Capturing Early Learning Environments in Urban Anganwadis

doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-4902808/v1

Download PDF

Research Article

Capturing Early Learning Environments in Urban Anganwadis

https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-4902808/v1

This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License

Version 1

posted

You are reading this latest preprint version

Profiling the quality of early learning environments in low- and middle-income countries is challenging, but essential to ensure that all children have access to quality early childhood education and care (Global Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), Target 4.2). We report a study which assessed the early learning environments of a sample of 36 Anganwadi centres (AWCs) in Hyderabad, India using the MELE (Measuring Early Leaning Environments), (MELQO, 2014). The data were part of a large-scale interdisciplinary project, the UKRI GCRF Action Against Stunting Hub (2019–2024). The MELE was translated into the Telegu and observations completed by a local researcher supported by the main team. We outline the context and characteristics of preschool education in the urban Hyderabad Anganwadis and the ways in which the Anganwadis function as centres of learning and offer integrated provisions for child health and nutrition promotion. The findings offer an in-depth assessment of the Anganwadi preschools as captured in three theoretical dimensions: learning environment, learning opportunities and learning interactions. While we found that children in Anganwadis were receiving nutrition, questions are raised about how the settings were supporting children’s cognitive development and the ways in which curricular guidance was implemented. The paper makes an original Action Against Stunting Hub contribution to the early childhood field through its rigor and significance in using a validated and reliable observational tool to measure the early learning environments of culturally diverse settings in the distinctive context of the urban slums of Addagutta and Warasiguda, Hyderabad, India. Opportunities for development are discussed.

Educational Psychology

Access to Early Childhood Education and Care (ECEC) in Low- and Middle-Income Countries (LMICs) is increasing and seen as a key opportunity for enhancing the lives of children in challenging situations, yet the quality of these services is variable (Yoshikawa et al., 2018). Current conceptualizations of the quality of ECEC are guided by socioecological, constructivist and learning theories which all focus on children’s experiences in their classroom environments and point to the critical role of learning interactions and opportunities to enhance development (Chen & Wolf, 2021). Quality early learning environments and pre-primary education are important experiences that can form the foundations for lifelong learning and success. An impact review concluded that the benefits to disadvantaged children of ECEC provision were most consistent between the ages of three and five years (Melhuish et al., 2015). Attending ECEC settings promotes early achievement, although the gain is greatest if quality is high (Causa & Johansson, 2010), debates continue about the nature and extent of the effectiveness of early intervention (Conti et al., 2016).

ECEC may also serve as a protective factor against risks associated with poverty such as malnutrition, lack of stimulation, and higher levels of stress (Berry et al., 2016). Quality education at ECEC can enhance pupils’ readiness for primary school entry, providing a foundation for effective approaches to learning, supporting emergent literacy and math skills, and helping to develop socio-emotional skills (Rouse et al., 2005). Early quality learning experiences -such as having teachers or adult carers who engage responsively in reading or telling stories and fostering opportunities for play and learning- shape children’s development and engagement with later learning opportunities (Britto et al., 2017). In sum, early learning environments can offer a potential driver for future development; and classroom observation tools are part of monitoring the quality of ECEC settings. Reliable and valid measures are needed to profile ECEC quality to inform the development of both the learning environment and teacher pedagogy (Britto et al., 2011; Britto et al., 2017).

Evaluation of ECEC settings involves capturing features of the learning environment, learning opportunities, and learning interactions. The learning environment includes both the physical environment e.g. space, facilities, and the resources available to children in the settings such as books, art materials, and toys. By contrast, learning opportunities are specific evidence-informed activities designed to foster children’s oral language, literacy, numeracy, and motor skills. These activities are scaffolded by learning interactions, the ways in which teachers support learning through feedback, reinforcement, and group activities (Burchinal et al., 2008).

