾ COVID-19 has laid bare and exacerbated these existing challenges.⁽⁵⁾

Structural racism and other inequities create stress and barriers for millions of families with young children in the U.S.

In the United States, racial categories were developed to justify the genocide of indigenous communities and enslavement of African Americans while constructing a unifying, economically advantageous “white” identity for disparate ethnic Europeans. Hundreds of years of slavery, Jim Crow and other explicitly racist laws, forced assimilation schools, segregation, pay inequity, and other forces have created persistent racial inequities. In this brief we take a racial equity approach which acknowledges racism as a primary driver of opportunity and outcome gaps in concert with socioeconomic, gender, cultural and linguistic inequities.⁽⁶⁾

Photo by Allison Shelley

All children and families possess unique resources and the capacity for resilience⁽⁷⁾, but racism operates at systemic, institutional and individual levels to harm children of color and their families.⁽⁸⁾ Economic instability and poverty also cause direct and indirect harm, increasing the risk of health, cognitive, behavioral, social and emotional difficulties.⁽⁹⁾ The effects of poverty can be seen at systemic, institutional, and individual levels from reduced access to nutritious food, health care and high-quality child care to increased familial stress which may influence brain development.⁽¹⁰⁾ Finally, while gains have been made to acknowledge the rights and dignity of all people with disabilities, children with disabilities and special needs continue to face exclusion from learning environments in their earliest years.⁽¹¹⁾

Millions of young children experience ACEs and toxic stress

The past few decades have seen remarkable advances in research methods that reveal how racism, poverty, trauma and toxic stress get “under the skin” to influence development. While these processes are complex and individual children may respond differently to the same experiences⁽¹²⁾, it is now clear that these stressors fundamentally influence physiology and brain development.⁽¹³⁾

The Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACEs) framework was a step forward in acknowledging the challenges faced by 1/3 of children in the United States.⁽¹⁴⁾ However, trauma disproportionately impacts particular racial and ethnic communities including tribal communities⁽¹⁵⁾ as well as Black and Hispanic/Latine communities.⁽¹⁶⁾ Recently, researchers have argued for the inclusion of racism and other forms of discrimination as distinct Adverse Child Experiences.⁽¹⁷⁾ Researchers are also studying the intergenerational impacts of ACEs and parent-focused supports that may help families cope.⁽¹⁸⁾ Continued research on ACEs can guide trauma-informed practice⁽¹⁹⁾ and insights on the mechanisms of structural adversity.⁽²⁰⁾ Importantly, trauma-informed approaches should be culturally responsive and developed in partnership with communities.⁽²¹⁾ Specific traumatic experiences — whether due to climate disasters, forced migration, or a pandemic — will continue to have the greatest impact on our most underserved children.⁽²²⁾

Significant numbers of children born in the U.S. today face racism, socioeconomic inequity, trauma and toxic stress. Children from affluent communities face risks as well. Parent stress, ACEs and other pressures can elevate risk for later substance abuse and emotional challenges for all children.⁽²³⁾ While children are sensitive to stress and trauma, no single experience will create a predictable developmental consequence, and children vary in sensitivity to their experiences.⁽²⁴⁾ Children’s overall experiences contribute dynamically to lifelong development and we must center children who face cumulative risk⁽²⁵⁾ while proactively creating nurturing environments for all.

Despite these challenges, every child possesses unique potential. Our context necessitates a clear focus on racial and socioeconomic equity (including careful attention to barriers based on home language and/or disability status), but the research in this brief highlights the dynamic ways that all children learn, grow, and adapt. Early childhood is a period of hope, renewal and reimagining no matter our present challenges.

We stand at a peak and a starting point for scientific research

In key areas of research about young children, scientists largely agree. Groundbreaking findings in the last twenty years have shed light on myths and mysteries about child development.⁽²⁶⁾ At the same time, the research community is just beginning to systematically address research gaps related to racial, cultural and linguistic equity and neurodiversity.⁽²⁷⁾

Historically, research conducted in developmental and learning sciences in the U.S. has been guided by white theorists and philosophers, led by white scholars, and funded by white-led private and public entities. Studies have disproportionately sampled neurotypical, white, middle-class or affluent children⁽²⁸⁾, and have often been guided by a deficit mindset toward children who are not white, standard English-speaking, or neurotypical.⁽²⁹⁾ Research institutions should commit to action on these inequities in pursuit of inclusion and better science.⁽³⁰⁾

THE RESEARCH WE HAVE

THE RESEARCH WE NEED

Primarily informed by white American and European theorists and philosophers

Informed by theorists and philosophers from all cultures and racial/ethnic identities

Disproportionately led and funded by white researchers and program officers

Led by researchers and funders who reflect all communities

Research questions informed by racism and deficit mentalities about children and families

Research questions informed by explicit antiracism and culturally sustaining approaches to all children, families and communities

Methods are not informed by communities or subjects

Community members are active participants who shape and evaluate research

Limited sample sizes and analyses that ignore or simply control for race

Large, diverse samples and analytical approaches that acknowledge and include racism

⁽³¹⁾

Guiding insights

Photo courtesy of EL Education

In this section, we briefly highlight recent discoveries about child development before examining research related to each of the nine principles of ideal learning environments.

Children develop dynamically and holistically

Cognition, emotion and physical development are overlapping elements of complex learning systems that allow humans to store memories and knowledge, apply insight to novel situations, make decisions and create.⁽³²⁾ These cascades of physical, neural and emotional development are regulated and influenced by the environment, especially daily interactions with caregivers and educators.⁽³³⁾ We now understand that children’s growth across domains is deeply interwoven. For example, physical milestones like walking can trigger bursts of language growth, and language development further influences cognitive and emotional growth.⁽³⁴⁾

We now understand that children’s growth across domains is deeply interwoven

Photo courtesy of AVANCE

Many researchers now study relationships between systems previously considered separately, including stress, the immune system, cognition and emotional regulation.⁽³⁵⁾ For example, early experiences shape the development of the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis to guide stress responses, influencing lifelong health outcomes as well as a child’s ability to learn. These early physiological regulatory systems are closely related to later executive function, cognitive and mental health outcomes.⁽³⁶⁾ It is now clear that exposure to trauma or toxic stress in early childhood may have cascading effects on physiological, socioemotional and cognitive development for years to come.⁽³⁷⁾ Supporting every child’s holistic wellbeing and development is essential.

Variability is normal and development is adaptive

Cantor and colleagues’ (2018) synthesis of recent child development research emphasizes that human variability is the norm⁽³⁸⁾, including in a single child’s abilities from hour to hour and variability in the timing of milestones from child to child. While developmental milestones are useful for reference, each child’s developmental pathway is unique and adaptive, in constant interaction with biology, context and caregivers.⁽³⁹⁾

Each child’s developmental pathway is unique and adaptive, in constant interaction with biology, context and caregivers

Historically, deficit-based thinking about race, cultural and linguistic diversity, socioeconomic status and neurodiversity has pervaded early childhood research.⁽⁴⁰⁾ Researchers have begun to utilize adaptive models of development, but more effort is needed to move beyond a pathologizing view of difference in children.⁽⁴¹⁾ If we embrace the reality of human variability, practice should shift toward responsive, personalized guidance to support every child’s unique development.⁽⁴²⁾

Epigenetic research demonstrates how nature and nurture work together

Epigenetic studies are beginning to shed light on how early childhood environments actively shape genetic expression. Simply put, human nature needs nurture. It now appears that rich early learning environments not only support individual development, they may alter genetic expression across generations.⁽⁴³⁾

Principle 1: Decision-making reflects a commitment to equity

Equity is a bedrock principle of ideal learning environments, but it is far from realized for most children and families or operationalized in research and policy. Equity begins with the belief that every child has unique, limitless potential and ideal learning environments should be proactively antiracist, inclusive of all cultures, languages, and genders and designed to serve all learners. Beyond the learning environment, an equity approach can guide progress at every level of early childhood systems.

Equity begins with the belief that every child has unique, limitless potential

Antiracist and inclusive practice supports underserved children and can benefit every child in the learning environment.⁽⁴⁴⁾ Importantly, we should let go of “colorblind” approaches, and replace them with proactive, inclusive models of learning.⁽⁴⁵⁾ For example, Farrington (2019) argues that social-emotional curricula will be more effective if they are explicitly antiracist.⁽⁴⁶⁾ Motegi (2019) describes an tribal community pre-school activity in which educators explore indigenous reconciliation through children’s personal stories, blending language, cultural and social-emotional development.⁽⁴⁷⁾ The movement for Universal Design in Learning centers children with disabilities and special needs to create learning spaces that engage all children equitably.⁽⁴⁸⁾

In research, an equity lens can lead to novel insights about the unique resources Black families⁽⁴⁹⁾, tribal communities⁽⁵⁰⁾ and multilingual families⁽⁵¹⁾ possess in support of child development. Equity research can bring individual bias to light, including bias toward Black children that leads to disproportionate punishment and expulsion.⁽⁵²⁾ Orienting toward equity can also reveal the benefits to young children of color when they have educators who look like them⁽⁵³⁾, as well as the benefits of diverse learning environments for all children.⁽⁵⁴⁾

Today, more researchers are focusing on the developmental effects of racism and other inequities, but these factors have been inconsistently operationalized in past studies.⁽⁵⁵⁾ While models like Bronfenbrenner & Morris’ (2007) bioecological approach can be used to consider racism as a variable operating at multiple levels on children’s opportunities and outcomes⁽⁵⁶⁾, new, explicitly antiracist and inclusive child development frameworks are emerging.⁽⁵⁷⁾

Photo courtesy of Educare Seattle

Equity as a mindset can help policymakers identify and remove structural barriers for children and families⁽⁵⁸⁾, helping policymakers critically examine funding, licensure and lotteries and mitigate inequities experienced by the early childhood workforce.⁽⁵⁹⁾ In the development of early childhood curricula, an equity lens can challenge and improve content and practice.⁽⁶⁰⁾

Finally, an equity mindset can lead to more effective educator development pathways. Proactive approaches that center cultural competence⁽⁶¹⁾, an asset-based approach to multilingual learners⁽⁶²⁾ and anti-bias, anti-racist strategies⁽⁶³⁾ can influence educator training and professional development programs.⁽⁶⁴⁾ As Escayg (2019) notes, existing anti-bias programs are in need of critical development through an anti-racist lens that includes an analysis of systems of power.⁽⁶⁵⁾

Existing inequities create risk for millions of children, influencing lifelong physical, cognitive, emotional and academic outcomes.⁽⁶⁶⁾ While high-quality early learning environments can buffer the effects of adverse experiences, we must also work to dismantle the policies and systems perpetuating this widespread harm.

Today, our fragile and underfunded early childhood systems fail all but the most fortunate families. Children who may benefit most from high-quality early learning environments are less likely to experience them due to inequitable access. For example, children experiencing poverty have reduced access to high-quality child care programs and well-prepared educators.⁽⁶⁷⁾ While federally-funded programs like Head Start provide the opportunity for high-quality learning environments, access to high-quality Head Start programs varies.⁽⁶⁸⁾

Gaps in access are compounded by other inequities. For example, Head Start serves a lower percentage of Hispanic/Latine and Asian eligible children, compared to the national average of eligible children served.⁽⁶⁹⁾ In a recent study, Hardy and colleagues (2020) found that Black and Hispanic/Latine children have reduced access to a neighborhood Head Start slot compared to white children.⁽⁷⁰⁾ Children with special needs are often excluded from classrooms and are more likely to be expelled and suspended compared to children without disabilities.⁽⁷¹⁾ Emergent bilingual children are often mis-disagnosed with language disorders and may be over or under-represented in special education programs⁽⁷²⁾, and children in immigrant families are less likely to have holistic, high-quality programs as they transition from Pre-K to Kindergarten.⁽⁷³⁾

We must proactively advance equity at every level in early childhood systems

We must proactively advance equity at every level in early childhood systems. A business-as-usual approach will only allow opportunity gaps to persist. Despite the challenges, all young children and their families possess cultural wealth, strength, and agency. Over the last century, enormous progress has been made on human rights and social and racial justice, led by the people most impacted by the injustices they worked to remedy. We need a re-imagined early childhood system to serve all families well, and it should be shaped by the communities it serves.

Principle 2: Children construct knowledge from diverse experiences to make meaning of the world

Photo courtesy of Manny Cantor Center

Building on earlier constructivist theories, current studies continue to reveal the innate, proactive learning abilities of young children. Far from blank slates, children are born learners, actively exploring their environments and relationships to construct meaning.⁽⁷⁴⁾ While most other species are ready to move, feed and act on their own within hours of birth, human babies rely on close caregivers for years as they develop. This prolonged early learning period allows children to adapt to their environments in the context of close relationships.⁽⁷⁵⁾

Young children are optimal learners

From birth, learning and meaning-making systems are on by default.⁽⁷⁶⁾ Children seek, predict and adapt to data from their inner and outer worlds, including thoughts, emotions, and physical sensations.⁽⁷⁷⁾ In the last twenty years, researchers have found that babies’ subtle eye movements may reveal the development of sophisticated attentional systems.⁽⁷⁸⁾ Their wiggling toes may actively build new sensory maps in their brains.⁽⁷⁹⁾ Babies may even use innate statistical capabilities to derive word units from the stream of language they hear.⁽⁸⁰⁾ Current studies continue to demonstrate that children’s remarkable learning abilities are deeply interconnected. For example, in studying links between emotion and language development, researchers have found that preference for infant-directed speech, which exaggerates rhythmic, melodic and emotional cues, predicted language acquisition in both preschool children with Autism Spectrum Disorder and typically developing children, suggesting that language processing is closely related to social processing.⁽⁸¹⁾

Children’s learning abilities are deeply interconnected

Ample evidence demonstrates that young children develop holistically, but learning domains are often isolated in curricula and materials. Importantly, research indicates that social, emotional and cultural development are integral to all learning, so early childhood approaches should evolve to fully integrate these often disparate domains.⁽⁸²⁾

Equity and inclusion considerations

Most children are born with the capacity to fluently learn multiple languages if they are exposed to them in the first few years of life.⁽⁸³⁾ Yet in the United States, young multilingual and multidialectical children are often seen as deficient in Mainstream American English rather than celebrated for the advantages multilingualism conveys over a lifetime.⁽⁸⁴⁾ While policy language about multilingual learners has recently evolved⁽⁸⁵⁾, there are still significant barriers to supporting all children and families in home language and dialectical continuity.⁽⁸⁶⁾ Future research should articulate key components of effective, culturally sustaining language development approaches like Dual Language Immersion models.⁽⁸⁷⁾

In developing whole-child programs, leaders should focus on supporting every child’s development in culturally-sustaining ways rather than enforcing unexamined white cultural norms.⁽⁸⁸⁾ Diversity in children’s emotional expression and regulatory skills are to be expected and embraced.

Photo by Allison Shelley

Educators need support to facilitate active learning

In ideal learning environments, adults guide children’s learning and discovery through direct interaction, facilitation of independent or small-group learning, and the protection of free time for play and exploration. Educators require knowledge of child development as well as the ability to thoughtfully prepare, observe and adapt the learning environment to stimulate curiosity and exploration. While ideal learning approaches intentionally facilitate children’s active learning⁽⁸⁹⁾, many educators who work with young children do not have access to these high-quality pedagogical approaches.⁽⁹⁰⁾

Principle 3: Play is an essential element of young children's learning

With roots in 20th century theory⁽⁹¹⁾, a broad body of recent evidence suggests that diverse forms of play come naturally to young children and support all aspects of learning and development.⁽⁹²⁾ Some researchers categorize play by type (e.g., sociodramatic, pretend, fantasy or free play)⁽⁹³⁾ while others define play by essential characteristics (e.g., joy, active engagement, meaningfulness or agency)⁽⁹⁴⁾ or developmental stage (e.g., gross-motor, parallel, object-based or cooperative).⁽⁹⁵⁾ As neuroscientists continue to shed light on the intertwined relationship between play and brain development⁽⁹⁶⁾, it is abundantly clear that play is a vehicle for learning rather than a distraction from it.⁽⁹⁷⁾

Play is a vehicle for learning rather than a distraction from it

Play supports growth and development across domains

Findings across studies suggest that play can support social, emotional, language and mathematical development while facilitating curiosity, creativity and problem-solving skills in children. In studying the relationship between social and emotional development and play, researchers emphasize the importance of free play, constructive play, dramatic play and outdoor play.⁽⁹⁸⁾ Researchers who have studied the relationship between language development and play emphasize the importance of dramatic play, dialogic reading and free play.⁽⁹⁹⁾ When examining the relationship between play and mathematical and problem-solving skills, researchers often focus on the effect of guided play using blocks and games.⁽¹⁰⁰⁾

Photo courtesy of American Montessori Society

Play is of such central importance to child development that advocates frame it as a right.⁽¹⁰¹⁾ Its role in healthy development has been further emphasized by the American Academy of Pediatrics, the National Association for the Education of Young Children, and others.⁽¹⁰²⁾ Yet children’s ability to engage in affirming, developmental play is limited by other factors, including an inappropriate focus on highly academic content in early childhood programs and limited access to playful learning opportunities.⁽¹⁰³⁾

Rather than being prescriptive about any one kind of play, educators in ideal learning approaches consider play in tandem with equity, relationships, personalized learning and the environment.⁽¹⁰⁴⁾ All children possess linguistic, cultural and experiential knowledge which can serve as entry points to engage curiosity through play, and play with an infant will look different than play amongst three year olds or a mixed-age group of children. A personalized, responsive approach to play-based learning is essential.⁽¹⁰⁵⁾

A recent review of 26 play interventions across 18 countries and five continents concluded that free and guided play provide greater cognitive benefits for pre-schoolers than teacher-based play or games. In their review, the authors emphasized the importance of child choice during play to facilitate growth and development.⁽¹⁰⁶⁾ Recent research also suggests that outdoor play may be especially supportive of children’s physical, cognitive and social emotional development.⁽¹⁰⁷⁾

Photo courtesy of Montessori Partnerships of Georgia

Equity & inclusion considerations

While considerable research has shed light on the importance of play for child development, models, measures and play in practice are highly influenced by culture.⁽¹⁰⁸⁾ Mainstream frameworks of play and learning also center and normalize the experiences of children without disabilities⁽¹⁰⁹⁾, yet children with diverse abilities may choose and benefit from a wide variety of playful learning experiences, and optimal play-based learning looks different for each child according to their moment-to-moment interests and needs. While play-based interventions may enhance the cognitive and social emotional development of children with disabilities⁽¹¹⁰⁾, Goodley & Runswick-Cole (2009) caution that rigid expectations of how play-based learning should look can pathologize children with disabilities who play in non-normative ways.⁽¹¹¹⁾

Children with diverse abilities may choose and benefit from a wide variety of playful learning experiences

Photo courtesy of SDI Productions

Children’s unique identities and interests may draw them toward or away from particular play opportunities, so explicit gender inclusion and antiracism in play are essential.⁽¹¹²⁾ Racial identity development and social and emotional development during play may be closely related. In Iruka et al. (2020), the authors discuss several important considerations related to racial and gender identification of young children during pretend play, including stereotyped expectations and children’s awareness of power differences between roles with different racialized identities. As they discuss, even very young children actively develop ideas about race, gender and culture, and naturally engage with these ideas during play.⁽¹¹³⁾ For example, Sturdivant and Alanís (2021) found that Black preschool girls demonstrated a strong preference for non-Black dolls during play. Sturdivant (2021) found that these choices were informed by children’s understanding of the privilege associated with white dolls. While play can perpetuate harm⁽¹¹⁴⁾, positive racial identity development has been shown to support cognitive, social and emotional growth, so play is an important area of focus for antiracist educator practice.⁽¹¹⁵⁾

Explicit gender inclusion and antiracism in play are essential

A more expansive and inclusive view of playful learning should center the experiences of children with disabilities, children from diverse racial and ethnic backgrounds and children who have experienced trauma. Researchers today can articulate proactive, inclusive and antiracist theories of play to inform the field.⁽¹¹⁶⁾

Principle 4: Instruction is personalized to acknowledge each child's development and abilities

From the earliest days of life, children express unique preferences, perspectives and capabilities. Human beings are excellent learners because we can apply our own memories and associations to complex new problems⁽¹¹⁷⁾, and children learn by connecting new experiences with their existing knowledge.⁽¹¹⁸⁾ Sensitive educators can engage each child’s interests to build socioemotional, language, math and creative skills. Educators’ ability to authentically personalize learning may be particularly important for racially minoritized children, multilingual learners and children with diverse learning needs.⁽¹¹⁹⁾

Personalized learning improves engagement and child outcomes

In one study, Begus & Gliga (2014) found that infants learned more from an interaction when they chose the object they learned from. They also studied the role of student choice in learning and discovered that children who were allowed some choices about a game were more motivated to learn from it.⁽¹²⁰⁾ In a study with older children, Orellana & Hernandez (1999) studied children’s experiences in community learning environments, observing which kinds of environmental text (e.g., street signs and logos) children noticed and responded to in conversation. They found that children were bored when educators pointed out environmental text at random, but were eager to describe places they knew (e.g., their own street or their parent’s workplace).⁽¹²¹⁾ In a 2008 meta-analysis of 41 studies on choice and learning, Patall et al (2008) found that providing choices enhanced learning, motivation and performance on a variety of tasks. Interestingly, they noted that providing children with a small number of choices (2-4) was ideal and that choice was most effective when there were no rewards associated with choices.⁽¹²²⁾

Personalized learning has also been guided by the idea that each child has a unique zone of proximal development⁽¹²³⁾, when a skill is just out of reach, but attainable. In ideal learning environments, educators guide personalized learning in many ways, from modeling, to child exploration in a carefully prepared environment to mixed-age or mixed-ability peer group work on an engaging project.