While several tools exist to capture early learning environments e.g. ECERS-3 and the ECERs-R (Cassidy et al., 2005; Gordon et al., 2013) few have been used across early ECEC in LMICs Learning environments are shaped by the cultural values , demographics and economy of a society (Chen & Wolf, 2021) and these differences should be captured in the tools that are used. The MELE (Measuring Early Leaning Environments) is a reliable and valid tool to capture learning experiences (Raikes et al., 2020) across LMICs. Versions of the MELE modules have been used in Colombia, Kenya, Nicaragua and Tanzania (UNESCO, 2017). The MELE includes seven core domains of quality (play, pedagogy, interactions, environment, parent/community engagement, personnel, and inclusion). It allows comparisons within and across country settings to profile their quality. Moreover, information is provided on the three dimensions key to effective ECEC: environment, opportunities and interactions (Dockrell et al., 2024).

Childhood stunting is pervasive in India and the Integrated Child Development Services (ICDS) Scheme, renamed Anganwadi Services, was launched in 1975 with the goals to improve the nutritional and health status of children from birth to six years; to lay the foundation for psychological, physical, and social development of the child (Ganimian et al., 2024; Rao et al., 2021; Pratik et al., 2021). The programme is nationwide, encompassing all the country's states and union territories. As of 01.06.2018, a total of 13.63 lakh Anganwadis (AWCs) out of a total of 14 lakh AWCs across the country were active. This is the largest early education programme in the world (Ministry of Women and Child Development, MWCD, 2023) and the focus of our current work in Hyderabad. These government programmes are free of cost for all children. The Anganwadis are under the Department of Women and Child Development (DWCD) and are managed thorough the Child development Program Officers (CDPO) and supervisors. Each Anganwadi has a teacher and an aide. A minimum of a tenth-grade qualification is required to be an Anganwadi teacher and a bachelor’s degree to be supervisor or CDPO. The government settings are the largest in the country but there are also private paid services under the Department of Education in each state of India governed by the Government of India’s Department of School Education and Literacy Pre-School Education (PSE). PSE is considered the most important component and the backbone of ICDS and the Government of India (GOI) has strengthened and proposed a minimum of six hours of working of AWCs. Accordingly, the State Government has extended the timings of Pre-School from 9am to 4pm and enhanced the honorarium of Anganwadi workers (AWWs) and Anganwadi Helpers (AWHs). The annual Pre-School education programme is conducted from June to April. Both the structure of the day and the curriculum are explicitly formalised in Anganwadi settings, as are the objectives for the monthly ECCE days such as ‘To enlighten the parents and community about age and developmentally appropriate early childcare and education practices’. Monthly targets include, for example; three action songs/rhymes (two in the local language Telugu and one in English), two stories and two games (indoor/outdoor). For a detailed description of the guidelines for conduct of day activities, visit the Women Development and Child Welfare Department Privacy Policy website, no date.

Studies in and of Anganwadi centres have focused primarily on health prevention and promotion (see Debata et al., 2023; Malik et al., 2015) or on Anganwadi workers (AWW) (Somani et al., 2023). AWWs are reported to spend a substantial amount of time on administrative tasks (Jain et al., 2020), but little is known about the children’s experiences and the potential for Anganwadis to be centres of learning. A notable exception is a recent study in 42 centres in the state of Telangana (Anjaneyulu, 2023) where data using a structured questionnaire and personal interview were collected. She found that, on average, settings had 46 children registered , did not provide hygienic conditions and learning resources were present but information about the nature of learning opportunities and interactions in the settings were not documented (Anjaneyulu, 2023). The current study aims to further understandings of Anganwadi centres by capturing the learning environment, learning opportunities and learning interactions using a standardised tool (MELE) in urban settings within Hyderabad city limits (Addaguta and Warasiguda under the Secunderabad). These areas are homes to large sections of population from the lower middle-class population (Census Of India, 2001).