Personalized learning should be guided by equity

Photo by Allison Shelley

While the field is shifting toward the fact that every child’s developmental path is unique and dynamic⁽¹²⁴⁾, many educators and psychologists are still guided by outdated mental models that categorize and center “normal” (and often, white) children in our approach to all children.⁽¹²⁵⁾ Educators may also operate under mistaken beliefs that a child’s identity is innate and fixed, sorting children into formal and informal categories that will shape their learning experiences for years to come.⁽¹²⁶⁾

Personalized learning is a hallmark of high-quality special education.⁽¹²⁷⁾ Many researchers and advocates are now working at the intersection of racial and cultural inclusion and disability to disentangle supports for multilingual children and children with disabilities. For example, Park et al. (2017) have issued guidance with the Council for Chief State School Officers while calling for additional research and tools.⁽¹²⁸⁾ Importantly, as Park et al (2021) describe, child-centered support rather than surveillance may be particularly important for children of color with disabilities.⁽¹²⁹⁾

Every child’s developmental path is unique

Developmentally appropriate practice has been shown to promote cognitive development⁽¹³⁰⁾, and has shifted over time toward meeting children where they are and building on their strengths.⁽¹³¹⁾ Because learning happens in the context of each child’s home language and culture⁽¹³²⁾, educators should use culturally sustaining practices to support multilingual development.⁽¹³³⁾ Indigenous language revitalization in early childhood programs presents an urgent priority to support tribal communities and revive the majority of tribal languages in the United States that are currently endangered.⁽¹³⁴⁾

Principle 5: The teacher is a guide, nurturing presence, and co-constructor of knowledge

Because children actively learn from their environments, educators can engage curiosity while cultivating new skills, habits and knowledge. Older theories about the nature of learning include emphasis on curiosity and discovery⁽¹³⁵⁾, and a number of recent studies affirm that guiding children’s discovery is more effective than overly-didactic, teacher-focused instruction.⁽¹³⁶⁾

Effective educators guide children’s discovery

Photo courtesy of American Montessori Society

In one study, Fisher, Hirsh-Pasek, Newcombe and Golinkoff (2013) compared two ways of teaching children about triangles. In one condition, they simply told children facts about triangles. In the other, they gave children clues and a goal to figure out the “secret of the shapes.” Children who were given clues and encouragement not only learned more initially, they also remembered more a week later.⁽¹³⁷⁾ Meacham, Vukelich, Han, and Buell (2016) examined conversational patterns between children and educators in Head Start centers, finding that children used more language when teachers continued discussing the topic children were already on, rather than imposing a new topic.⁽¹³⁸⁾ A number of studies comparing child-centered programs to programs that rely more on didactic instruction have found differential effects on academic and life outcomes.⁽¹³⁹⁾ In one meta-analysis comparing three types of instruction — explicit instruction, assisted discovery and unassisted discovery — Alfieri et al, 2011 found that programs in which educators facilitated “assisted discovery” showed the greatest benefits for children.⁽¹⁴⁰⁾

Programs in which educators facilitated “assisted discovery” showed the greatest benefits for children

By guiding active learning, educators support children’s executive functions — self-regulatory skills that develop in early childhood and are predictive of later academic and life outcomes.⁽¹⁴¹⁾ These overlapping skills include attentional control (paying attention to a specific task), working memory (keeping information in mind in the short-term), and inhibition (avoiding distractions).⁽¹⁴²⁾ Closely related to physiological self-regulation, executive function skills seem to be affected both by prolonged periods of stress⁽¹⁴³⁾ and positive adult scaffolding.⁽¹⁴⁴⁾ Importantly, executive function skills support agency, which all children possess and can express from a young age. While children with special needs and disabilities benefit from choice and self-direction, they may be most vulnerable to a loss of agency in the learning environment.⁽¹⁴⁵⁾

Educators hold positions of power and influence, and they need support

As they facilitate learning, educators are also social and emotional guides for children, who co-create culture in the learning environment.⁽¹⁴⁶⁾ Educators who are warm, responsive and self-regulated help children learn to manage their own emotional experiences.⁽¹⁴⁷⁾ As Farmer et al. (2018) describe it, educators have an “invisible hand” influencing classroom social dynamics, which may be especially important for inclusion of children with learning disabilities.

As guides who shape children’s knowledge, social perceptions, emotional regulation and identity, educators hold positions of enormous responsibility and influence in the lives of young children. Unfortunately, early educators are not without racial biases, and educator development programs should be proactively built on principles of antiracism and inclusion.⁽¹⁴⁸⁾

To guide each child’s active learning, educators must possess knowledge of child development, sophisticated self-regulatory and facilitation skills and a commitment to antiracism and inclusion. Educator development programs aligned with the principles of ideal learning support these capabilities in educators, not just in formative training, but through ongoing coaching, reflective observation and holistic assessment practices.⁽¹⁴⁹⁾

Principle 6: Young children and adults learn through relationships

From the first days of life, babies tune in to what matters in their environment by interacting with caregivers, educators and peers.⁽¹⁵⁰⁾ This give-and-take dance can be observed in patterns of touch, heart rate, facial expression, vocalization, eye gaze and brain activity⁽¹⁵¹⁾, and will shape the development of children’s stress, immune and emotion regulation systems.⁽¹⁵²⁾ While much of the research on this moment-to-moment synchrony has focused on mothers, similar tools have been used to study father-child, grandparent-child, and educator-child interactions.⁽¹⁵³⁾

Photo courtesy of Educare

Time spent in nurturing relationships is essential for brain development as infants develop up to one million new neural connections per second, which are directly shaped by interactions.⁽¹⁵⁴⁾ Numerous studies have shown how relationships influence long-term language⁽¹⁵⁵⁾, social⁽¹⁵⁶⁾, and executive function outcomes in children.⁽¹⁵⁷⁾

Relationships can be a source of resilience or stress for young children

Relationships fluctuate over time⁽¹⁵⁸⁾, and patterns of emotional regulation or dysregulation in children’s relationships can increase stress or bolster resilience.⁽¹⁵⁹⁾ Researchers generally agree that key features define effective learning relationships: warmth, consistency, attunement, reciprocity, and joint activity.⁽¹⁶⁰⁾ However, any relationship also brings the potential for harm.⁽¹⁶¹⁾ Racial bias, devaluation of home languages and cultures, and deficit-based thinking can create harmful learning relationships in which children are not fully seen and supported for who they are.⁽¹⁶²⁾

Children’s relational learning environments are dynamic and develop over time

As children grow, they develop more sophisticated self-regulatory abilities.⁽¹⁶³⁾ Typically, this coincides with growth in their social network, and as children enter formal learning environments, educators and peers play an important role in learning and development. In addition to the importance of nurturing relationships with individual adults, children benefit when multiple adults in their lives reinforce familiar patterns⁽¹⁶⁴⁾, and when adults scaffold relationships with peers⁽¹⁶⁵⁾, who play a central and often unacknowledged role in one another’s learning. For example, Henry and Rickman (2007) found that peer ability in Head Start classrooms may have a significant, under-reported effect on children’s outcomes. After children enter formal learning environments, parents continue to play a central role in learning both through day-to-day engagement and support of school goals.⁽¹⁶⁶⁾ Ideally, family-educator relationships are trusting and mutually supportive, as children benefit when educators build strong relationships with families.⁽¹⁶⁷⁾

Equity in relationships

Photo courtesy of Manny Cantor Center

Relationship-based learning is backed by a robust body of research, yet millions of children experience disruptions in their relationships with parents and other early educators because of systemic inequities. For example, Iruka et al. (2019) found that Black children are less likely to have close relationships with teachers and be in emotionally supportive classrooms compared to peers.⁽¹⁶⁸⁾ Conversely, strong relationships with educators can protect a child from the effects of structural racism⁽¹⁶⁹⁾ and other kinds of adversity⁽¹⁷⁰⁾, while creating supportive, culturally sustaining learning environments for all.⁽¹⁷¹⁾

Because any individual relationship can increase or buffer stress, researchers can clarify both universal and culturally-specific factors that support healthy relationships for every young child at home, child care, or school. Many tribal communities in the United States and elsewhere have longstanding, relational approaches to early childhood development⁽¹⁷²⁾, but non-white cultural wealth has often been ignored in research on relational wellbeing. Researchers now have an opportunity to evolve relational constructs (e.g., attachment and parental sensitivity) through a lens of racial, cultural, and linguistic inclusion.⁽¹⁷³⁾

The quality of moment-to-moment interactions are particularly important to children’s growth and development

Relational learning happens in real time

Significant research to date has found that the quality of moment-to-moment interactions are particularly important to children’s growth and development. It is the nuanced, sensitive quality of these interactions that seems to matter most. Relational learning is dynamic, prompting important questions about how we support adults to develop the personal qualities and skills to nurture every child’s potential in the present.⁽¹⁷⁴⁾

Principle 7: The learning environment intentionally facilitates exploration, independence, and interaction

While the term “environment” is used broadly in developmental research, ideal learning approaches uniquely emphasize the importance of the physical learning environment⁽¹⁷⁵⁾, including considerations of designed learning spaces, open spaces for exploration, materials, furniture, look and feel and access to nature. The educator’s role in guiding children’s engagement with their environment is critical. In practice, educators can use the environment to enhance social, emotional, and cognitive development, balancing universal and individual needs and structuring spaces and schedules to facilitate flexibility, exploration and focus.⁽¹⁷⁶⁾

How the built environment influences learning

As Choi et al (2014) and others argue, the physical environment plays a central role in children’s cognitive load and learning abilities. Researchers who have examined designed learning environments have found a variety of effects with implications for development. For example, Klatte et al (2009) found that in more acoustically resonant classrooms, children had more difficulty with speech perception, short-term memory and social relationships. Marx et al (1999) examined children’s question-asking in two classroom formations — desks arranged in rows and columns and desks arranged in a semi-circle — finding that children asked more questions in a semi-circle. Acer et al (2015) studied the effects of a preschool classroom redesign on children’s play behavior, finding that manipulative and dramatic play increased after a subtle change to make materials more accessible to children.⁽¹⁷⁷⁾ Finally, Fisher et al. (2014) found that children in classrooms with cluttered walls were more distracted, off-task, and learned less than children in classrooms with un-cluttered walls.⁽¹⁷⁸⁾ Hanley et al., 2017 found that similar effects were even more pronounced for children with Autism Spectrum Disorder.⁽¹⁷⁹⁾

In one recent study, Barrett et al. (2013) incorporated many factors of environmental design into a multi-level model and found that light, temperature, air quality, ownership, flexibility, complexity, and color were among the most important environmental design factors related to children’s learning. These design considerations are not trivial; their model demonstrated that these factors account for approximately 16% of variability in academic performance.⁽¹⁸⁰⁾

Color and lighting considerations

Some researchers have focused on the influence of specific components of the designed learning environment, including individual colors and dimensions of warmth or intensity of hue. Researchers also consider the quantity and contrast of colors in a classroom as they relate to cognitive load or attention. Rather than indicating that certain colors are uniformly better or worse for children’s learning and development, the research as a whole suggests that color should be carefully considered in tandem with light sources, child age, inclusion of children with a variety of special needs, and the use of different areas in the learning environment.

Several researchers recommend the use of warm, neutral colors to prevent overstimulation in young children with disabilities like ADHD and autism.⁽¹⁸¹⁾ However, active children also seem to respond well to cool, neutral colors⁽¹⁸²⁾ and there is some evidence that blue and purple hues may support attention and regulation.⁽¹⁸³⁾ Designers should be thoughtful about contrasting colors and keep the needs of visually impaired learners in mind when choosing accent colors in a learning environment. While monotonous colors have been associated with reduced performance in children, too many colors may lead to overstimulation.⁽¹⁸⁴⁾ In addition to color, Shabha (2006) and Gaines (2008) have examined questions about light sources as they relate to children with disabilities and found that visual triggers including both light and color can interfere with children’s learning and concentration.⁽¹⁸⁵⁾ Although some researchers have investigated the varying effects of color on children of different ages, genders, and learning abilities⁽¹⁸⁶⁾, little research has focused on how diverse home cultures may inform the color and overall design of welcoming, inclusive learning environments.

Environmental toxins & access to nature

Significant research exists on the risks children face due to environmental toxins⁽¹⁸⁷⁾, which disproportionately impact children experiencing poverty, including in their learning environments.⁽¹⁸⁸⁾ A growing body of research also demonstrates the importance of time in nature for children’s development.⁽¹⁸⁹⁾ Children today have far less time in nature than prior generations⁽¹⁹⁰⁾, and access to nature is further limited by systemic racism and other socioeconomic factors.⁽¹⁹¹⁾ For example, Wen et al, 2013 reported that areas with more Black and Hispanic/Latine families were less likely to have accessible green space. Climate change and environmental crises are only worsening disparities, especially for children and families of color.⁽¹⁹²⁾

While research suggests that all children benefit from regular access to green space, many children and families do not currently have the ability to play safely in nature. UNICEF’s discussion paper on the necessity of urban green space includes creative recommendations for communities, schools, and local and national lawmakers to ensure that all children grow up with access to nature and the many benefits it provides. children playing outside

Finally, while more research is needed, educators around the country have used COVID-19 as a way to expand nature-based learning environments for young children. These programs will also benefit from research and evaluation as children’s immersion in nature may support both physiological and cognitive development as well as the ability to respond to climate change. It is important to note that many tribal communities in the United States and elsewhere see learning and development as intrinsically linked to both land and culture.⁽¹⁹³⁾ Efforts to re-connect all children with nature will benefit from recognition and restoration of historic and current indigenous practice.⁽¹⁹⁴⁾

Equity & inclusion considerations

Universal Design for Learning centers children with a range of needs and abilities through a framework to ensure that all children are maximally supported by the learning environment.⁽¹⁹⁵⁾ The framework begins with equitable use and emphasizes flexibility, perceptibility of visual cues and information, and other accessibility considerations that make learning materials and experiences available to all. One important equity consideration in the learning environment is the extent to which photographs, books and other materials authentically reflect both children’s home cultures and languages and diverse communities in the larger world.⁽¹⁹⁶⁾

Future research directions

While researchers have identified important considerations related to classroom setup, access to nature, color, lighting and acoustics, children experience learning environments holistically and dynamically. Children may also respond in distinctive ways to identical learning environments based on neurodiversity, language, home culture, mood, and age. Future research should explore the holistic effects of carefully designed environments, including on oral language development, socioemotional development and children’s agency.

In their 2020 review of existing research on the physical learning environment’s role in child learning outcomes, Matthews and Lippman also recommend future research on key components of the built physical environment (including classroom size, density, organization, noise levels, and lighting as well as air quality and ventilation) and ways that it is used (design, flexibility and “legibility”). They emphasize that a physical learning environment is rarely ideal for every learning scenario, and that educators and children should have ownership and flexibility to reconfigure space to optimize learning. Other researchers recommend incorporating both psychosocial and physical environmental factors in future research frameworks.⁽¹⁹⁷⁾

Because children actively learn everywhere, not just in formal learning environments, future research should also investigate the diverse settings where children spend their time. Importantly, most existing studies on the effects of learning environments have focused on children’s experiences. Given extensive research linking educator and family wellbeing to child outcomes, learning environments should be optimally designed to support adult engagement and development as well.

Principle 8: The time of childhood is valued

Ideal learning environments nurture children in the present rather than existing solely to prepare them for the near (i.e., Kindergarten) or distant (i.e., college) future. Research suggests that educators’ capacity to be present and attuned to young children in real time on a moment-to-moment basis fundamentally shapes development.⁽¹⁹⁸⁾

Photo courtesy of Educare

These supportive interactions, whether playful, communicative, or regulatory, have a time-sensitive quality. Children benefit from socially-contingent interactions with back-and-forth rhythms, from serve-and-return conversations to clapping, singing, and playing peek-a-boo.⁽¹⁹⁹⁾

Research has also shed light on the particular rhythms of childhood, which may run counter to recent efforts to maximize “time on task” in learning environments. Numerous studies suggests that inner reflective time and rest are critical for children’s development across domains. Sleep, in particular, is of fundamental importance to children’s growth and learning. For example, Seehagen et al. (2015) explored the relationship between napping and memory in infants, finding that infants who napped after learning a new imitation task were better able to recall the task after napping then infants who stayed awake.⁽²⁰⁰⁾

Photo courtesy of Waldorf Early Childhood Association of North America

At a program level, educators should pace activities according to the needs of children, planning plenty of time to learn, explore, reflect, and rest. Learning environments should feel welcoming, cozy, and calm.⁽²⁰¹⁾ An adult’s ability to respond to children in real time requires presence and sensitivity, so ensuring time for educators to rest and reflect is critical as well.

Protecting and valuing the time of childhood is especially important when considering the disparities that children experience today. For example, Epstein and colleagues (2017) found that adults perceive Black girls as less innocent and older than their white peers, disrupting their experience of childhood.⁽²⁰²⁾ Similarly, Cooke & Halberstadt found that adults mistakenly perceive Black boys to be angry at higher rates than they do white boys.⁽²⁰³⁾ Finally, recent studies have shown that more than a million preschoolers are suspended or expelled each year, and children of color face disproportionate suspension and expulsion which results in exclusion from their learning environments.⁽²⁰⁴⁾ In 2020, the Children’s Equity Project and Bipartisan Policy Center released a report detailing these harsh and inequitable disciplinary practices and recommending policy solutions to end disparities and ensure that all children have access to supportive learning environments.⁽²⁰⁵⁾ Childhood is a time of limitless potential not only for individual children, but for our communities. Early childhood policies and programs should embrace and protect this unique, sensitive period.

Principle 9: Continuous learning environments support adult development

While early childhood is a unique period, humans continue to grow and develop throughout life.⁽²⁰⁶⁾ In particular, there is evidence that having or caring for children may enhance adult capacity for neuroplasticity and learning.⁽²⁰⁷⁾ Ideal learning environments encourage ongoing, whole-person learning and development in all adults who support children — parents, caregivers, and teachers.

Adults develop through equitable, experiential and personalized educator pathways

Educator development models tend to follow a linear path: intensive pre-service coursework leads to student teaching and a career of independent teaching with occasional supervisor feedback. However, research suggests that experiential learning through work with children, coupled with competency-based credentials and continual reflective coaching, may be both supportive of child development and more approachable for educators from diverse backgrounds.⁽²⁰⁸⁾ Indeed, research on how adults learn and develop, including the framework of adult learning known as andragogy, echoes core principles of ideal learning environments.⁽²⁰⁹⁾

Equity considerations are of central importance to the formation and development of educators, and include consideration of educator recruitment and retention⁽²¹⁰⁾, cost and barriers to high-quality training models⁽²¹¹⁾, compensation and credentialing⁽²¹²⁾, inclusive curricula⁽²¹³⁾ and supportive learning environments.⁽²¹⁴⁾

In addition, studies of adult learning emphasize the importance of the trainer-educator as a facilitator and guide rather than “sage on the stage.” These trainer-educator and peer-peer relationships are also important for educator development.⁽²¹⁵⁾

Researchers have also highlighted the importance of personalized learning in which adults can construct new meaning through reflection on past experiences to build skills. To facilitate this integration of past and current experiences, trainers and coaches of educators should observe and build authentic, reflective relationships with their adult students.⁽²¹⁶⁾

Photo courtesy of Bank Street

The development of educators requires whole-person learning — new knowledge, skills, habits of mind and the continual development of social and emotional capacities that allow adults to be present and responsive to the needs of young children.⁽²¹⁷⁾ Coherence between adult educator development and child development may be an important, overlooked ingredient in effective programs. In ideal learning approaches, adult professional learning is closely aligned to the child curriculum, materials, parent expectations, school culture and the physical environment.⁽²¹⁸⁾

New educator pathways are needed to meet educators where they are and support their development

Early educators enter the workforce in many ways and at various stages in their own development. Yet early childhood training models haven’t sufficiently evolved to meet these educators where they are and support their learning and licensure. The COVID-19 pandemic created opportunities to develop blended (online/offline) teacher development programs. At the same time, continued pressure on institutes of higher education is driving creativity in format, especially to serve a growing group of “non-traditional” learners.⁽²¹⁹⁾ While innovation can help make high-quality programs more accessible, core elements of educator development must continue to happen in immersive settings with children and families.

The next decade offers opportunities for early educator development programs to rapidly innovate and scale low-cost, blended (online/offline) programs aligned with the principles of ideal learning environments. For example, Bank Street released a calculator in 2021 to help programs estimate costs for residency-based programs, and efforts like Trust for Learning’s partners’ SEED grant projects can inform the development of more inclusive educator pathways.⁽²²⁰⁾ Recent early childhood educator efforts led by the American Indian College Fund⁽²²¹⁾ and HBCUs offer models to learn from. Finally, the last few years have seen a surge in educator programs aimed to reduce teacher bias and promote inclusion. Further study of these efforts is needed.⁽²²²⁾

Educators of all kinds face enormous stressors that require policy changes at every level

Skilled educator practice relies on a holistic, moment-to-moment integration and deployment of various faculties — language, emotion, decision-making, creativity and reflection.⁽²²³⁾ This sophisticated set of adult competencies is critically important for children’s development, yet educators experience ongoing stressors related to low compensation, working conditions, barriers to high-quality training programs, and persistent turnover in the field. These stressors directly and indirectly impede an adult’s ability to be present and responsive with young children. ⁽²²⁴⁾ Compensating educators fully and removing socioeconomic barriers for families may go a long way toward increasing the wellbeing of parents and the early childhood workforce in ways that will have cascading effects on young children. Focused on parents, Baby’s First Years is a recent study with families experiencing poverty to examine the effects of a monthly unconditional cash transfer on their children’s development. Researchers will examine how parent stress and mental health contribute to the effects of this program.⁽²²⁵⁾ While structural changes are needed to reduce parent and educator stress, researchers have found that supporting educator wellbeing through mindfulness-based interventions for teachers and parents also supports child outcomes.⁽²²⁶⁾ Notably, Oberle and Schonert-Reichl (2016) found that reducing teacher stress through mindfulness may reduce student stress biomarkers.⁽²²⁷⁾

Policy innovation is needed at all levels to support ongoing, embedded and meaningful educator development. For example, employers should support modified schedules to ensure that educators can benefit from off-site learning opportunities and counties and cities can develop robust substitute pools to ensure continuity of care and learning. Importantly, articulation agreements are needed to recognize educators’ existing experience and make sure that every educator has a personalized and meaningful path toward high-quality credentials. Investments in equitable educator pathways aligned with the principles of ideal learning environments can accelerate the expansion of high-quality experiences for children.

Conclusion & Acknowledgements

As advocates, we focus on the prenatal period to the age of eight because of the sensitivity and importance of these years to all future development. But young children do not develop and learn alone: these early years also create a sensitive period for the adults in a young child’s life — us!

Investment in early childhood educators is paramount.

We have included brief recommendations related to policy and practice in each section, but the resounding takeaway is this: ideal learning environments come to life in the hands of educators, formal and informal, in any setting. Historically, we have systematically underfunded and devalued early childhood educators of every kind, which has further perpetuated racism, sexism, and economic inequity. Early educators are predominantly women and disproportionately women of color and immigrants, and they are being driven out of the field year after year because the profession is financially untenable and perpetuates socioeconomic inequity.⁽²²⁸⁾ Evidence from every direction highlights the urgent need for full, sustainable investment in our early childhood systems and most importantly, our educators.

How do we create ideal learning environments for young children?

Research on child development continues to shed light on optimal learning environments for young children. Over time, specific recommendations may change as our understanding of ideal learning environments grows from this scientific base. Today, it is abundantly clear that children thrive in discovery-based learning environments that are equitable, playful, joyful and supportive of the continual development of parents and other educators. We now need greater public will, equitable state and federal policy, and sustained funding which centers the wellbeing and compensation of our invaluable early childhood educators. Please join our community of advocates to tackle the barriers that remain and bring our shared ideals to life for every child in the United States.

Acknowledgments

This compilation of research was facilitated by Trust for Learning, a philanthropic partnership dedicated to supporting ideal learning environments for every child. Individual studies and literature reviews were identified by searching peer-reviewed developmental science, psychology, education, and implementation science journals. While we focused on research related directly to each individual principle of ideal learning environments, a number of recent literature reviews of child development research closely align with the overall ideal learning framework.⁽²²⁹⁾

Contributors

Tobi Adejumo, Jeffrey Beal, Elizabeth Beaven, Elena Bodrova, Cathrine Floyd, Brenda Fyfe, Chrisanne Gayl, Teresa Granillo, Iheoma Iruka, Cynthia Jackson, Marianna McCall, Denise Monnier, Soyoung Park, Christina Riley, Ellen Roche, Marina Rodriguez, Lisa Roy, Allyx Schiavone, Wendy Shenk-Evans, Wendy Simmons and Sara Suchman served as contributors, and Ximena Franco-Jenkins and Liz Pungello Bruno served as reviewers. The final document was edited by Trust for Learning and designed and developed by Kate Purcell and Dylan Tuohy.

Special thanks to all members of the Ideal Learning Roundtable, Trust for Learning’s board of advisors, and our partner funders. Feedback on this compilation of evidence is welcome. Please contact corresponding author Ellen Roche at ellen [@] trustforlearning [.] org

Suggested citation: Trust for Learning. (2022). Evidence Brief: Ideal learning environments for young children. Retrieved from https://www.trustforlearning.org/evidence-brief

Souto-Manning, M., & Rabadi-Raol, A. (2018). (Re)Centering quality in early childhood education: Toward intersectional justice for minoritized children. Review of Research in Education, 42(1), 203-225.
Bernstein, R. (2021). African American children and childhood. Childhood Studies, Oxford Bibliographies.

Noltemeyer, A.L., Mujic, J., & McLoughlin, C.S. (2012). The history of inequality in education. In A.L. Noltemeyer & C.S. McLoughlin (Eds.), Disproportionality in education and special education. Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas Publisher Ltd.

Souto-Manning, M., & Winn, M. T. (2017). Introduction: Foundational understandings as “show ways” for interrupting injustice and fostering justice in and through education research. Review of Research in Education, 41, ix-xix.
Bassok, D., & Eva Galdo, E. (2016). Inequality in preschool quality? Community-level disparities in access to high-quality learning environments. Early Education and Development, 27(1), 128-144, DOI: 10.1080/10409289.2015.1057463

Collier, A. Y., & Molina, R. L. (2019). Maternal Mortality in the United States: Updates on Trends, Causes, and Solutions. NeoReviews, 20(10), e561–e574. https://doi.org/10.1542/neo.20-10-e561

Dearing, E., McCartney, K., & Taylor, B. A. (2009). Does higher-quality early child care promote low‐income children’s math and reading achievement in middle childhood? Child Development, 80(5), 1329-1349.

Friedman-Krauss, A., & Barnett, S. (2020). Access to high-quality early education and racial equity. National Institute for Early Education Research. Retrieved from http://nieer. org/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/Special-Report-Access-to-High-Quality-Early-Education-and-Racial-Equity. Pdf.

Valentino, R. (2018). Will public pre-K really close achievement gaps? Gaps in prekindergarten quality between students and across states. American Educational Research Journal, 55(1), 79-116.
Carnoy, M., & Rothstein, R. (2015). What international test scores tell us. Society (New Brunswick), 52(2), 122-128. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12115-015-9869-3
Iruka, I. U., Curenton, S. M., Sims, J., Escayg, K.-A., Ibekwe-Okafor, N., & RAPID-EC. (2021). Black Parent Voices: Resilience in the Face of the Two Pandemics—COVID-19 and Racism. Researchers Investigating Sociocultural Equity and Race (RISER) Network. https://www.bu-ceed.org/riser-network.html
Harvey, S. P. (2016). Ideas of race in early America. In Oxford Research Encyclopedia of American History.

Smedley, A., & Smedley, B. D. (2005). Race as biology is fiction, racism as a social problem is real: Anthropological and historical perspectives on the social construction of race. American Psychologist, 60(1), 16-26. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.60.1.16

Prucha, F. P. (Ed.). (2000) Documents of United States Indian Policy. University of Nebraska Press.

IOM (Institute of Medicine) & NRC (National Research Council). (2015). Transforming the Workforce for Children Birth Through Age 8: A Unifying Foundation. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.

Reardon, S. F., & Bischoff, K. (2011). Income inequality and income segregation. American journal of sociology, 116(4), 1092-1153.
DiMaggio, P., & Garip, F. (2012). Network effects and social inequality. Annual Review of Sociology, 38, 93-118.

Spencer. (2007). Phenomenology and Ecological Systems Theory: Development of Diverse Groups. In Handbook of Child Psychology. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470147658.chpsy0115
Brody, G. H., Lei, M.-K., Chae, D. H., Yu, T., Kogan, S. M., & Beach, S. R. H. (2014). Perceived discrimination among African American adolescents and allostatic load: A longitudinal analysis with buffering effects. Child Development, 85(3), 989–1002. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12213

Caughy, M. O., O’Campo, P. J., & Muntaner, C. (2004). Experiences of racism among African American parents and the mental health of their preschool-aged children. American Journal of Public Health, 94(12), 2118–2124.

Priest, N., Paradies, Y., Trenerry, B., Truong, M., Karlsen, S., & Kelly, Y. (2013). A systematic review of studies examining the relationship between reported racism and health and well-being for children and young people. Social Science & Medicine, 95, 115–127.

Trent, M., Dooley, D. G., Dougé, J., Cavanaugh, R. M., Lacroix, A. E., Fanburg, J., … & Wallace, S. B. (2019). The impact of racism on child and adolescent health. Pediatrics, 144(2), e20191765.

Williams, D. R., & Mohammed, S. A. (2013). Racism and health I: Pathways and scientific evidence. American Behavioral Scientist, 57(8), 1152–1173.
Brito, N. H., & Noble, K. G. (2014). Socioeconomic status and structural brain development. Frontiers in Neuroscience, 8, 276.

Farah, M. J. (2018). Socioeconomic status and the brain: prospects for neuroscience-informed policy. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 19(7), 428-438.

National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine; Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education; Committee on National Statistics; Board on Children, Youth, and Families; Committee on Building an Agenda to Reduce the Number of Children in Poverty by Half in 10 Years; Le Menestrel S, Duncan G, editors. Washington (DC): National Academies Press (US); 2019
Blair, C., & Raver, C. C. (2016). Poverty, stress, and brain development: New directions for prevention and intervention. Academic Pediatrics, 16(3), S30-S36.
National Council on Disability (NCD). (2018). IDEA series: The segregation of students with disabilities. The National Council on Disability, Washington, DC.
Belsky, J., Bakermans-Kranenburg, M. J., & Van IJzendoorn, M. H. (2007). For better and for worse: Differential susceptibility to environmental influences. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 16(6), 300-304.

Cole, P. M. (2014). Moving ahead in the study of the development of emotion regulation. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 38(2), 203-207.

Johnson, S. B., Riis, J. L., & Noble, K. G. (2016). State of the art review: Poverty and the developing brain. Pediatrics, 137(4), e20153075.
Brito, N. H., & Noble, K. G. (2014). Socioeconomic status and structural brain development. Frontiers in Neuroscience, 8, 276.

Bucci, M., Marques, S. S., Oh, D., & Harris, N. B. (2016). Toxic stress in children and adolescents. Advances in Pediatrics, 63(1), 403-428.

Center on the Developing Child. (2020). How racism can affect child development. Center on the Developing Child at Harvard University.

Chen, E., Brody, G. H., & Miller, G. E. (2017). Childhood close family relationships and health. American Psychologist, 72, 555–566.

Farah, M. J. (2018). Socioeconomic status and the brain: prospects for neuroscience-informed policy. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 19(7), 428-438.

Hyde, L. W., Gard, A. M., Tomlinson, R. C., Burt, S. A., Mitchell, C., & Monk, C. S. (2020). An ecological approach to understanding the developing brain: Examples linking poverty, parenting, neighborhoods, and the brain. American Psychologist, 75(9), 1245.

Jedd, K., Hunt, R. H., Cicchetti, D., Hunt, E., Cowell, R. A., Rogosch, F. A., … & Thomas, K. M. (2015). Long-term consequences of childhood maltreatment: Altered amygdala functional connectivity. Development and Psychopathology, 27(4pt2), 1577-1589.

Johnson, S. B., Riis, J. L., & Noble, K. G. (2016). State of the Art Review: Poverty and the Developing Brain. Pediatrics, 137(4), e20153075. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2015-3075

Kirouac, S., & McBride, D. L. (2009). The impact of childhood trauma on brain development: A literature review and supporting handouts. Online Submission.

Lawson, G. M., Camins, J. S., Wisse, L., Wu, J., Duda, J. T., Cook, P. A., … & Farah, M. J. (2017). Childhood socioeconomic status and childhood maltreatment: Distinct associations with brain structure. PloS one, 12(4), e0175690.

Perfect, M. M., Turley, M. R., Carlson, J. S., Yohanna, J., & Saint Gilles, M. P. (2016). School-related outcomes of traumatic event exposure and traumatic stress symptoms in students: A systematic review of research from 1990 to 2015. School Mental Health, 8(1), 7-43.
Felitti, V. J., Anda, R. F., Nordenberg, D., Williamson, D. F., Spitz, A. M., Edwards, V., & Marks, J. S. (1998). Relationship of childhood abuse and household dysfunction to many of the leading causes of death in adults: The Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACE) Study. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 14(4), 245-258.
Dorgan, U. S. B. L., Shenandoah, J., BigFoot, D. S., Broderick, E., Brown, E. F., Fletcher, M. L., … & Zimmerman, M. J. B. (2014). Ending violence so children can thrive. US Department of Justice.

Willmon-Haque, S., & BigFoot, S. D. (2008). Violence and the effects of trauma on American Indian and Alaska Native populations. Journal of Emotional Abuse, 8(1-2), 51-66.
Sacks, V., & Murphey, D. (2018). The prevalence of adverse childhood experiences, nationally, by state, and by race or ethnicity. Child Trends.
Bernard, D. L., Calhoun, C. D., Banks, D. E., Halliday, C. A., Hughes-Halbert, C., & Danielson, C. K. (2021). Making the “C-ACE” for a culturally-informed adverse childhood experiences framework to understand the pervasive mental health impact of racism on Black youth. Journal of Child & Adolescent Trauma, 14(2), 233-247

Iruka, I. U., Durden, T. R., Gardner-Neblett, N., Ibekwe-Okafor, N., Sansbury, A., & Telfer, N. A. (2021). Attending to the adversity of racism against young Black children. Policy Insights from the Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 8(2), 175-182.

Lanier, P. (2020). Racism is an Adverse Childhood Experience (ACE). The Jordan Institute for Families, University of North Carolina.
Bethell, C., Jones, J., Gombojav, N., Linkenbach, J., & Sege, R. (2019). Positive childhood experiences and adult mental and relational health in a statewide sample: Associations across adverse childhood experiences levels. JAMA Pediatrics, 173(11), e193007.

Narayan, A. J., Lieberman, A. F., & Masten, A. S. (2021). Intergenerational transmission and prevention of adverse childhood experiences (ACEs). Clinical Psychology Review, 101997.
Nicholson, J., Perez, L., & Kurtz, J. (2018). Trauma-informed practices for early childhood educators: Relationship-based approaches that support healing and build resilience in young children. Routledge.