We examined the children’s learning experiences, the pedagogy in place, the curriculum, and collected information about teaching staff and aides. We anticipated that the MELE would reflect the three theoretical dimensions of environment, opportunities, and interactions. We further predicted that children would be exposed to a range of conversation and school readiness activities given the clearly delineated criteria in the curricular guidance and the emphasis on Anganwadis as centres of learning. Given previous research across LMICs we anticipated that learning interactions would include an aspect of harsh discipline (Cuartas et al., 2019).

Sample and Settings

Two urban slums in Hyderabad, India participated in the study. These slums together have a population of ≈175,000, with a high prevalence of childhood stunting (around 27% at 24 months age). The study area has predominantly government managed preschools (Anganwadis) and a few private preschools. Thirty-six Anganwadi government settings in the urban areas of Addagutta (n = 19) and Warasiguda (n = 17) participated in the study.

Total preschool enrolment varied across the centres (M = 13.92, SD = 4.31, range 8 - 25), with two children with special educational needs identified in the total sample. However, these children were not enrolled in the class (records). Class sizes also varied (M = 10.56, SD = 3.19, range 3-18). As Figure 1 shows numbers of children in the settings during the observation period varied. On average there was a M = 10.47 (SD = 3.92) children in the classes during the observation period (Boys M = 4.94, SD = 2.83; Girls M = 5.53, SD = 2.21). All observed classes had one teacher and 86% of classes had an aide present (n = 31).

Curriculum

Despite government guidelines not all settings reported following a curriculum. Thirty-one (86.1%) of the settings reported having a curriculum. Observations captured different aspects of learning. Within the settings learning areas that were covered daily in lesson plans varied: socio-emotional development (n = 36) Language and literacy (n = 35) mathematics and health (n = 31) health and art rarely present (n = 8). No other curricular aspects were recorded.

Measures

Classroom characteristics and classroom quality were measured using a translated and adapted version of the Measuring Early Learning Environment (MELE) Classroom Observation tool (MELQO, 2014). The MELE 'core' version contains 42 items grouped into six sections detailed in Appendix A with scoring criteria. The tool was translated to the local language (Telegu) by trained staff ensuring the language was as spoken in the community. The translation was validated by the back translation. Minor adaptations were made to the tool to contextualise it within the local context: three new items were added. For example, adaptations included removing facilities items that did not align to standard practices and adding items related to the use of digital technology, snack and meal provision, and specific examples of negative physical interactions reported by local staff[1].

Piloting and reliability assessments and revisions

The tool was piloted in three centres and inter-rater reliability was established between the two observers through independent scoring during the same observations for each item coded. The inter-rater reliability ranged between 94 to 98%. Both observers assessed four of the centres observed (not sequentially) to guarantee reliability. The average reliability of the final tool was 97.25% between the two enumerators, range 96 to 98% in the four centres that were rated by two observers in the main trial.

Data were collected between December 2021 and April 2023 and all observations took place in the mornings to systematically capture attendance and activities. The average length of observations was over two hours (M = 147.46 minutes; SD = 33.26) following MELE guidance.

Ethics approval Data checking and validation

The study protocol was approved by the Institutional Ethic Committee of the ICMR-National Institute of Nutrition Hyderabad and UCL, IOE ethics panel. Anganwadi centres were identified from the local catchment centres for the AASH, Settings opted in to the project. All data collected were transcribed and entered into Excel. A random 10% were double coded and checked for accuracy. The final file was checked for outliers and data missing.

Approach to analysis

Reliability of the scale was assessed using Cronbach’s Alpha. Overall, the Indian version of the MELE demonstrated high reliability across respondents (42 items, α = .79). The results section focuses on setting characteristics, Learning environments, Learning opportunities and Learning interactions. A Principal Component Analysis- PCA using SPSS 27 did not reveal a unitary structure. We therefore examined subdimensions of the MELE to test the proposed framework. The learning environment subscale did not result in high reliability (22 items, α = .53)[2], and removal of items did not improve the α. These items are therefore examined conceptually as the learning environment resources, space and health and safety. Neither learning opportunities (7 items, α = 58.) nor learning interactions (6 items, α = 66.) provided reliable scales and removal of items did not improve the α. We use our conceptual framework for descriptive purposes to describe the learning contexts of the Anganwadis. We return to these issues in the discussion and present the Means (SDs) for all MELE items in Appendix B.