Thomas, M. S., Crosby, S., & Vanderhaar, J. (2019). Trauma-informed practices in schools across two decades: An interdisciplinary review of research. Review of Research in Education, 43(1), 422-452.
Ortiz, R. (2021). Contextualizing Adverse Childhood Experiences—Intersections with structural adversity and imperatives for future research. JAMA Network Open, 4(10), e2130950.
Lechner, A., Cavanaugh, M., & Blyler, C. (2016). Addressing trauma in American Indian and Alaska Native youth. Mathematica Policy Research. Retrieved from https://aspe.hhs.gov/pdfreport/addressing-trauma-american-indian-and-alaska-native-youth.
Ahmad, J., Al Aqra, A., Bellizzi, S., Betancourt, T., Brown, M. R., Daelmans, B., … & Wilton, K. S.(2021). Special Issue on Early Childhood Development in Emergencies [Complete]. Journal on Education in Emergencies, (7)1, 240.

Ortiz, R. (2021). Contextualizing Adverse Childhood Experiences—Intersections with structural adversity and imperatives for future research. JAMA Network Open, 4(10), e2130950.
Skeer, M., McCormick, M. C., Normand, S.-L. T., Buka, S. L., & Gilman, S. E. (2009). A prospective study of familial conflict, psychological stress, and the development of substance use disorders in adolescence. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 104(1–2), 65–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2009.03.017
Belsky, J. (2013). Differential susceptibility to environmental influences. International Journal of Child Care and Education Policy, 7(2), 15–31. https://doi.org/10.1007/2288-6729-7-2-15
Evans, G. W., Li, D., & Whipple, S. S. (2013). Cumulative risk and child development. Psychological Bulletin, 139(6), 1342.

Masten, A. S., Lucke, C. M., Nelson, K. M., & Stallworthy, I. C. (2021). Resilience in development and psychopathology: Multisystem perspectives. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, 17, 521-549.
Fischer, K. W. , & Bidell , T. R. ( 2006 ). Dynamic development of action and thought. In W. Damon & R. M. Lerner (Eds.), Theoretical models of human development: Handbook of child psychology (6th ed., Vol. 1, pp. 313 – 399 ). New York, NY: Wiley.
Bruno, E. P., & Iruka, I. U. (2022). Reexamining the Carolina abecedarian project using an antiracist perspective: Implications for early care and education research. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 58, 165-176.

Roberts, S. O., Bareket-Shavit, C., Dollins, F. A., Goldie, P. D., & Mortenson, E. (2020). Racial inequality in psychological research: Trends of the past and recommendations for the future. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 15(6), 1295–1309. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691620927709

Society for Research in Child Development (2020). Statement on Anti-racism, Equity, and Inclusion in SRCD Publications. Retrieved from https://www.srcd.org/news/statement-antiracism-equity-and-inclusion-srcd-publications
Feldman, M. A., Battin, S. M., Shaw, O. A., & Luckasson, R. (2013). Inclusion of children with disabilities in mainstream child development research. Disability & Society, 28(7), 997–1011.

Henrich, J., Heine, S. J., & Norenzayan, A. (2010). The weirdest people in the world?. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 33(2-3), 61-83.
Davis, L. P., & Museus, S. D. (2019). What is deficit thinking? An analysis of conceptualizations of deficit thinking and implications for scholarly research. NCID Currents, 1(1).

American Psychological Association, Task Force on Resilience and Strength in Black Children and Adolescents. (2008). Resilience in African American children and adolescents: A vision for optimal development. American Psychological Association.

Genishi, C., Dyson, A. H., & Fassler, R. (1994). Language and diversity in early childhood: Whose voices are appropriate. In Diversity and Developmentally Appropriate Practices, 250-268.
Researchers Investigating Sociocultural Equity and Race (RISER) Network. (2021). Racial Justice and Equity for Children in Boston and Beyond. Boston University, Center on the Ecology of Early Development (BU CEED).

SRCD Governing Council Announces Formation of Anti-Racism Task Force. (2021). Diversity and Inclusion. Society for Research in Child Development (SRCD). https://www.srcd.org/about-us/diversity-and-inclusion
Brayboy, B. M. J. (2014). Culture, place, and power: Engaging the histories and possibilities of American Indian education. History of Education Quarterly, 54(3), 395-402.

Brown, C. S., Mistry, R. S., & Yip, T. (2019). Moving from the margins to the mainstream: Equity and justice as key considerations for developmental science. Child Development Perspectives, 13(4), 235-240.

Doucet, F. (2017). What does a culturally sustaining learning climate look like? Theory Into Practice, 56(3), 195–204.

Jones, D. (2017). From theorizing in the ivory tower to creating change with the people: Activist research as a framework for collaborative action. International Journal of Adult Vocational Education and Technology (IJAVET), 8(2), 29-41.

Olkin, R., & Pledger, C. (2003). Can disability studies and psychology join hands?. American Psychologist, 58(4), 296.

Redbird-Post, M. (2020). Exploring curriculum development in indigenous early childhood language immersion programs: An indigenous storywork journey through the Kiowa encampment story circle methodology. Retrieved from https://shareok.org/handle/11244/325346

Roberts, S. O., Bareket-Shavit, C., Dollins, F. A., Goldie, P. D., & Mortenson, E. (2020). Racial inequality in psychological research: Trends of the past and recommendations for the future. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 15(6), 1295–1309.

Super, C. M., Harkness, S., Barry, O., & Zeitlin, M. (2011). Think locally, act globally: Contributions of African research to child development. Child Development Perspectives, 5(2), 119-125.
Cantor, P., Lerner, R. M., Pittman, K. J., Chase, P. A., & Gomperts, N. (2021). Whole-child development, learning, and thriving: A dynamic systems approach. Cambridge University Press.

Immordino-Yang, M. H., Darling-Hammond, L., & Krone, C. R. (2019). Nurturing nature: How brain development is inherently social and emotional, and what this means for education. Educational Psychologist, 54(3), 185-204.

Immordino-Yang, M. H. (2016). Emotion, sociality, and the brain’s default mode network: Insights for educational practice and policy. Policy Insights from the Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 3(2), 211-219.

Immordino-Yang, M. H., & Damasio, A. (2007). We feel, therefore we learn: The relevance of affective and social neuroscience to education. Mind, Brain, and Education, 1(1), 3–10.

Mascolo, M. F., & Fischer, K. W. (2015). Dynamic development of thinking, feeling, and acting. In W.F. Overton, P. C. M. Molenaar, & R. M. Lerner (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology and developmental science: Theory and method (pp. 113–161). John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Meyer, D. K., & Turner, J. C. (2006). Re-conceptualizing emotion and motivation to learn in classroom contexts. Educational Psychology Review, 18(4), 377-390.

Overton, W. F. (2015). Processes, relations, and relational-developmental-systems. In W. F. Overton, P. C. M. Molenaar, & R. M. Lerner (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology and developmental science: Theory and method (pp. 9–62). John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Li, J., & Julian, M. M. (2012). Developmental relationships as the active ingredient: A unifying working hypothesis of “what works” across intervention settings. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 82(2), 157–166.

Masten, A. S., & Cicchetti, D. (2010). Developmental cascades. Development and Psychopathology, 22(3), 491-495.

Siegel, D. J. (2012). The developing mind: How relationships and the brain interact to shape who we are (pp. xix, 506). The Guilford Press.
Cantor, P., Osher, D., Berg, J., Steyer, L., & Rose, T. (2019). Malleability, plasticity, and individuality: How children learn and develop in context. Applied Developmental Science, 23(4), 307–337. https://doi.org/10.1080/10888691.2017.1398649

Gonzalez, S. L., Alvarez, V., & Nelson, E. L. (2019). Do gross and fine motor skills differentially contribute to language outcomes? A systematic review. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 2670. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02670

Masten, A. S., & Cicchetti, D. (2010). Developmental cascades. Development and Psychopathology, 22(3), 491-495.

Masten, A. S., Lucke, C. M., Nelson, K. M., & Stallworthy, I. C. (2021). Resilience in development and psychopathology: Multisystem perspectives. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, 17, 521-549.
Blair, C., & Raver, C. C. (2016). Poverty, stress, and brain development: New directions for prevention and intervention. Academic Pediatrics, 16(3), 30–36.

Shonkoff, J. P., Garner, A. S., The Committee on Psychosocial Aspects Of Child and Family Health, C. O.E. C., Adoption, And Dependent Care, And Section On Developmental And Behavioral Pediatrics, Siegel, B. S., Dobbins, M. I., Earls, M. F., Garner, A. S., McGuinn, L., Pascoe, J., & Wood, D. L. (2012). The lifelong effects of early childhood adversity and toxic stress. Pediatrics, 129(1), e232–e246.
Boyce, W. T., & Ellis, B. J. (2005). Biological sensitivity to context: I. An evolutionary–developmental theory of the origins and functions of stress reactivity. Development and Psychopathology, 17(2), 271–301. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0954579405050145

Ellis Weismer, S., Kaushanskaya, M., Larson, C., Mathée, J., & Bolt, D. (2018). Executive function skills in school-age children with autism spectrum disorder: Association with language abilities. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 61(11), 2641-2658.

Giudice, M. D., Ellis, B. J., & Shirtcliff, E. A. (2011). The Adaptive Calibration Model of stress responsivity. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 35(7), 1562–1592. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2010.11.007

McEwen, B. S. (2000). The neurobiology of stress: From serendipity to clinical relevance. Brain Research, 886(1), 172–189. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0006-8993(00)02950-4

Kudielka, B. M., & Kirschbaum, C. (2007). Biological bases of the stress response. In Stress and Addiction (pp. 3-19). Academic Press.
Shonkoff, J. P., Garner, A. S., The Committee on Psychosocial Aspects Of Child and Family Health, C. O. E. C., Adoption, And Dependent Care, And Section On Developmental And Behavioral Pediatrics, Siegel, B. S., Dobbins, M. I., Earls, M. F., Garner, A. S., McGuinn, L., Pascoe, J., & Wood, D. L. (2012). The lifelong effects of early childhood adversity and toxic stress. Pediatrics, 129(1), e232–e246.
Cantor, P., Osher, D., Berg, J., Steyer, L., & Rose, T. (2019). Malleability, plasticity, and individuality: How children learn and develop in context. Applied Developmental Science, 23(4), 307–337. https://doi.org/10.1080/10888691.2017.1398649

Nesselroade, J. R. (2018). Developments in developmental research and theory. Applied Developmental Science, 24(4), 345-348

Rose, L. T., Rouhani, P., & Fischer, K. W. (2013). The science of the individual. Mind, Brain, and Education, 7(3), 152-158.
Spencer, M. B. (2008). Phenomenology and ecological systems theory: Development of diverse groups. In Handbook of Child Psychology. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Wang, S., Lang, N., Bunch, G. C., Basch, S., McHugh, S. R., Huitzilopochtli, S., & Callanan, M. (2021). Dismantling persistent deficit narratives about the language and literacy of culturally and linguistically minoritized children and youth: Counter-possibilities. Frontiers in Education, 6, 260. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2021.641796
Anderson, V., Northam, E., & Wrennall, J. (2018). Developmental neuropsychology: A clinical approach. Routledge.

Iruka, I. U., Curenton, S. M., Durden, T. R., & Escayg, K. A. (2020). Don’t Look Away: Embracing Anti-bias Classrooms. Gryphon House Incorporated.

Iruka, I. U., Dotterer, A. M., & Pungello, E. P. (2014). Ethnic variations of pathways linking socioeconomic status, parenting, and preacademic skills in a nationally representative sample. Early Education and Development, 25(7), 973-994.

Troller Renfree, S., Shuffrey, L. C., Lopera-Perez, D. C., Filippi, C., & Brito, N. (October, 2020). Emergence of individual differences in functional brain development during the first year of life: Implications for risk and resilience [Young Investigator Symposium] International Society for Developmental Psychobiology (ISDP) Virtual Conference
Souto-Manning, M., & Rabadi-Raol, A. (2018). (Re) Centering quality in early childhood education: Toward intersectional justice for minoritized children. Review of Research in Education, 42(1), 203-225.
Bernstein, B. E., Meissner, A., & Lander, E. S. (2007). The mammalian epigenome. Cell, 128(4), 669-681.

Fischer, K. W., & Bidell, T. R. (2007). Dynamic Development of Action and Thought. In Handbook of Child Psychology. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470147658.chpsy0107

Meaney, M. J. (2010). Epigenetics and the biological definition of gene× environment interactions. Child Development, 81(1), 41-79.

Moore, D. S. (2015). The developing genome: An introduction to behavioral epigenetics. Oxford University Press.

Slavich, G. M., & Cole, S. W. (2013). The emerging field of human social genomics. Clinical Psychological Science, 1(3), 331-348.
Escayg, K. A. (2020). Anti‐racism in US early childhood education: Foundational principles. Sociology Compass, 14(4), e12764.

Iruka, I. U., Durden, T. R., Gardner-Neblett, N., Ibekwe-Okafor, N., Sansbury, A., & Telfer, N. A. (2021). Attending to the adversity of racism against young Black children. Policy Insights from the Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 8(2), 175-182.

Leyva, D., Weiland, C., Shapiro, A., Yeomans‐Maldonado, G., & Febles, A. (2021). A strengths‐based, culturally responsive family intervention improves Latino kindergarteners’ vocabulary and approaches to learning. Child Development.

McGregor, G., & Vogelsberg, R. T. (1998). Inclusive Schooling Practices: Pedagogical and Research Foundations. A Synthesis of the Literature that Informs Best Practices about Inclusive Schooling.
Apfelbaum, E. P., Pauker, K., Sommers, S. R., & Ambady, N. (2010). In blind pursuit of racial equality?. Psychological Science, 21(11), 1587-1592.

Boutte, G. S., Lopez-Robertson, J., & Powers-Costello, E. (2011). Moving beyond colorblindness in early childhood classrooms. Early Childhood Education Journal, 39(5), 335-342.
Farrington, C. (2019): Equitable learning and development: Applying science to foster liberatory education, Applied Developmental Science, DOI: 10.1080/10888691.2019.1609730
Motegi, N. (2019). Reconciliation as relationship: Exploring Indigenous cultures and perspectives through stories. Journal of Childhood Studies, 44(4), 82-97.
Conn-Powers, M., Cross, A. F., Traub, E. K., & Hutter-Pishgahi, L. (2006). The Universal Design of Early Education. Young Children archives. www. naeyc. org/files/yc/file/200609/ConnPowersBTJ. Pdf.

Cothren Cook, S., Rao, K., & Cook, B. G. (2016). Using Universal Design for Learning to personalize an evidence-based practice for students with disabilities. In M. Murphy, S. Redding, & J. Twyman (Eds.), Handbook on personalized learning for states, districts, and schools (pp. 239–247). Philadelphia, PA: Temple University, Center on Innovations in Learning. Retrieved from www.centeril.org

Meyer, A., Rose, D. H., & Gordon, D. T. (2014). Universal design for learning: Theory and practice. CAST Professional Publishing.
Gaylord‐Harden, N. K., Burrow, A. L., & Cunningham, J. A. (2012). A cultural‐asset framework for investigating successful adaptation to stress in African American youth. Child Development Perspectives, 6(3), 264-271.
Caldwell, J. Y., Davis, J. D., Du Bois, B., Echo-Hawk, H., Erickson, J. S., Goins, R. T., … & Stone, J. B. (2005). Culturally competent research with American Indians and Alaska Natives: findings and recommendations of the first symposium of the work group on American Indian Research and Program Evaluation Methodology. American Indian and Alaska Native Mental Health Research: The Journal of the National Center, 12(1), 1-21.

Hicks, S., Edwards, K., Dennis, M. K., & Finsel, C. (2005). Asset-building in tribal communities: Generating Native discussion and practical approaches [Policy Report]. Center for Social Development, Washington, DC.
Sims, M., Ellis, E. M., & Knox, V. (2017). Parental plurilingual capital in a monolingual context: Investigating strengths to support young children in early childhood settings. Early childhood education journal, 45(6), 777-787.
Gilliam, W. S., Maupin, A. N., Reyes, C. R., Accavitti, M., & Shic, F. (2016). Do early educators’ implicit biases regarding sex and race relate to behavior expectations and recommendations of preschool expulsions and suspensions. Yale University Child Study Center, 9(28), 1-16.

Caughy, M. O. B., O’Campo, P. J., & Muntaner, C. (2004). Experiences of racism among African American parents and the mental health of their preschool-aged children. American Journal of Public Health, 94(12), 2118-2124.
Egalite, A. J., & Kisida, B. (2018). The effects of teacher match on students’ academic perceptions and attitudes. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 40(1), 59-81.

Gershenson, S., Hart, C. M., Hyman, J., Lindsay, C., & Papageorge, N. W. (2018). The long-run impacts of same-race teachers (No. w25254). National Bureau of Economic Research.
Wells, A. S., Fox, L., & Cordova-Cobo, D. (2016). How racially diverse schools and classrooms can benefit all students. The Century Foundation.
DeCuir-Gunby, J. T., & Schutz, P. A. (2014). Researching race within educational psychology contexts. Educational Psychologist, 49(4), 244–260.

Researchers Investigating Sociocultural Equity and Race (RISER) Network. (2021). Racial Justice and Equity for Children in Boston and Beyond. Boston University, Center on the Ecology of Early Development (BU CEED).

SRCD Governing Council Announces Formation of Anti-Racism Task Force. (2021). Diversity and Inclusion. Society for Research in Child Development (SRCD). https://www.srcd.org/about-us/diversity-and-inclusion
Bronfenbrenner, U., & Morris, P. A. (2006). The bioecological model of human development. In M. R. Lerner, (Ed.). Handbook of Child Psychology, 793-828.
Alim, H. S., Rickford, J. R., & Ball, A. F. (Eds.). (2016). Raciolinguistics: How Language Shapes Our Ideas About Race (1st edition). Oxford University Press.

Annamma, S., & Morrison, D. (2018). DisCrit classroom ecology: Using praxis to dismantle dysfunctional education ecologies. Teaching and Teacher Education, 73, 70-80.

Coll, C. G., Crnic, K., Lamberty, G., Wasik, B. H., Jenkins, R., Garcia, H. V., & McAdoo, H. P. (1996). An integrative model for the study of developmental competencies in minority children. Child development, 67(5), 1891-1914.

Darling-Hammond, L., Flook, L., Cook-Harvey, C., Barron, B., & Osher, D. (2020). Implications for educational practice of the science of learning and development. Applied Developmental Science, 24(2), 97–140.

Derman-Sparks, L., & Edwards, J. O. (2010). Anti-bias education for young children and ourselves (Vol. 254). National Association for the Education of Young Children.

Flores, N., & Rosa, J. (2015). Undoing appropriateness: Raciolinguistic ideologies and language diversity in education. Harvard Educational Review, 85(2), 149-171.

Gardner-Neblett, N., & Iruka, I. U. (2015). Oral narrative skills: Explaining the language-emergent literacy link by race/ethnicity and SES. Developmental Psychology, 51(7), 889–904.

Ghavami, N., Katsiaficas, D., & Rogers, L. O. (2016). Toward an intersectional approach in developmental science: The role of race, gender, sexual orientation, and immigrant status. Advances in Child Development and Behavior, 50, 31-73.

Hammond, Z. (2020). Looking at SoLD through an equity lens: Will the science of learning and development be used to advance critical pedagogy or will it be used to maintain inequity by design?. Applied Developmental Science, 24(2), 151-158.