We report the results of the MELE in three sections capturing the learning environment, learning opportunities and interactions.

Figure 3 reports the learning environment, measured on a nominal scale, included in the MELE. As these centres were in urban regions outdoor space for gross motor activities was not available in any setting. However, inside the classroom children had space to sit on the floor in a semi-circle or circular fashion with the teacher. Some settings were constrained for space for activities that required physical movement. Limited space could also explain why learning corners were not, typically, observed. Children rarely had their own portfolios (n = 4), although tracking development was reported in just under a third of the settings (n = 11).

Figure 4 reports availability of learning resources across the 36 settings. As Fig. 4 shows materials were available, however, even when present, they were not used. The most common were writing materials, but despite being present in most Anganwadis (n = 31) they were only used in half of them (n = 15). All 36 Anganwadis had books (with five having over 14 books) but the materials were rarely in use during the observation periods. The most common writing surface was a slate. Most of the children in the class had access to a slate whenever a writing exercise was observed. However, a few teachers mentioned that slate pencils were not provided, and this becomes an out-of-pocket expenditure for the teachers. Teachers reported concerns that children may damage items or quarrel over limited availability.

In all centres cooked food was provided and children were able to ask for more (94%, n = 34) and meals were typically (86%) accompanied by pleasant conversation (n = 31). Table 9 provides details of water and sanitation. Overall, these were safe settings with good sanitation although handwashing by the children was inconsistent and only four settings had running water for handwashing.

Figure 5 provides details of the distribution of scores for all learning opportunities recorded on an ordinal scale. Means (SD) are reported in Appendix B, Table 6. Music activities were scored on a nominal scale (present/absent) and were recorded in 84% of the settings (n = 30).

As Fig. 5 shows there was considerable variability across the settings in terms of the opportunities that children had access to; book reading activities to support children’s listening and speaking rarely occurred and free play was not a common practice, occurring in less than a third of the centres. A Kendall’s τ was calculated to examine whether there were significant differences across learning opportunities. Learning opportunities for each area varied significantly (r_τ =.374, p < .005), activities for spoken language occurred significantly more than others, but as Fig. 5 shows book reading used to support listening and speaking was rare. Opportunities to develop children’s listening skills involved acting out to set songs and rhymes. Children were engaged in these actions, and it was often more visual/physical than a listening activity. Books available were also designed to be read by an adult with large amounts of text and not designed for preschoolers (i.e lack of big print or illustrations).

We examined whether learning opportunities to support spoken language were associated with other opportunities or interactions (see Fig. 6). There were no significant correlations with any of the learning opportunities or aspects of the learning environment.

In relation to learning interactions children frequently waited for more than 10 minutes without an activity (n = 24, 67%). Figure 6 displays interactions by children and supervision by staff. As the data indicate individualised instruction was rare although typically, but not always, children were supervised by the teacher or aide.

Approaches to child discipline are presented in Fig. 7. Negative verbal discipline and physical discipline were common, with physical or negative discipline being recorded 23 times over the 36 observations.

We examined the relationships between verbal and physical discipline and engagement using Spearmans Rho. Correlations are presented in Table 1. Frequency of verbal disciplinary strategies were significantly positively associated with the frequency of negative physical interactions, child engagement and individualised instruction. Individualised attention from the teacher was associated with reprimands or corrections for unacceptable behaviour.