Hyde, L. W., Gard, A. M., Tomlinson, R. C., Burt, S. A., Mitchell, C., & Monk, C. S. (2020). An ecological approach to understanding the developing brain: Examples linking poverty, parenting, neighborhoods, and the brain. American Psychologist, 75(9), 1245–1259.

King Thorius, K. A., Moore, T. S., & Coomer, M. N. (2019). We can do better: Critically reframing special education research and practice at the intersections of disability and cultural and linguistic diversity for young children. In Special education for young learners with disabilities. Emerald Publishing Limited.

Nsamenang, A. B. (2007). A critical peek at early childhood care and education in Africa. Child Health and Education, 1(1), 14-26.

Spencer, M. B. (2008). Phenomenology and Ecological Systems Theory: Development of Diverse Groups. In R. M. Lerner & W. Damon (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology: Theoretical models of human development (pp. 829–893). John Wiley & Sons Inc.

Thompson, J. R., Wehmeyer, M. L., & Hughes, C. (2010). Mind the gap! Implications of a person-environment fit model of intellectual disability for students, educators, and schools. Exceptionality, 18(4), 168-181.

Vélez-Agosto, N. M., Soto-Crespo, J. G., Vizcarrondo-Oppenheimer, M., Vega-Molina, S., & García Coll, C. (2017). Bronfenbrenner’s bioecological theory revision: Moving culture from the macro into the micro. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 12(5), 900-910.
Tan, M. L., Vlahov, D., Hagan, E., Glymour, M. M., Gottlieb, L. M., Matthay, E. C., & Adler, N. E. (2019). Building the evidence on Making Health a Shared Value: Insights and considerations for research. SSM – Population Health, 9, 100474.
Denver Preschool Program. (n.d.). Denver Preschool Program Story | From an Innovation concept to a National Model. Denver Preschool Program. Retrieved December 15, 2021, from https://dpp.org/about-us/dpp-story

Hilty, R., Boddicker-Young, P., Hegseth, D., Thompson, J., Bultinck, E., Fojut, J., & Early, D. (n.d.). Understanding Equitable Access to Public Montessori Pre-K: A Case Study of Montessori Recruitment and Enrollment Practices. 42.
Moses, R. P. (2002). Radical equations: Civil rights from Mississippi to the algebra project. Beacon Press.
Gay, G. (2002). Preparing for culturally responsive teaching. Journal of teacher education, 53(2), 106-116.

Gay, G. (2021). Culturally responsive teaching: Ideas, actions, and effects. In Handbook of Urban Education (pp. 212-233). Routledge.
De Sousa, E. B. C. (2017). Promoting the contributions of multilingual preschoolers. Linguistics and Education, 39, 1-13.
Iruka, I. U., Curenton, S. M., Durden, T. R., & Escayg, K. A. (2020). Don’t look away: Embracing anti-bias classrooms. Gryphon House Incorporated.

Yosso*, T. J. (2005). Whose culture has capital? A critical race theory discussion of community cultural wealth. Race Ethnicity and Education, 8(1), 69-91.
Toldson, I. A. (2011). Editor’s comments: Diversifying the United States’ teaching force: Where are we now? Where do we need to go? How do we get there?. The Journal of Negro Education, 183-186.
Escayg, K.-A. (2019). “Who’s got the power?”: A critical examination of the anti-bias curriculum. International Journal of Child Care and Education Policy, 13(1), 6. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40723-019-0062-9
Perfect, M. M., Turley, M. R., Carlson, J. S., Yohanna, J., & Saint Gilles, M. P. (2016). School-related outcomes of traumatic event exposure and traumatic stress symptoms in students: A systematic review of research from 1990 to 2015. School Mental Health, 8(1), 7–43. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12310-016-9175-2
Nores, M., & Barnett, W. S. (2014). Access to high-quality early care and education: Readiness and opportunity gaps in America. National Institute for Early Education and Center on Enhancing Early Learning Policy report. New Brunswick, NJ: Center on Enhancing Early Learning Outcomes.

Bassok, D., Fitzpatrick, M., Greenberg, E., & Loeb, S. (2016). Within‐and between‐sector quality differences in early childhood education and care. Child Development, 87(5), 1627-1645.

Bassok, D., Finch, J. E., Lee, R., Reardon, S. F., & Waldfogel, J. (2016). Socioeconomic gaps in early childhood experiences: 1998 to 2010. Aera Open, 2(3), 2332858416653924.

Phillips, D. A., Voran, M., Kisker, E., Howes, C., & Whitebook, M. (1994). Child care for children in poverty: Opportunity or inequity? Child Development, 65(2 Spec No), 472–492.

Valentino, R. (2018). Will public pre-K really close achievement gaps? Gaps in prekindergarten quality between students and across states. American Educational Research Journal, 55(1), 79-116.
Mendez Smith, J., Crosby, D., & Stephens, C. (2021). Equitable access to high-quality early care and education: Opportunities to better serve young Hispanic children and their families. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 696(1), 80–105.

Morris, P. A., Connors, M., Friedman-Krauss, A., McCoy, D. C., Weiland, C., Feller, A., … & Yoshikawa, H. (2018). New findings on impact variation from the Head Start Impact Study: Informing the scale-up of early childhood programs. AERA Open, 4(2), 2332858418769287.
Disparate Access: Head Start and CCDBG Data by Race and Ethnicity | CLASP. (n.d.). Retrieved December 28, 2021, from https://www.clasp.org/publications/report/brief/disparate-access-head-start-and-ccdbg-data-race-and-ethnicity
Hardy, E., & Huber, R. Institute for Child, Youth and Family Policy. (2020). Retrieved December 3, 2021, from https://www.diversitydatakids.org/research-library/data-visualization/unequal-neighborhood-availability-head-start-exploring-patterns
Fierros, E. G., & Conroy, J. W. (2002). Double jeopardy: An exploration of restrictiveness and race in special education. Racial Inequity in Special Education, 39-70.

Ferri, B. A., & Connor, D. J. (2014). Talking (and not talking) about race, social class, and dis/ability: Working margin to margin. Race, Ethnicity and Education, 17(4), 471-493.

Office for Civil Rights. (n.d.). Civil Rights Data Collection. Retrieved December 15, 2021, from https://ocrdata.ed.gov/

The Children’s Equity Project (CEP). (n.d.). Center for Child and Family Success. Accessed December 15, 2021, from https://childandfamilysuccess.asu.edu/cep
Fernandez, N., & Inserra, A. (2013). Disproportionate classification of ESL students in US special education.TESL-EJ, 17(2), n2.

Linn, D., & Hemmer, L. (2011). English language learner disproportionality in special education: Implications for the scholar-practitioner. Journal of Educational Research and Practice, 1(1), 14.

Morgan, P. L., Farkas, G., Hillemeier, M. M., Mattison, R., Maczuga, S., Li, H., & Cook, M. (2015). Minorities are disproportionately underrepresented in special education: Longitudinal evidence across five disability conditions. Educational Researcher, 44(5), 278-292.

Ortiz, A. A., Robertson, P. M., Wilkinson, C. Y., Liu, Y. J., McGhee, B. D., & Kushner, M. I. (2011). The role of bilingual education teachers in preventing inappropriate referrals of ELLs to special education: Implications for response to intervention. Bilingual Research Journal, 34(3), 316-333.
Adair, J. K. (2015). The impact of discrimination on the early schooling experiences of children from immigrant families. National Center on Immigrant Integration Policy.

Garcia, E. E., & Gonzales, D. M. (2006). Pre-K and Latinos: The Foundation for America’s future. Pre-K Now Research Series. Pre-K Now.
Dewey, J. (1938). Experience And Education. Free Press.

Gopnik, A., Meltzoff, A. N., & Kuhl, P. K. (1999). The scientist in the crib: Minds, brains, and how children learn. William Morrow & Co.

McCall, R. B. (1974). Exploratory manipulation and play in the human infant. Monographs of the society for research in child development, 1-88.

Montessori, M. (1949). The Absorbent Mind. Theosophical Publishing House.

Piaget, J., Inhelder, B., Fraise, P., & Piaget, J. (1969). Intellectual operations and their development. P. Fraisse & J. Piaget, 144-205.

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Interaction between learning and development. In M. Gauvain & M. Cole (Eds.), Readings on the Development of Children (Vol. 23, pp. 34–41). Macmillan.
Guellaï, B., Hausberger, M., Chopin, A., & Streri, A. (2020). Premises of social cognition: Newborns are sensitive to a direct versus a faraway gaze. Scientific Reports, 10(1), 1-8.

Guellai, B., & Streri, A. (2011). Cues for early social skills: Direct gaze modulates newborns’ recognition of talking faces. PloS one, 6(4), e18610.

Gross, L. (2006). Evolution of neonatal imitation. PLoS biology, 4(9), e311.
Gopnik, A., Meltzoff, A. N., & Kuhl, P. K. (1999). The scientist in the crib: Minds, brains, and how children learn. William Morrow & Co.

Saffran, J. R., Aslin, R. N., & Newport, E. L. (1996). Statistical learning by 8-month-old infants. Science, 274(5294), 1926-1928.
Trevarthen, C. (2017). The function of emotions in early infant communication and development. In New Perspectives in Early Communicative Development (pp. 48-81). Routledge.
Leppänen, J. M. (2016). Using eye-tracking to understand infants’ attentional bias for faces. Child Development Perspectives, 10(3), 161-165.
Marshall, P. J., & Meltzoff, A. N. (2015). Body maps in the infant brain. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 19(9), 499-505.
Kuhl, P. K. (2004). Early language acquisition: Cracking the speech code. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 5(11), 831-843.

Saffran, J. R., Aslin, R. N., & Newport, E. L. (1996). Statistical learning by 8-month-old infants. Science, 274(5294), 1926-1928.
Golinkoff, R. M., Can, D. D., Soderstrom, M., & Hirsh-Pasek, K. (2015). (Baby) talk to me: The social context of infant-directed speech and its effects on early language acquisition. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 24(5), 339-344.

Kuhl, P. K., Conboy, B. T., Padden, D., Nelson, T., & Pruitt, J. (2005). Early speech perception and later language development: Implications for the” critical period”. Language Learning and Development, 1(3-4), 237-264.
Bell, M. A., & Fox, N. A. (1992). The relations between frontal brain electrical activity and cognitive development during infancy. Child Development, 63(5), 1142-1163.

Frith, C. D., & Frith, U. (2007). Social cognition in humans. Current Biology, 17(16), R724-R732.

Gross, J. J. (2014). Emotion regulation: conceptual and empirical foundations. In J. J. Gross (Ed.), Handbook of emotion regulation (pp. 3–20). The Guilford Press.

Haidt, J. (2001). The emotional dog and its rational tail: A social intuitionist approach to moral judgment. Psychological Review, 108(4), 814.

Immordino‐Yang, M. H. (2007). A tale of two cases: Lessons for education from the study of two boys living with half their brains. Mind, Brain, and Education, 1(2), 66-83.

Immordino‐Yang, M. H., & Damasio, A. (2007). We feel, therefore we learn: The relevance of affective and social neuroscience to education. Mind, Brain, and Education, 1(1), 3-10.

Immordino-Yang, M. H., Darling-Hammond, L., & Krone, C. R. (2019). Nurturing nature: How brain development is inherently social and emotional, and what this means for education. Educational Psychologist, 54(3), 185-204.

Meyer, D. K., & Turner, J. C. (2006). Re-conceptualizing emotion and motivation to learn in classroom contexts. Educational Psychology Review, 18(4), 377–390.

Schore, A. N. (1998). Early shame experiences and infant brain development. Shame: Interpersonal Behavior, Psychopathology, and Culture, 57-77.

Sporns, O., Chialvo, D. R., Kaiser, M., & Hilgetag, C. C. (2004). Organization, development, and function of complex brain networks. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 8(9), 418-425.

Thatcher, R. W., Walker, R. A., & Giudice, S. (1987). Human cerebral hemispheres develop at different rates and ages. Science, 236(4805), 1110-1113.

Tomasello, M., Carpenter, M., Call, J., Behne, T., & Moll, H. (2005). Understanding and sharing intentions: The origins of cultural cognition. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 28(5), 675-691.

Tucker, D. M., Gunner, M. R., & Nelson, C. A. (1992). Developing emotions and cortical networks. In Minnesota Symposium on Child Psychology (Vol. 24, pp. 75-128).

Uddin, M., Aiello, A. E., Wildman, D. E., Koenen, K. C., Pawelec, G., De Los Santos, R., … & Galea, S. (2010). Epigenetic and immune function profiles associated with posttraumatic stress disorder. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 107(20), 9470-9475.
Berger, K. S. (2018, 8th ed.). Developing person through childhood. Macmillan.
Brito, N. H., Grenell, A., & Barr, R. (2014). Specificity of the bilingual advantage for memory: examining cued recall, generalization, and working memory in monolingual, bilingual, and trilingual toddlers. Frontiers in Psychology, 5, 1369.

Green, D. W. (1998). Mental control of the bilingual lexico-semantic system. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 1(2), 67-81.

Okal, B. O. (2014). Benefits of multilingualism in education. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 2(3), 223–229.
National Association for the Education of Young Children. (2019). Advancing Equity in Early Childhood Education Position Statement. NAEYC. https://www.naeyc.org/resources/position-statements/equity

Trawick‐Smith, J. (2019). Not all children grow up the same: Child development, diversity, and early care and education. The Wiley Handbook of Early Childhood Care and Education, 29-58.
Meek, S., Smith, L., Allen, R., Catherine, E., Edyburn, K., Williams, C., Fabes, R., McIntosh, K., Garcia, E., Takanishi, R., Gordon, L., Jimenez-Castellanos, O., Hemmeter, M. L., Gilliam, W., & Pontier, R. (2020). Start with equity: From the early years to the early grades. The Children’s Equity Project and Bipartisan Policy Center. Retrieved December 16, 2021, from https://childandfamilysuccess.asu.edu/cep/start-with-equity

Sibley, E., & Brabeck, K. (2017). Latino immigrant students’ school experiences in the United States: The importance of family-school-community collaborations. School Community Journal, 27(1), 137-157.

Surrain, S. (2021). ‘Spanish at home, English at school’: How perceptions of bilingualism shape family language policies among Spanish-speaking parents of preschoolers. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 24(8), 1163-1177.
Steele, J. L., Slater, R. O., Zamarro, G., Miller, T., Li, J., Burkhauser, S., & Bacon, M. (2017). Effects of dual-language immersion programs on student achievement: Evidence from lottery data. American Educational Research Journal, 54(1_suppl), 282S-306S.
Mistry, J., & Dutta, R. (2015). Human development and culture. In W. F. Overton, P. C. M. Molenaar, & R. M. Lerner (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology and developmental science: Theory and method (pp. 369–406). John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Gendron, M. (2017). Revisiting Diversity: Cultural variation reveals the constructed nature of emotion perception. Current Opinion in Psychology, 17;145-150

Lillard, A. (1998). Ethnopsychologies: Cultural variations in theories of mind. Psychological Bulletin, 123(1), 3–32.
Hohmann, M., Weikart, D. P., & Epstein, A. S. (1995). Educating young children: Active learning practices for preschool and child care programs. Ypsilanti, MI: High/Scope Press.

Schulz, L. E., & Bonawitz, E. B. (2007). Serious fun: Preschoolers engage in more exploratory play when evidence is confounded. Developmental Psychology, 43(4), 1045.
Beaven, E., Cady, Alexandra, Fyfe, B., & Woods Myles, T. A. (2020). Ideal pathways: How ideal learning approaches prepare and support early childhood educators. Trust for Learning.
Lillard, A. S. (2013). Playful learning and Montessori education. American Journal of Play, 5(2).

Parten, M. B. (1932). Social participation among pre-school children. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 27(3), 243–269.

Piaget, J., & Inhelder, B. (1969). Intellectual operations and their development. In Experimental Psychology Its Scope and Method: Volume VII (Psychology Revivals): Intelligence, 144-205.

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Interaction between learning and development. In M. Gauvain & M. Cole (Eds.), Readings on the Development of Children (Vol. 23, pp. 34–41). Macmillan.
Alfieri, L., Brooks, P. J., Aldrich, N. J., & Tenenbaum, H. R. (2011). Does discovery-based instruction enhance learning?. Journal of Educational Psychology, 103(1), 1.

Gray, P. (2011). The Special Value of Children’s Age-Mixed Play. American Journal of Play, 3(4), 500-522.

Hanline, M. F., Milton, S., & Phelps, P. C. (2008). A longitudinal study exploring the relationship of representational levels of three aspects of preschool sociodramatic play and early academic skills. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 23(1), 19-28.

Pellegrini, A. D., Dupuis, D., & Smith, P. K. (2007). Play in evolution and development. Developmental Review, 27(2), 261-276.

Roskos, K., & Christie, J. (2011). The Play-Literacy Nexus and the Importance of Evidence-Based Techniques in the Classroom. American Journal of Play, 4(2), 204-224.

Roskos, K. A., & Christie, J. F. (2011). Mindbrain and play-literacy connections. Journal of Early Childhood Literacy, 11(1), 73-94.

Shonkoff, J. P., Phillips, D. A., & National Research Council. (2000). The developing brain. In From neurons to neighborhoods: The science of early childhood development. National Academies Press (US).

Stagnitti, K., Bailey, A., Hudspeth Stevenson, E., Reynolds, E., & Kidd, E. (2016). An investigation into the effect of play-based instruction on the development of play skills and oral language. Journal of Early Childhood Research, 14(4), 389-406.

Stegelin, D. A. (2005). Making the case for play policy: Research-based reasons to support play-based environments. YC Young Children, 60(2), 76.

Zosh, J. M., Hirsh-Pasek, K., Hopkins, E. J., Jensen, H., Liu, C., Neale, D., … & Whitebread, D. (2018). Accessing the inaccessible: Redefining play as a spectrum. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, 1124.
Miller, E., & Almon, J. (2009). Crisis in the kindergarten: Why children need to play in school. Alliance for Childhood (NJ3a).
Burghardt, G. M. (2011). Defining and recognizing play. In The Oxford handbook of the development of play.

Rubin, K. H., Fein, G. G., Vandenberg, B., Mussen, P. H., & Hetherington, E. M. (1983). Handbook of child psychology, Vol. 4: Socialization, personality, and social development. New York, 30-34.

Whitebread, D., Neale, D., Jensen, H., Liu, C., Solis, L., Hopkins, E., Hirsh-Pasek, K., & Zosh, J. (2017). The role of play in children’s development: A review of the evidence. LEGO Foundation.

Zosh, J., Hopkins, E., Jensen, H., Liu, C., Neale, D., Hirsh-Pasek, S., Solis, L., Whitebread, D. (2017). Learning through play: A review of the evidence. LEGO Foundation.
Parten, M. B. (1932). Social participation among pre-school children. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 27(3), 243–269.

Whitebread, D., Neale, D., Jensen, H., Liu, C., Solis, L., Hopkins, E., Hirsh-Pasek, K., & Zosh, J. (2017). The role of play in children’s development: A review of the evidence. the LEGO Foundation.
Frost, J. L. (1998, June). Neuroscience, Play, and Child Development. Paper presented at the IPA/USA Triennial National Conference, Longmont, CO.