Table 1

*Correlations Between Learning Interaction Scales*
Learning interaction scale	Verbal disciplinary strategies	Frequency of negative physical activity	Engaged throughout	Children are supervised
Frequency of negative physical activity	.459**
Engaged throughout	.562**	.161
Children are supervised	.056	− .155	.227
Individualised instruction	.600**	.354*	.674**	.135

To date, research is lacking about the ways in which Anganwadis function as centres of learning, without data on the learning environment staff development and child outcomes cannot be addressed in an evidence informed manner. To address this gap data were collected in Anganwadi centres using the MELE to better understand the current learning environments, opportunities, and interactions in a sample of 36 government-managed preschool settings in India. We anticipated that observations using the MELE scale would reflect the three theoretical dimensions of the learning environment, learning opportunities and learning interactions and predicted that children would be exposed to a range of conversation and school readiness activities given the clearly delineated criteria in the government’s curricular guidance. The evaluation of the Indian version of the MELE tool demonstrated strong internal consistency for the entire scale, (suggesting a strong correlation between items), for the Anganwadi observations the PCA did not find a unified structure, suggesting that the items of the MELE may not be measuring a single underlying factor reflecting early years provision. Moreover, no statistically or conceptually consistent components were found, indicating that there was no evidence of fixed latent variables. Therefore, we maintained subdimensions in interpreting the results (DeVellis, 2016) but the individual items within sub dimensions were analysed and discussed individually for descriptive purposes.

All the Anganwadis observed had a teacher, and most had an assistant as per government policy. The settings observed were smaller than those in other studies (M = 10 children), providing opportunities for interaction and small group activities but as we discuss below, these were not evident. The classes had similar numbers of girls and boys. Despite clear guidance about curriculum and activities, differences were evident both between settings and with the national guidance. Indeed, often the children were sitting for long periods of time with no set activities and teachers were rarely present for the full session.

All settings reported prioritizing socio-emotional development, reflecting educators' recognition of its importance in fostering children's social skills, emotional regulation, and interpersonal relationships (Cristóvão et al., 2020). Additionally, language and literacy were consistently emphasized. However, as we discuss below, these aspects were not evident in the observations. The inclusion of language in the curriculum reflects the increasing awareness of language as a foundational skill for learning and interaction (Girolametto & Weitzman, 2007) but language activities were not language exchanges, but rote songs or games which are less likely to support language development (Hulme et al., 2020. Nonetheless, when these activities were observed children appeared to enjoy them and most teachers were also enthusiastic about the sessions. Art was not frequently present in the implementedcurriculum which may reflect the limited resources available for these specific activities. Art offers children opportunities for self-expression, creativity, fine motor skill development, and exploration of different materials and mediums (Sharma et al., 2022). The absence of these areas within the operationalised curriculum indicates gaps in the breadth and depth of learning experiences provided to children in the Anganwadi settings.

As Fig. 4 shows, while the majority of Anganwadis observed had a range of resources their use was restricted. Writing-related materials were found in the majority of Anganwadis (31 of 36), but they were actively utilised in less than half (15 of 36). Similarly, every Anganwadi possessed books, and several Anganwadi centres even had a significant number of books (> 14) but these were rarely used during the observation periods. Given the potential for these resources to support children’s cognitive development it is important to establish why they were not used. Lack of use could reflect that the materials were not appropriate for the group, that teachers have not been trained or supported in using the resources, the settings did not afford opportunities for their use or time constraints due to the multiple roles of Anganwadis workers. Active learning was rarely observed in the settings, despite pedagogical approaches emphasising active learning, as integral elements of early childhood education (Kim, & Womack, 2021).