Liu, C., Solis, S. L., Jensen, H., Hopkins, E. J., Neale, D., Zosh, J. M., Hirsh-Pasek, K., & Whitebread, D. (2017). Neuroscience and learning through play: A review of the evidence (research summary). The LEGO Foundation, DK.

Siviy, S. M. (2016). A brain motivated to play: Insights into the neurobiology of playfulness. Behaviour, 153(6-7), 819-844.

Stevens Jr, P. (2020). Yes, we need a neuroscience of play. International Journal of Play, 9(1), 160-169.
Hirsh-Pasek, K., Golinkoff, R. M., Berk, L. E., & Singer, D. (2009). A Mandate for Playful Learning in Preschool: Applying the Scientific Evidence. Oxford University Press, USA.

Zosh, J., Hopkins, E., Jensen, H., Liu, C., Neale, D., Hirsh-Pasek, S., Solis, L., Whitebread, D. (2017). Learning through play: A review of the evidence. LEGO Foundation. Retrieved October 15, 2021 from https://www.legofoundation.com/media/1063/learning-through-play_web.pdf
Bodrova, E., Germeroth, C., Leong, D., Play and Self-Regulation: Lessons from Vygotsky. American Journal of Play, 6(1)

Bredekamp, S. (2005). Play and School Readiness. Educational Perspectives, 38(1), 18–26.

Lindsey, E. W., & Colwell, M. J. (2013). Pretend and physical play: Links to preschoolers’ affective social competence. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 59(3), 330–360.

Li, J., Hestenes, L. L., & Wang, Y. C. (2016). Links between preschool children’s social skills and observed pretend play in outdoor childcare environments. Early Childhood Education Journal, 44(1), 61–68.

Lynch, M. (2015). More play, please: The perspective of kindergarten teachers on play in the classroom. American Journal of Play, 7(3), 347–370.

Stegelin, D. A. (n.d.). Making the case for play policy: Research-based reasons to support play-based environments. YC Young Children, 60(2). Retrieved December 16, 2021, from https://www.proquest.com/openview/0c34a7e7f9f0bb53b116c551083256c5/1?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=27755

Veiga, G., Neto, C., & Rieffe, C. (2016). Preschoolers’ free play – connections with emotional and social functioning. The International Journal of Emotional Education, 8( l ), 48-62.
Bodrova, E., Germeroth, C., & Leong, D. J. (2013). Play and self-regulation: lessons from Vygotsky. American Journal of Play, 6(1), 111-123.

Hanline, M. F., Milton, S., & Phelps, P. C. (2008). A longitudinal study exploring the relationship of representational levels of three aspects of preschool sociodramatic play and early academic skills. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 23(1), 19–28.

Lewis, V., Boucher, J., Lupton, L., & Watson, S. (2000). Relationships between symbolic play, functional play, verbal and non-verbal ability in young children. International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders, 35(1), 117–127.

Quinn, S., Donnelly, S., & Kidd, E. (2018). The relationship between symbolic play and language acquisition: A meta-analytic review. Developmental Review, 49, 121–135.

Roskos, K. A., & Christie, J. F. (2011). Mindbrain and play-literacy connections. Journal of Early Childhood Literacy, 11(1), 73–94.

Reynolds, E., Stagnitti, K., & Kidd, E. (2011). Play, language, and social skills of children attending a play-based curriculum school and a traditionally structured classroom curriculum school in low socioeconomic areas. Australasian Journal of Early Childhood, 36(4), 120–130.
Ginsburg, H. P. (2006). Mathematical play and playful mathematics: A guide for early education. In D. G. Singer, R. M. Golinkoff, & K. Hirsh-Pasek (Eds.), Play = learning: How play motivates and enhances children’s cognitive and social-emotional growth (pp. 145–165). Oxford University Press.

Kamii, C., Miyakawa, Y., & Kato, Y. (2004). The development of logico-mathematical knowledge in a block-building activity at ages 1–4. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 19(1), 44-57.
Lester, S., & Russell, W. (2010). Children’s right to play: An examination of the importance of play in the lives of children worldwide (Working Papers in Early Childhood Development, No. 57).
Council on School Health, Murray, R., Ramstetter, C., Devore, C., Allison, M., Ancona, R., Barnett, S., Gunther, R., Holmes, B. W., Lamont, J., Minier, M., Okamoto, J., Wheeler, L., & Young, T. (2013). The crucial role of recess in school. Pediatrics, 131(1), 183–188.

National Association for the Education of Young Children. (2019). Advancing Equity in Early Childhood Education Position Statement. Retrieved December 15, 2021 from https://www.naeyc.org/resources/position-statements/equity

Yogman, M., Garner, A., Hutchinson, J., Hirsh-Pasek, K., Golinkoff, R. M., Baum, R., Gambon, T., Lavin, A., Mattson, G., Wissow, L., Hill, D. L., Ameenuddin, N., Chassiakos, Y. (Linda) R., Cross, C., Boyd, R., Mendelson, R., Moreno, M. A., … Smith, J. (2018). The Power of Play: A Pediatric Role in Enhancing Development in Young Children. Pediatrics, 142(3), e20182058. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2018-2058
LEGO Foundation. (2021). Learning through play: Increasing impact, reducing inequality. The LEGO Foundation.
Fisher, K., Hirsh-Pasek, K., Golinkoff, R. M., Singer, D. G., & Berk, L. (2011). Playing around in school: Implications for learning and educational policy. In The Oxford handbook of the development of play (pp. 341–360). Oxford University Press.

Hirsh-Pasek, K., Golinkoff, R. M., Berk, L. E., Singer, D., & Singer, D. (2009). A mandate for playful learning in preschool: Applying the scientific evidence. Oxford University Press, USA.
National Association for the Education of Young Children. (n.d). Principles of child development and learning and implications that inform practice. NAEYC. Retrieved December 15, 2021, from https://www.naeyc.org/resources/position-statements/dap/principles
LEGO Foundation. (2021). Learning through play: Increasing impact, reducing inequality. The LEGO Foundation.
Strife, S., & Downey, L. (2009). Childhood development and access to nature. Organization & Environment, 22(1), 99–122.
Escayg, K. A. (2021). The “Race” in “RECE”: Reconceptualizing play-based learning through an anti-racist lens. In Reconceptualizing Quality in Early Childhood Education, Care and Development (pp. 269-287). Palgrave Macmillan, Cham.
Goodley, D., & Runswick‐Cole, K. (2010). Emancipating play: Dis/abled children, development and deconstruction. Disability & Society, 25(4), 499–512.
Stagnitti, K., Bailey, A., Hudspeth Stevenson, E., Reynolds, E., & Kidd, E. (2016). An investigation into the effect of play-based instruction on the development of play skills and oral language. Journal of Early Childhood Research, 14(4), 389-406.
Goodley, D., & Runswick‐Cole, K. (2010). Emancipating play: Dis/abled children, development and deconstruction. Disability & Society, 25(4), 499–512.
Adair, J. K., & Doucet, F. (2014). The impact of race and culture on play in early childhood classrooms. The SAGE handbook of play and learning in early childhood, 354-365.

Bryan, N. (2020). Shaking the bad boys: troubling the criminalization of black boys’ childhood play, hegemonic white masculinity and femininity, and the school playground-to-prison pipeline, Race Ethnicity and Education, 23(5), 673-692, DOI: 10.1080/13613324.2018.1512483

Clark, K., & Clark, M. (1939) The development of consciousness of self and the emergence of racial identification in Negro preschool children. Retrieved December 28, 2021, from https://psychclassics.yorku.ca/Clark/Self-cons/

Dishion, T. J., McCord, J., & Poulin, F. (1999). When interventions harm. Peer groups and problem behavior. The American Psychologist, 54(9), 755–764.

Earick, M. E. (2010). The power of play and language on early childhood racial identity in three U.S. schools. Diaspora, Indigenous, and Minority Education, 4(2), 131–145.

Escayg, K. A. (2021). The “race” in “RECE”: Reconceptualizing play-based learning through an anti-racist lens. In Reconceptualizing Quality in Early Childhood Education, Care and Development (pp. 269-287). Palgrave Macmillan, Cham.

Goodley, D., & Runswick‐Cole, K. (2010). Emancipating play: Dis/abled children, development and deconstruction. Disability & Society, 25(4), 499–512.

MacNevin, M. & Berman, R. (2017). The Black baby doll doesn’t fit: The disconnect between early childhood diversity policy, early childhood educator practice, and children’s play. Early Child Development and Care, 187:5-6, 827-839, DOI: 10.1080/03004430.2016.1223065
Iruka, I., Curenton, St., Escayg., K, Durden, T. 2020. Don’t look away: embracing anti-bias classrooms. Gryphon House.
Sturdivant, T. & Alanis, I. (2021). “I’m gonna cook my baby in a pot”: young Black girls’ racial preferences and play behavior. Early Childhood Education Journal 49(2), DOI: 10.1007/s10643-020-01095-9

Sturdivant, T. D. (2021). Racial awareness and the politics in play: Preschoolers and racially diverse dolls in a US classroom. International Journal of Early Childhood, 53(2), 139–157.
Byrd, C. M., & Chavous, T. M. (2009). Racial identity and academic achievement in the neighborhood context: A multilevel analysis. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 38(4), 544–559.
Escayg, K.-A. (2020). Anti-racism in U.S. early childhood education: Foundational principles. Sociology Compass, 14(4), e12764.

Escayg, K. A. (2021). The “race” in “RECE”: Reconceptualizing play-based learning through an anti-racist lens. In Reconceptualizing Quality in Early Childhood Education, Care and Development (pp. 269-287). Palgrave Macmillan, Cham.

MacNevin, M. & Berman, R. (2017). The Black baby doll doesn’t fit: the disconnect between early childhood diversity policy, early childhood educator practice, and children’s play. Early Child Development and Care, 187:5-6, 827-839, DOI: 10.1080/03004430.2016.1223065

Nicholson, J., Perez, L., & Kurtz, J. (2018). Trauma-informed practices for early childhood educators: Relationship-based approaches that support healing and build resilience in young children. Routledge.
Bransford, J., National Research Council (U.S.), & National Research Council (U.S.) (Eds.). (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school (Expanded ed). National Academy Press.

Cordova, D., & Lepper, M. (1996). Intrinsic motivation and the process of learning: Beneficial effects of contextualization, personalization, and choice. Journal of Educational Psychology, 88, 715–730.
Fivush, R. (2011). The development of autobiographical memory. Annual Review of Psychology, 62, 559–582.

Reber, R., Canning, E. A., & Harackiewicz, J. M. (2018). Personalized education to increase interest. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 27(6), 449–454.
Doucet, F. (2019). Centering the margins: (Re)defining useful research evidence through critical perspectives. New York: William T. Grant Foundation.

Fischer, K.W., Bernstein, J.H., Immordino-Yang, M.H. (2007). Mind, brain, and education in reading disorders. Cambridge University Press.

National Autism Center. (2015). National Autism Center free digital publications. https://www.nationalautismcenter.org/090605-2/

Thompson, J.R., Walker, V.L., Shogren, K.A., Wehmeyer, M.L. (2018). Expanding inclusive educational opportunities for students with the most significant cognitive disabilities through personalized supports. Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities, 56(6).
Begus, K., Gliga, T., & Southgate, V. (2014). Infants learn what they want to learn: Responding to infant pointing leads to superior learning. PloS One, 9(10), e108817.
Orellana, M. F., Ek, L., & Hernandez, A. (1999). Bilingual education in an immigrant community: Proposition 227 in California. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 2(2), 114-130.
Patall, E. A., Cooper, H., & Robinson, J. C. (2008). The effects of choice on intrinsic motivation and related outcomes: A meta-analysis of research findings. Psychological Bulletin, 134(2), 270.
Vygotsky, L. (1978). Interaction between learning and development. Readings on the Development of Children, 23(3), 34-41.
Cantor, P., Osher, D., Berg, J., Steyer, L., & Rose, T. (2019). Malleability, plasticity, and individuality: How children learn and develop in context. Applied Developmental Science, 23(4), 307-337.

Cole, S. W. (2014). Human social genomics. PLoS Genetics, 10(8), e1004601.

Nesselroade, J. R. (2018). Developments in developmental research and theory. Applied Developmental Science, 23(4), 346–348.

Rose, L. T., Rouhani, P., & Fischer, K. W. (2013). The science of the individual. Mind, Brain, and Education, 7(3), 152-158.
Brown, C. S., Mistry, R. S., & Yip, T. (2019). Moving from the margins to the mainstream: Equity and justice as key considerations for developmental science. Child Development Perspectives, 13(4), 235-240.

Nxumalo, F., & Brown, C. P. (Eds.). (2019). Disrupting and countering deficits in early childhood education. Routledge.
Christle, C., Jolivette, K., & Nelson, C. (2005). Breaking the school to prison pipeline: Identifying school risk and protective factors for youth delinquency. Exceptionality, 13, 69–88.

Mathis, W. J. (2013). Research overwhelmingly counsels an end to tracking. National Education Policy Center.

National Education Association. (1990). Academic tracking: Report of the NEA Executive Committee/Subcommittee on Academic Tracking. National Education Association.
National Council on Disability. (2018). IDEA series: The segregation of students with disabilities.

Odom, S. L., & Wolery, M. (2003). A unified theory of practice in early intervention/early childhood special education: Evidence-based practices. The Journal of Special Education, 37(3), 164–173.
Park, S., Martinez, M., Chou, F. (2017) CCSSO English learners with disabilities guide. Washington DC: Council of Chief State School Officers.
Park, S., Lee, S., Alonzo, M., & Adair, J. K. (2021). Reconceptualizing assistance for young children of color with disabilities in an inclusion classroom. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 1-12.
Brown, C. P., & Lan, Y. C. (2013). The influence of developmentally appropriate practice on children’s cognitive development: A qualitative metasynthesis. Teachers College Record, 115(12).
National Association for the Education of Young Children. (n.d). Principles of child development and learning and implications that inform practice. NAEYC. Retrieved December 15, 2021, from https://www.naeyc.org/resources/position-statements/dap/principles
Tomasello, M., Carpenter, M., Call, J., Behne, T., & Moll, H. (2005). Understanding and sharing intentions: The origins of cultural cognition. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 28(5), 675-691.
Meek, S., Smith, L., Allen, R., Catherine, E., Edyburn, K., Williams, C., & Pontier, R. (2020). Start with equity: From the early years to the early grades–Data, research, and an actionable child equity policy agenda. Children’s Equity Project & Bipartisan Policy Center.

National Association for the Education of Young Children. (2019). Advancing Equity in Early Childhood Education Position Statement. NAEYC. https://www.naeyc.org/resources/position-statements/equity

Okal, B. O. (2014). Benefits of multilingualism in education. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 2(3), 223–229.

Redbird-Post, M. (2020). Exploring Curriculum Development in Indigenous Early Childhood Language Immersion Programs: An Indigenous Storywork Journey Through the Kiowa Encampment Story Circle Methodology. Retrieved from https://shareok.org/handle/11244/325346

Souto-Manning, M., & Rabadi-Raol, A. (2018). (Re)Centering quality in early childhood education: Toward intersectional justice for minoritized children. Review of Research in Education, 42(1), 203–225.
Redbird-Post, M. (2020). Exploring curriculum development in indigenous early childhood language immersion programs: An indigenous storywork journey through the Kiowa encampment story circle methodology. Retrieved from https://shareok.org/handle/11244/325346

Yazzie-Mintz, T. (2011). Native Teachers’ Beliefs and Practices: Choosing Language and Cultural Revitalization over Uniformity and Standardization. Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood, 12(4), 315–326. https://doi.org/10.2304/ciec.2011.12.4.315
Dewey, J. (1986). Experience and education. In The educational forum, 50(3), 241-252. Taylor & Francis Group.

Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the oppressed, New York, Herder & Herder.

Montessori, M. (1912). The Montessori method. Frederick A. Stokes Company

Piaget, J. (1948). The moral judgment of the child. Free Press.

Vygotsky, L. (1978). Interaction between learning and development. Readings on the Development of Children, 23(3), 34-41.
Bonawitz, E., Shafto, P., Gweon, H., Goodman, N. D., Spelke, E., & Schulz, L. (2011). The double-edged sword of pedagogy: Instruction limits spontaneous exploration and discovery. Cognition, 120(3), 322–330.

Cordova, D., & Lepper, M. (1996). Intrinsic motivation and the process of learning: Beneficial effects of contextualization, personalization, and choice. Journal of Educational Psychology, 88, 715–730.

Fisher, K. R., Hirsh-Pasek, K., Newcombe, N., & Golinkoff, R. M. (2013). Taking shape: Supporting preschoolers’ acquisition of geometric knowledge through guided play. Child Development, 84(6), 1872–1878.

Hirsh-Pasek, K., D, S. and D. L. P. K. H.-P., PH, Golinkoff, R. M., Berk, L. E., & Singer, D. (2009). A mandate for playful learning in preschool: Applying the scientific evidence. Oxford University Press, USA.
Fisher, K. R., Hirsh-Pasek, K., Newcombe, N., & Golinkoff, R. M. (2013). Taking shape: Supporting preschoolers’ acquisition of geometric knowledge through guided play. Child Development, 84(6), 1872–1878.
Meacham, S., Vukelich, C., Han, M., & Buell, M. (2016). Teachers’ responsiveness to preschoolers’ utterances in sociodramatic play. Early Education & Development, 27(3), 318–335.
Marcon, R. A. (2002). Moving up the grades: Relationship between preschool model and later school success. Early Childhood Research & Practice, 4(1), n1.

Lillard, A. S. (2016). Montessori: The science behind the genius. Oxford University Press.

Weisberg, D. S., Hirsh-Pasek, K., & Golinkoff, R. M. (2013). Guided play: Where curricular goals meet a playful pedagogy. Mind, Brain, and Education, 7(2), 104–112.
Alfieri, L., Brooks, P. J., Aldrich, N. J., & Tenenbaum, H. R. (2011). Does discovery-based instruction enhance learning?. Journal of Educational Psychology, 103(1), 1.

Skene, K., O’Farrelly, C. M., Byrne, E. M., Kirby, N., Stevens, E. C., & Ramchandani, P. G. (2022). Can guidance during play enhance children’s learning and development in educational contexts? A systematic review and meta‐analysis. Child Development.
Blair, C., & Diamond, A. (2008). Biological processes in prevention and intervention: The promotion of self-regulation as a means of preventing school failure. Development and Psychopathology, 20(3), 899–911.

Blakemore, S.J., & Bunge, S. A. (2012). At the nexus of neuroscience and education. Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience, 2(Suppl 1), S1–S5.

Dweck, C. S., Walton, G. M., & Cohen, G. L. (2014). Academic tenacity: Mindsets and skills that promote long-term learning. Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

Flouri, E., Midouhas, E., & Joshi, H. (2014). Family poverty and trajectories of children’s emotional and behavioral problems: The moderating roles of self-regulation and verbal cognitive ability. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 42(6), 1043–1056.

Hamre, B. K., & Pianta, R. C. (2001). Early teacher-child relationships and the trajectory of children’s school outcomes through eighth grade. Child Development, 72(2), 625–638.

Jones, D. E., Greenberg, M., & Crowley, M. (2015). Early social-emotional functioning and public health: The relationship between kindergarten social competence and future wellness. American Journal of Public Health, 105(11), 2283–2290.

Miyake, A., Friedman, N. P., Emerson, M. J., Witzki, A. H., Howerter, A., & Wager, T. D. (2000). The unity and diversity of executive functions and their contributions to complex “frontal lobe” tasks: A latent variable analysis. Cognitive Psychology, 41(1), 49–100.

Pianta, R. C., & Stuhlman, M. W. (2004). Conceptualizing risk in relational terms: Associations among the quality of child-adult relationships prior to school entry and children’s developmental outcomes in first grade. Educational and Child Psychology, 21(1), 32–45.

Raver, C. C., Garner, P. W., & Smith-Donald, R. (2007). The roles of emotion regulation and emotion knowledge for children’s academic readiness: Are the links causal? In school readiness and the transition to kindergarten in the era of accountability (pp. 121–147). Paul H Brookes Publishing.

Zelazo, P. D. (2015). Executive function: Reflection, iterative reprocessing, complexity, and the developing brain. Developmental Review, 38, 55–68.
Jones, S. M., Bailey, R., Barnes, S. P., & Partee, A. (2016). Executive function mapping project: Untangling the terms and skills related to executive function and self-regulation in early childhood. Office of Planning, Research and Evaluation, Administration for Children and Families, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
Jimenez, M. E., Wade, R., Jr, Lin, Y., Morrow, L. M., & Reichman, N. E. (2016). Adverse experiences in early childhood and kindergarten outcomes. Pediatrics, 137(2), e20151839.

Shonkoff, J. P., Garner, A. S., The Committee On Psychosocial Aspects Of Child And Family Health, C. O. E. C., Adoption, And Dependent Care, And Section On Developmental And Behavioral Pediatrics, Siegel, B. S., Dobbins, M. I., Earls, M. F., Garner, A. S., McGuinn, L., Pascoe, J., & Wood, D. L. (2012). The lifelong effects of early childhood adversity and toxic stress. Pediatrics, 129(1), e232–e246.
Blair, C., Raver, C. C., & Berry, D. J. (2014). Two approaches to estimating the effect of parenting on the development of executive function in early childhood. Developmental Psychology, 50(2), 554–565.

Center on the Developing Child. (2016). From best practices to breakthrough Impacts. Center on the Developing Child at Harvard University.

Diamond, A., & Ling, D. S. (2016). Conclusions about interventions, programs, and approaches for improving executive functions that appear justified and those that, despite much hype, do not. Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience, 18, 34–48.
Danneker, J. E., & Bottge, B. A. (2009). Benefits of and barriers to elementary student-led individualized education programs. Remedial and Special Education, 30(4), 225–233.

Palmer, S., Summers, J., Brotherson, M., Erwin, E., Maude, S., Stroup-Rentier, V., Wu, H.-Y., Peck, N., Zheng, Y., Weigel, C., Chu, S., McGrath, G., & Haines, S. (2013). Foundations for self-determination in early childhood an inclusive model for children with disabilities. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 33, 38–47.
Hanish, L. D., & Rodkin, P. C. (2007). Bridging children’s social development and social network analysis. New Directions for Child and Adolescent Development, 118, 1–8.
Farmer, T. W., Dawes, M., Hamm, J. V., Lee, D., Mehtaji, M., Hoffman, A. S., & Brooks, D. S. (2018). Classroom Social Dynamics Management: Why the Invisible Hand of the Teacher Matters for Special Education. Remedial and Special Education, 39(3), 177–192. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741932517718359

Savina, E., Fulton, C., & Beaton, C. (2021). Training teachers in emotional intelligence: A transactional model for elementary education. Routledge.Raver, C. C., Jones, S. M., Li-Grining, C., Zhai, F., Bub, K., & Pressler, E. (2011). CSRP’s impact on low-income preschoolers’ preacademic skills: Self-regulation as a mediating mechanism. Child Development, 82(1), 362–378.
Gilliam, W. S., Maupin, A. N., Reyes, C. R., Accavitti, M., & Shic, F. (2016). Do early educators’ implicit biases regarding sex and race relate to behavior expectations and recommendations of preschool expulsions and suspensions. Yale University Child Study Center, 9(28), 1-16.
Beaven, E., Cady, Alexandra, Fyfe, B., & Woods Myles, T. A. (2020). Ideal pathways: How ideal learning approaches prepare and support early childhood educators. Trust for Learning.
Shonkoff, J. P., & Phillips, D. A. (2000). The developing brain. In from neurons to neighborhoods: The science of early childhood development. National Academies Press (US).

Siegel, D. J. (2012). The developing mind: How relationships and the brain interact to shape who we are. The Guilford Press.
Bell M. A. (2020). Mother-child behavioral and physiological synchrony. Advances in child development and behavior, 58, 163–188.

Davis, M., West, K., Bilms, J., Morelen, D., & Suveg, C. (2018). A systematic review of parent-child synchrony: It is more than skin deep. Developmental psychobiology, 60(6), 674–691.

DiLorenzo, M. G., Bucsea, O., Rumeo, C., Waxman, J. A., Flora, D. B., Schmidt, L. A., & Riddell, R. P. (2021). Caregiver and young child biological attunement in distress contexts: A systematic review and narrative synthesis. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, S0149763421004875.

Siegel, D. J. (2001). Toward an interpersonal neurobiology of the developing mind: Attachment relationships, “mindsight,” and neural integration. Infant Mental Health Journal, 22(1–2), 67–94.
Boyce, W. T., & Ellis, B. J. (2005). Biological sensitivity to context: I. An evolutionary–developmental theory of the origins and functions of stress reactivity. Development and Psychopathology, 17(2), 271–301.

Giudice, M. D., Ellis, B. J., & Shirtcliff, E. A. (2011). The adaptive calibration model of stress responsivity. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 35(7), 1562–1592.

McDermott, J., Troller-Renfree, S., Vanderwert, R., Nelson, C., Zeanah, C., & Fox, N. (2013). Psychosocial deprivation, executive functions, and the emergence of socio-emotional behavior problems. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 7, 167.

McEwen, B. S. (2000). The neurobiology of stress: From serendipity to clinical relevance. Brain Research, 886(1), 172–189.
Baker, J. A. (2006). Contributions of teacher-child relationships to positive school adjustment during elementary school. Journal of School Psychology, 44(3), 211–229.

Hamre, B. K., & Pianta, R. C. (2001). Early teacher-child relationships and the trajectory of children’s school outcomes through eighth grade. Child Development, 72(2), 625–638.

O’Connor, E., & McCartney, K. (2007). Examining teacher-child relationships and achievement as part of an ecological model of development. American Educational Research Journal, 44(2), 340–369.

Raikes, H. H., & Edwards, C. P. (2009). Extending the dance in infant and toddler caregiving: Enhancing attachment and relationships. Brookes Publishing Company.
Perry, B. D., Pollard, R. A., Blakley, T. L., Baker, W. L., & Vigilante, D. (1995). Childhood trauma, the neurobiology of adaptation, and “use-dependent” development of the brain: How “states” become “traits.” Infant Mental Health Journal, 16(4), 271–291.

Shonkoff, J. P., & Phillips, D. A. (2000). The developing brain. In from neurons to neighborhoods: The science of early childhood development. National Academies Press (US).

Siegel, D. J. (2012). The developing mind: How relationships and the brain interact to shape who we are. The Guilford Press.
Appelbaum, M., Batten, D. A., Belsky, J., Boller, K., Friedman, S., Phillips, D., … & Vandell, D. L. (2000). The relation of child care to cognitive and language development. Child development, 71(4), 960-980.

Fellowes, J., & Oakley, G. (2011). Language, literacy, and early childhood education. Oxford University Press.Bowen, C., & Snow, P. (2017). making sense of interventions for children with developmental disorders: A guide for parents and professionals. J & R Press Limited.

Romeo, R. R., Leonard, J. A., Robinson, S. T., West, M. R., Mackey, A. P., Rowe, M. L., & Gabrieli, J. D. E. (2018). Beyond the 30-Million-Word Gap: Children’s Conversational Exposure Is Associated With Language-Related Brain Function. Psychological Science, 29(5), 700–710. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797617742725

Sroufe, L. A. (2005). Attachment and development: A prospective, longitudinal study from birth to adulthood. Attachment & Human Development, 7(4), 349–367.

Tamis-LeMonda, C. S., Bornstein, M. H., & Baumwell, L. (2001). Maternal responsiveness and children’s achievement of language milestones. Child Development, 72(3), 748–767. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8624.00313
Carpendale, J., & Lewis, C. (2006). How children develop social understanding. Blackwell Publishing.

Feldman, R. (2015). The adaptive human parental brain: Implications for children’s social development. Trends in Neurosciences, 38(6), 387–399.

Ray, A., Bowman, B. T., & Brownell, J. O. (2006). Teacher-child relationships, social-emotional development, and school achievement | Research Connections. National Black Child Development Institute.

Rogoff, B. (2003). The cultural nature of human development. Oxford university press.

Willis, L. M., & Edwards, C. P. (1999). The blood runs through every one of us and we are stronger for It: The role of Head Start in promoting cultural continuity in tribal communities. 17.
Fay-Stammbach, T., Hawes, D., & Meredith, P. (2014). Parenting influences on executive function in early childhood: A review. Child Development Perspectives, 8.
Siegel, D. J. (2012). The developing mind: How relationships and the brain interact to shape who we are. The Guilford Press.
Luthar, S. S., Crossman, E. J., Small, P. J., Lerner, R. M., & Lamb, M. E. (2015). Handbook of child psychology and developmental science. Wiley Online Library.

Obradović, J., Shaffer, A., & Masten, A. S. (2012). Risk and adversity in developmental psychopathology: Progress and future directions. In the Cambridge handbook of environment in human development (pp. 35–57). Cambridge University Press.
Center on the Developing Child. (2016). From best practices to breakthrough impacts. Center on the Developing Child at Harvard University.

Li, J., & Julian, M. M. (2012). Developmental relationships as the active ingredient: A unifying working hypothesis of “what works” across intervention settings. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 82(2), 157–166.
Steele, J. R., George, M., Williams, A., & Tay, E. (2018). A cross-cultural investigation of children’s implicit attitudes toward White and Black racial outgroups. Developmental Science, 21(6), e12673.

Sutherland, K. S., & Oswald, D. P. (2005). The relationship between teacher and student behavior in classrooms for students with emotional and behavioral disorders: Transactional processes. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 14(1), 1–14.
Gilliam, W. S., Maupin, A. N., Reyes, C. R., Accavitti, M., & Shic, F. (2016). Do early educators’ implicit biases regarding sex and race relate to behavior expectations and recommendations of preschool expulsions and suspensions. Yale University Child Study Center, 9(28), 1-16.

Sturdivant, T. D. (2021). Racial awareness and the politics in play: Preschoolers and racially diverse dolls in a US classroom. International Journal of Early Childhood, 53(2), 139–157.
Siegel, D. J. (2012). The developing mind: How relationships and the brain interact to shape who we are. The Guilford Press.
McCormick, L., Noonan, M. J., & Heck, R. (1998). Variables affecting engagement in inclusive preschool classrooms. Journal of Early Intervention, 21(2), 160–176.

Pianta, R. C. (1992). Beyond the parent: The role of other adults in children’s lives (p. 136). Jossey-Bass.
Syrjämäki, M., Pihlaja, P., & Sajaniemi, N. K. (2019). Enhancing peer interaction in early childhood special education: Chains of children’s initiatives, adults’ responses and their consequences in play. Early Childhood Education Journal, 47(5), 559–570.
Carter, A., & Healey, T. (2012). Professional development for parents. Education Digest, 77(7), 9–14.

LaRocque, M., Kleiman, I., & Darling, S. M. (2011). Parental involvement: The missing link in school achievement. Preventing School Failure: Alternative Education for Children and Youth, 55(3), 115–122.
Hopson, L., & Weldon, P. (2013). Parental expectations and academic success in the context of school climate effects. Families in Society, 94(1), 45–52.

Ratcliff, N., & Hunt, G. (2009). Building teacher-family partnerships: The role of teacher preparation programs. Gale General, 129(3).
Iruka, I., U., Sheridan, S., Knoche, L., & Witte, A. (2019). Examining child-teacher relationships and classroom quality across racial groups. Biennial SRCD Conference, Baltimore, MD.
Steele, C. M. (2011). Whistling vivaldi: How stereotypes affect us and what we can do. W. W. Norton & Company.
Norwalk, K. E., Hamm, J. V., Farmer, T. W., & Barnes, K. L. (2016). Improving the school context of early adolescence through teacher attunement to victimization: Effects on school belonging. The Journal of Early Adolescence, 36(7), 989–1009.
Doucet, F. (2017). What does a culturally sustaining learning climate look like? Theory Into Practice, 56(3), 195–204.

Ladson‐Billings, G. (1995). But that’s just good teaching! The case for culturally relevant pedagogy. Theory Into Practice, 34(3), 159–165.

Paris, D. (2012). Culturally sustaining pedagogy: A needed change in stance, terminology, and practice. Educational Researcher, 41(3), 93–97.
Redbird-Post, M. (2020). Exploring Curriculum Development in Indigenous Early Childhood Language Immersion Programs: An Indigenous Storywork Journey Through the Kiowa Encampment Story Circle Methodology. Retrieved from https://shareok.org/handle/11244/325346

Rogoff, B. (2014). Learning by observing and pitching in to family and community endeavors: An orientation. Human Development, 57(2–3), 69–81.

Zoubak, E. (2020). Infant and early childhood mental health in American Indian and Alaskan Native communities: Considerations for early childhood partners and funders. Zero to Three, 40(5).
Nxumalo, F., & Villanueva, M. T. (2020). (Re) storying water: Decolonial pedagogies of relational affect with young children. In Mapping the Affective Turn in Education (pp. 209-228). Routledge.
Beaven, E., Cady, Fyfe, A. B., & Woods Myles, T. A. (2020). Ideal pathways: How ideal learning approaches prepare and support early childhood educators. Trust for Learning.
Berris, R., & Miller, E. (2011). How design of the physical environment impacts on early learning: Educators’ and parents’ perspectives. Australasian Journal of Early Childhood, 36(4), 102–110.

Edwards, C. P. (2002). Three approaches from Europe: Waldorf, Montessori, and Reggio Emilia. Early Childhood Research & Practice, 4(1).

Matthews, E., & Lippman, P. C. (2020). The design and evaluation of the physical environment of young children’s learning settings. Early Childhood Education Journal, 48(2), 171–180.

Tarr, P. (2001). Aesthetic codes in early childhood classrooms: What art educators can learn from Reggio Emilia. Art Education, 54(3), 33–39.
Curtis, D., & Carter, M. (2014, 2nd). Designs for living and learning: Transforming early childhood environments. Redleaf Press.

Jechura, J., Wooldridge, D. G., Bertelsen, C., & Mayers, G. (2016). Exploration of early-childhood learning environments. Delta Kappa Gamma Bulletin, 82(3), 9–15.

Ogu, U., & Schmidt, S. R. (2013). The natural playscape project: A real-world study with kindergartners. YC: Young Children, 68(4), 32–39.
Acer, D., Gözen, G., Fırat, Z. S., Kefeli, H., & Aslan, B. (2016). Effects of a redesigned classroom on play behavior among preschool children. Early Child Development and Care, 186(12), 1907–1925.
Fisher, A. V., Godwin, K. E., & Seltman, H. (2014). Visual environment, attention allocation, and learning in young children: When too much of a good thing may be bad. Psychological Science, 25(7), 1362–1370.
Hanley, M., Khairat, M., Taylor, K., Wilson, R., Cole-Fletcher, R., & Riby, D. M. (2017). Classroom displays—attraction or distraction? Evidence of impact on attention and learning from children with and without autism. Developmental Psychology, 53(7), 1265–1275.
Barrett, P., Zhang, Y., Moffat, J., & Kobbacy, K. (2013). A holistic, multi-level analysis identifying the impact of classroom design on pupils’ learning. Building and Environment, 59, 678–689.
Clay, R.A. (2004). No more Mickey Mouse design: Child’s environments require unique considerations. ASID ICON, 43-47.

Myler, P.A., Fantacone, T.A., Merritt, E.T. (2003). Eliminating distractions: The educational needs of autistic children challenge ordinary approaches to school design. American School & University. November, 313-317.
Torrice, A. F., & Logrippo, R. (1989). In my room: Designing for and with Children. Fawcett.
Duyan, F., & Unver, R. (2016). A research on the effect of classroom wall colours on student’s attention. A/Z : ITU Journal of Faculty of Architecture, 13, 73–78.
Gaines, K. S., & Curry, Z. D. (2011). The inclusive classroom: The effects of color on learning and behavior. Journal of Family & Consumer Sciences Education, 29(1).
Gaines, K. (2008). Brain compatible learning environments for students with autism spectrum disorders. Doctoral dissertation. etd-10092008-142401. Texas Tech University.

Shabha, G. (2006). An assessment of the impact of the sensory environment on individuals’ behaviour in special needs schools. Facilities, 24, 31–42.
Engelbrecht, K. (2003). The impact of color on learning. Chicago, IL: Perkins & Will.
Johnson, S. B., Riis, J. L., & Noble, K. G. (2016). State of the art review: Poverty and the developing brain. Pediatrics, 137(4), e20153075.
Jones, J., Barnett, C., Naidoo, A., Witherspoon, N. O., Trousdale, K., Swanson, M., & Gregoire, T. (2018). Eliminating lead risks in schools and child care facilities: A united and urgent call to action for children. In Healthy Schools Network, Inc.
Taylor, A. F., & Kuo, F. E. (2009). Children with attention deficits concentrate better after walk in the park. Journal of Attention Disorders, 12(5), 402–409.

The Natural Learning Initiative. (2019). Impact of naturalized early childhood outdoor learning environments [Research Brief]. The Natural Learning Initiative.

Strife, S., & Downey, L. (2009). Childhood development and access to nature. Organization & Environment, 22(1), 99–122.
Lester, S. and Russell, W. (2010) Children’s right to play: An examination of the importance of play in the lives of children worldwide. Working Paper No. 57. The Hague, The Netherlands: Bernard van Leer Foundation
Rowland-Shea, J., Doshi, S., Edberg, S., & Fanger, R. (2020). The nature gap: Confronting racial and economic disparities in the destruction and protection of nature in America. Center for American Progress.

Strife, S., & Downey, L. (2009). Childhood development and access to nature. Organization & Environment, 22(1), 99–122.

The United Nations International Children’s Emergency Fund (UNICEF). (2018). Advantage or Paradox: The challenge for children and young people of growing up urban. UNICEF.
Early Childhood Development Action Network (EDCAN), 2021. Our climate is our children’s future. Retrieved December 15, 2021, from https://covidaction.ecdan.org/climatechange
(Re)storying Water | Decolonial Pedagogies of Relational Affect with Young Children. (n.d.). Retrieved December 15, 2021, from https://www.taylorfrancis.com/chapters/edit/10.4324/9781003004219-21/re-storying-water-fikile-nxumalo-marleen-tepeyolotl-villanueva
Rogoff, B. (2014). Learning by observing and pitching in to family and community endeavors: An orientation. Human Development, 57(2–3), 69–81.
Conn-Powers, M., Cross, A. F., Traub, E. K., & Hutter-Pishgahi, L. (2006). The universal design of early education. Young Children Archives.

Cothren Cook, S., Rao, K., & Cook, B. G. (2016). Using universal design for learning to personalize an evidence-based practice for students with disabilities. In M. Murphy, S. Redding, & J. Twyman (Eds.), Handbook on personalized learning for states, districts, and schools (pp. 239–247). Philadelphia, PA: Temple University, Center on Innovations in Learning. Retrieved from www.centeril.org

Hall, T., Meyer, A., & Rose, D. (2012). Universal design for learning in the classroom: Practical applications. Guilford Press.
Adam, H (2019) Cultural diversity and children’s literature: Kindergarten educators’ practices to support principles of cultural diversity through book sharing. Doctoral Dissertation, Edith Cowan University, Australia. Available at: https://ro.ecu.edu.au/theses/2245

Bernstein, R. (2021). African American children and childhood [Childhood Studies – Oxford Bibliographies]. Obo.

McCabe, J., Fairchild, E., Grauerholz, L., Pescosolido, B., & Tope, D. (2011). Gender in twentieth-century children’s books. Gender & Society – GENDER SOC, 25, 197–226.

Wilkins, J., Howe, K., Seiloff, M., Rowan, S., & Lilly, E. (2016). Exploring elementary students’ perceptions of disabilities using children’s literature. British Journal of Special Education, 43.
Barri, M. (2020). Evaluation of physical aspects of classroom environment in terms of the humanistic approach: A comprehensive theoretical framework. Journal of Education and Training Studies, 8, 1–21.

Choi, H.-H., van Merriënboer, J. J. G., & Paas, F. (2014). Effects of the physical environment on cognitive load and learning: Towards a new model of cognitive load. Educational Psychology Review, 26(2), 225–244.
Harrist, A. W., & Waugh, R. M. (2002). Dyadic synchrony: Its structure and function in children’s development. Developmental Review, 22(4), 555-592.

Markova, G., Nguyen, T., & Hoehl, S. (2019). Neurobehavioral Interpersonal Synchrony in Early Development: The Role of Interactional Rhythms. Frontiers in Psychology, 10. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02078

Shonkoff, J. P., & Phillips, D. A. (2000). The developing brain. In from neurons to neighborhoods: The science of early childhood development. National Academies Press (US).
Levitt, P., & Eagleson, K. (2018). The Ingredients of Healthy Brain and Child Development. Washington University Journal of Law & Policy, 57(1), 075–088.

National Scientific Council on the Developing Child. (2007). The science of early childhood development: Closing the gap between what we know and what we do. National Scientific Council on the Developing Child.

Rosemond, Z. (2018). The importance of serve and return in the infant classroom settings. Képzés És Gyakorlat, 16(3), 45–50.
Barker, J. E., Semenov, A. D., Michaelson, L., Provan, L. S., Snyder, H. R., & Munakata, Y. (2014). Less-structured time in children’s daily lives predicts self-directed executive functioning. Frontiers in Psychology, 5, 593.

Brackett, M., Rivers, S. E., Reyes, M. R., & Salovey, P. (2012). ‪Enhancing academic performance and social and emotional competence with the RULER feeling words curriculum‬. Learning and Individual Differences, 22(2), 218–224.

Gómez, R. L., Bootzin, R. R., & Nadel, L. (2006). Naps promote abstraction in language-learning infants. Psychological Science, 17(8), 670–674.

Immordino-Yang, M. H., Joanna A, C., & Singh, V. (2012). ‪Rest is not idleness: Implications of the brain’s default mode for human development and education‬. Sage Publications, 7(4), 352–364.

Lampl, M., & Johnson, M. L. (2011). Infant Growth in Length Follows Prolonged Sleep and Increased Naps. Sleep, 34(5), 641–650.

Seehagen, S., Konrad, C., Herbert, J. S., & Schneider, S. (2015). Timely sleep facilitates declarative memory consolidation in infants. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 112(5), 1625–1629.

Semple, R. J., Lee, J., Rosa, D., & Miller, L. F. (2010). A randomized trial of mindfulness-based cognitive therapy for children: Promoting mindful attention to enhance social-emotional resiliency in children. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 19(2), 218–229.

Tarullo, A. R., Balsam, P. D., & Fifer, W. P. (2011). Sleep and infant learning. Infant and Child Development, 20(1), 35–46.

Tham, E. K., Schneider, N., & Broekman, B. F. (2017). Infant sleep and its relation with cognition and growth: A narrative review. Nature and Science of Sleep, 9, 135–149.

Walker, M. P., & Stickgold, R. (2004). Sleep-dependent learning and memory consolidation. Neuron, 44(1), 121–133.
‪Asadi, F.S., Hojat, I., (2020). Investigation of place components affecting the child’s perception of the school environment utilizing Q-Sort methodology‬. International Journal of Architectural Engineering and Urban Planning, 30(2): 184-197.

HOJAT, E., & Sheikh, A. F. (2021).Improvement and continuity of childhood experience in children’s educational environments: A Reflection on the Home and School Environment among Elementary School Children in Kerman. 13(30), 61–79.
Epstein, R., Blake, J., González, T. (2017). Girlhood interrupted: The erasure of black girls’ childhood. Center on Poverty and Inequality.
Cooke, A. N., & Halberstadt, A. G. (2021). Adultification, anger bias, and adults’ different perceptions of Black and White children. Cognition and Emotion, 0(0), 1–7.
American Psychological Association. (2016). Presidential Task Force on Educational Disparities. (2012). Ethnic and racial disparities in education: Psychology’s contributions to understanding and reducing disparities.

Anyon, Y., Jenson, J. M., Altschul, I., Farrar, et al. (2014). The persistent effect of race and the promise of alternatives to suspension in school discipline outcomes. Children and Youth Services Review, 44, 379-386
Meek, S., Smith, L., Allen, R., Catherine, E., Edyburn, K., Williams, C., & Pontier, R. (2020). Start with equity: From the early years to the early grades–Data, research, and an actionable child equity policy agenda. Children’s Equity Project & Bipartisan Policy Center.
Knowles, M. S., III, E. F. H., & Swanson, R. A. (2012). The Adult Learner. Routledge.

Lindeman, E. (1926). The meaning of adult education. New Republic, inc.
Abraham, E., Hendler, T., Shapira-Lichter, I., Kanat-Maymon, Y., Zagoory-Sharon, O., & Feldman, R. (2014). Father’s brain is sensitive to childcare experiences. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111(27), 9792–9797.

Barba-Müller, E., Craddock, S., Carmona, S., & Hoekzema, E. (2019). Brain plasticity in pregnancy and the postpartum period: Links to maternal caregiving and mental health. Archives of Women’s Mental Health, 22(2), 289–299.

Feldman, R. (2015). The adaptive human parental brain: Implications for children’s social development. Trends in Neurosciences, 38(6), 387–399.
Artman-Meeker, K., Fettig, A., Barton, E. E., Penney, A., & Zeng, S. (2015). Applying an evidence-based framework to the early childhood coaching literature. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 35(3), 183–196. https://doi.org/10.1177/0271121415595550

Beaven, E., Cady, Fyfe, A. B., & Woods Myles, T. A. (2020). Ideal pathways: How ideal learning approaches prepare and support early childhood educators. Trust for Learning.

Guarino, A. (2019, July 25). Strengthening the early learning workforce with registered apprenticeships. First Five Years Fund.

National Research Council. (2015). Transforming the workforce for children birth through age 8: A unifying foundation (L. Allen & B. B. Kelly, Eds.). The National Academies Press.

Peleman, B., Lazzari, A., Budginaite, I., Siarova, H., Hauari, H., Peeters, J., & Cameron, C. (2018). Continuous professional development and ECEC quality: Findings from a European systematic literature review. European Journal of Education, 53.

Pianta, R., Hamre, B., Downer, J., Burchinal, M., Williford, A., LoCasale-Crouch, J., Howes, C., La Paro, K., & Scott-Little, C. (2017). Early childhood professional development: Coaching and coursework effects on indicators of children’s school readiness. Early Education and Development, 28(8), 956–975.

Sharrock, E., & Parkerson, C. (2020). Investing in the birth-to-three workforce: A new vision to strengthen the foundation for all learning. Bank Street Education Center.
Carlson McCall, R., Padron, K., & Andrews, C. (2018). Evidence-based instructional strategies for adult learners: A Review of the literature. Publications and Research.

National Research Council. (2015). Transforming the workforce for children birth through age 8: A unifying foundation (L. Allen & B. B. Kelly, Eds.). The National Academies Press.

Knowles, M. S., III, E. F. H., & Swanson, R. A. (2012). The adult learner. Routledge.
McLean, C., Austin, L. J. E., Whitebook, M., & Olson, K. L. (2021). Early Childhood Workforce Index 2020. Center for the Study of Child Care Employment (CSCCE). Berkeley, CA.
Beaven, E., Cady, Alexandra, Fyfe, B., & Woods Myles, T. A. (2020). Ideal pathways: How ideal learning approaches prepare and support early childhood educators. Trust for Learning.
National Association for the Education of Young Children (2021) Compensation Matters Most

Sharrock, E., & Parkerson, C. (2020). Investing in the birth-to-three workforce: A new vision to strengthen the foundation for all learning. Bank Street Education Center.

U.S. Department of Education (2016) High-Quality Early Learning Settings Depend on a High-Quality Workforce.
Forlin, C. (2010). Teacher Education for Inclusion: Changing paradigms and innovative approaches. Routledge.

Freedman, J., Applebaum, A., Woodfield, C., & Ashby, C. (2019). Integrating disability studies pedagogy in teacher education. Journal of Teaching Disability Studies, 1.

Silverman, S. K. (2010). What Is diversity?: An inquiry into preservice teacher beliefs. American Educational Research Journal, 47(2), 292–329.
Knowles, M. S., III, E. F. H., & Swanson, R. A. (2012). The adult learner. Routledge.
Cooke, N. A. (2010). Becoming an Andragogical librarian: Using library instruction as a tool to combat library anxiety and empower adult learners. New Review of Academic Librarianship, 16(2), 208–227.

Hanft, B. E., Rush, D. D., & Shelden, M. L. (2004). Coaching families and colleagues in early childhood. In Brookes Publishing Company. Brookes Publishing Company.
Day, B. W., Lovato, S., Tull, C., & Ross-Gordon, J. (2011). Faculty perceptions of adult learners in college classrooms. The Journal of Continuing Higher Education, 59(2), 77-84.
Evertson, C. M., & Weinstein, C. S. (Eds.). (2013). Handbook of classroom management: Research, practice, and contemporary issues. Routledge.

Jennings, P. A., & Greenberg, M. T. (2009). The prosocial classroom: Teacher social and emotional competence in relation to student and classroom outcomes. Review of Educational Research, 79(1), 491–525.
Beaven, E., Cady, Alexandra, Fyfe, B., & Woods Myles, T. A. (2020). Ideal pathways: How ideal learning approaches prepare and support early childhood educators. Trust for Learning.
National Center for Educational Statistics (NCES). (2018). Characteristics of public school teachers who completed alternative route to certification programs. National Center for Educational Statistics.
Sklar, C. (2020). Youth apprenticeship in early childhood education: Lessons and opportunities. New America: Education Policy.
The American Indian College Fund. (2018). Tribal college and university early childhood education initiatives: Strengthening systems of care and learning with native communities from birth to career. American Indian College Fund Office of Research and Sponsored Programs Program Initiatives.
Collum, D., Christensen, R., Delicath, T., & Knezek, G. (2020, April). Measuring changes in educator bias in a simulated learning environment. In Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference (pp. 507-513). Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE).

Escayg, K.-A. (2019). “Who’s got the power?”: A critical examination of the anti-bias curriculum. International Journal of Child Care and Education Policy, 13(1), 6.

Toldson, I. A. (2011). Editor’s comments: Diversifying the United States’ teaching force: Where are we now? Where do we need to go? How do we get there? The Journal of Negro Education, 80(3), 183–186.
Raikes, H. H., & Edwards, C. P. (2009). Extending the dance in infant and toddler caregiving: Enhancing attachment and relationships. Brookes Publishing Company. Baltimore, MD.
Beaven, E., Cady, Alexandra, Fyfe, B., & Woods Myles, T. A. (2020). Ideal pathways: How ideal learning approaches prepare and support early childhood educators. Trust for Learning.

McLean, C., Austin, L. J. E., Whitebook, M., & Olson, K. L. (2021). Early Childhood Workforce Index 2020. Center for the Study of Child Care Employment (CSCCE). Berkeley, CA.

Grant, A. A., Jeon, L., & Buettner, C. K. (2019). Relating early childhood teachers’ working conditions and well-being to their turnover intentions. Educational Psychology, 39(3), 294–312.

Jennings, P. A., & Greenberg, M. T. (2009). The prosocial classroom: Teacher social and emotional competence in relation to student and classroom outcomes. Review of Educational Research, 79(1), 491–525.

Hamre, B. K., & Pianta, R. C. (2001). Early teacher-child relationships and the trajectory of children’s school outcomes through eighth grade. Child Development, 72(2), 625–638.

Yazzie-Mintz, T. (2011). Native Teachers’ Beliefs and Practices: Choosing Language and Cultural Revitalization over Uniformity and Standardization. Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood, 12(4), 315–326. https://doi.org/10.2304/ciec.2011.12.4.315
Noble, K. G., Magnuson, K., Gennetian, L. A., Duncan, G. J., Yoshikawa, H., Fox, N. A., & Halpern-Meekin, S. (2021). Baby’s first years: Design of a randomized controlled trial of poverty reduction in the United States. Pediatrics, 148(4).

Rodriguez, V., Lynneth Solis, S., Mascio, B., Kiely Gouley, K., Jennings, P. A., & Brotman, L. M. (2020). With awareness comes competency: The five awarenesses of teaching as a framework for understanding teacher social-emotional competency and well-being. Early Education and Development, 31(7), 940–972.
Flook, L., Goldberg, S. B., Pinger, L., Bonus, K., & Davidson, R. J. (2013). Mindfulness for teachers: A pilot study to assess effects on stress, burnout, and teaching efficacy. Mind, Brain and Education: The Official Journal of the International Mind, Brain, and Education Society, 7(3).

Jennings, P. A., & Greenberg, M. T. (2009). The prosocial classroom: Teacher social and emotional competence in relation to student and classroom outcomes. Review of Educational Research, 79(1), 491–525.

Meiklejohn, J. H., Phillips, C., Freedman, M. L., & Griffin, M. L. (2013). Integrating mindfulness training into K-12 education: Fostering the resilience of teachers and students. Mindfulness, 3(3).
Oberle, E., & Schonert-Reichl, K. A. (2016). Stress contagion in the classroom? The link between classroom teacher burnout and morning cortisol in elementary school students. Social Science & Medicine, 159, 30-37.
Key Findings. (2021). Early Childhood Workforce Index 2020 – Center for the Study of Child Care Employment (CSCCE). Berkeley, CA. Retrieved December 15, 2021, from https://cscce.berkeley.edu/workforce-index-2020/introduction-policy-recommendations/key-findings/

Caven, M., Khanani, N., Zhang, X., & Parker, C. E. (2021). Center-and program-level factors associated with turnover in the early childhood education workforce. REL 2021-069. Regional Educational Laboratory Northeast & Islands.

Grant, A. A., Jeon, L., & Buettner, C. K. (2019). Relating early childhood teachers’ working conditions and well-being to their turnover intentions. Educational Psychology, 39(3), 294–312.

Vogtman, J. (2017). Undervalued: A brief history of women’s care work & child care policy in the U.S. National Women’s Law Center.
Cantor, P., Osher, D., Berg, J., Steyer, L., & Rose, T. (2019). Malleability, plasticity, and individuality: How children learn and develop in context. Applied Developmental Science, 23(4), 307–337.

Darling-Hammond, L., Flook, L., Cook-Harvey, C., Barron, B., & Osher, D. (2020). Implications for educational practice of the science of learning and development. Applied Developmental Science, 24(2), 97–140.

DEY. (2021). Six Principles to Guide Education Policy. Defending the Early Years. Retrieved from https://dey.org/publication/six-principles-to-guide-education-policy/

Dowd, A.J., & Thompson, B.J. (2021). Learning through play: Increasing impact, reducing inequality. The Lego Foundation

Madden-Dent, T., Jackson, I., & Cason, J. A. L. (2021). Culturally responsive social, emotional, and academic development (SEAD): Three case studies implementing SEAD [Chapter]. Leading Schools With Social, Emotional, and Academic Development (SEAD); IGI Global.

NAEYC. (n.d.). Principles of Child Development and Learning and Implications That Inform Practice. NAEYC. Retrieved November 22, 2021, from https://www.naeyc.org/resources/position-statements/dap/principles

National Association for the Education of Young Children. (2019). Advancing equity in early childhood education position statement. NAEYC.

Osher, D., Cantor, P., Berg, J., Steyer, L., & Rose, T. (2020). Drivers of human development: How relationships and context shape learning and development. Applied Developmental Science, 24(1), 6–36.

Evidence Brief – Ideal Learning Environments for Young Children

Children are born learning, exploring and growing.

Table of Contents

Our context

Early childhood is a crossroads of inequity and investment in our future

Structural racism and other inequities create stress and barriers for millions of families with young children in the U.S.

Millions of young children experience ACEs and toxic stress

We stand at a peak and a starting point for scientific research

THE RESEARCH WE HAVE

THE RESEARCH WE NEED

Guiding insights

Children develop dynamically and holistically

Variability is normal and development is adaptive

Epigenetic research demonstrates how nature and nurture work together

Principle 1: Decision-making reflects a commitment to equity

Principle 2: Children construct knowledge from diverse experiences to make meaning of the world

Young children are optimal learners

Equity and inclusion considerations

Educators need support to facilitate active learning

Principle 3: Play is an essential element of young children's learning

Play supports growth and development across domains

Equity & inclusion considerations

Principle 4: Instruction is personalized to acknowledge each child's development and abilities

Personalized learning improves engagement and child outcomes

Personalized learning should be guided by equity

Principle 5: The teacher is a guide, nurturing presence, and co-constructor of knowledge

Effective educators guide children’s discovery

Educators hold positions of power and influence, and they need support

Principle 6: Young children and adults learn through relationships

Relationships can be a source of resilience or stress for young children

Children’s relational learning environments are dynamic and develop over time

Equity in relationships

Relational learning happens in real time

Principle 7: The learning environment intentionally facilitates exploration, independence, and interaction

How the built environment influences learning

Color and lighting considerations

Environmental toxins & access to nature

Equity & inclusion considerations

Future research directions

Principle 8: The time of childhood is valued

Principle 9: Continuous learning environments support adult development

Adults develop through equitable, experiential and personalized educator pathways

New educator pathways are needed to meet educators where they are and support their development

Educators of all kinds face enormous stressors that require policy changes at every level

Conclusion & Acknowledgements

Investment in early childhood educators is paramount.

How do we create ideal learning environments for young children?

Acknowledgments

Contributors

Contact Trust for Learning