The addition of three new items to the health and safety scale to capture nutrition in the centres is a recognition of the importance of nutrition in early childhood development and the nutrition polices implemented (Government of India Ministry of Women & Child Developmen, Annual report 2022-23). The findings show positive practices related to nutrition, with cooked food being provided in all centres and children being able to ask for more (94%) if needed. Meals were often accompanied by conversation between the children and aide (who served their food), and between the teacher and children, fostering a positive mealtime environment (86%). However, hand washing by the children was inconsistent across the centres, and only a minority of settings had running water available specifically for handwashing (n = 4). This highlights potential opportunities for developing and enhancing hygiene practices. While the overall conditions were clean, the availability of running water for handwashing, particularly in a setting where young children are present, is crucial for preventing the spread of infections and promoting good hygiene habits (Dreibelbis et al., 2014). Educational initiatives aimed at promoting proper handwashing techniques among children and caregivers could help improve hygiene behaviours and reduce the risk of illness transmission (Bowen et al., 2007).

Other aspects of the learning environment were not uniformly observed, such as children's own portfolios for documenting child’s learning progress, achievements and experiences. In the broader context in which the preschool operates, institutional policies, administrative support, and community expectations, may also play a role in determining the presence of aspects of the learning environment (Epstein & Gipson, 2018). Understanding the factors influencing the presence or absence of these aspects can provide valuable insights in creating and maintaining high-quality early learning environments. Considerable variation was seen in the availability and quality of Anganwadis learning provision, specifically the infrequency of book reading activities to enhance children's listening and speaking skills. Interactive book reading offers potential word learning and extended conversations ( Girolametto & Weitzman, 2002; Zucker et al., 2013) and has been shown to improve receptive and expressive vocabulary and narrative skills (Cabell et al., 2019; Grolig et al., 2020; Mol et al., 2009; Pesco & Gagné, 2017). Interactive book reading was never observed. Further small group activities increase opportunities for joint attention (Hassinger-Das et al., 2017), encourage children to interact and make verbal contributions (Pellegrino et al., 1990) and encourage educators to offer higher-quality language-supporting practice matched to children’s developmental levels (Turnbull et al., 2009), but again, despite the small numbers in the classes these exchanges were not observed.

In addition, we observed few examples of unstructured play, observed in less than one-third of the settings (Fig. 4) and the incorporation of two ten-minute periods designated for free play in the curriculum this was never observed. Notable disparities were also evident among learning opportunities, with teacher directed oral language activities being the most common, such as talking about good habits. Teachers frequently relied on narration rather than reading and the books that were accessible were highly textual, designed for teachers. There is considerable scope to develop language-supportive activities by providing age-appropriate and appealing materials, such as picture books specifically developed for preschoolers (Dickinson & Tabors, 2001). Additional training will be necessary to improve the quality and diversity of learning opportunities offered in Anganwadis, especially for supporting activities that encourage language development (Justice et al., 2003; Neuman & Celano, 2001). These activities on their own are unlikely to be sufficient to support development but with careful scaffolding by informed practitioners they can be powerful drivers of development.

We captured learning interactions in different ways. Firstly, by observing the ongoing nature of interactions throughout the session and secondly through the ways in which teachers managed activities and behaviour. ‘Waiting Time’ was observed for transition from one activity to another. A significant portion of children (67%) experienced waiting times of more than ten minutes without engaging in any activities. Transition between activities was abrupt where the teacher promptly released the children, resulting in sudden shifts. Consequently, the children often found themselves idle, either sitting quietly or engaging in chatter with one another, without engaging in meaningful activities. The data also showed that individualized instruction was rare. Children were typically, though not always, supervised by staff.

There was a high prevalence of negative verbal and physical disciplinary approaches within the Anganwadis. Moreover, the data indicated a significant association between the frequency of verbal disciplinary strategies and negative physical activity, child engagement, and individualized instruction. Verbal reprimands were often associated with negative physical activity. Most instances of individualized attention from the teacher, occurred in response to unacceptable behaviour, rather than for non-disciplinary reasons. The reliance on negative disciplinary approaches in early childhood settings can have detrimental effects on children's socio-emotional development, self-esteem, and overall well-being (Gershoff et al., 2018). Training Anganwadi staff about positive discipline strategies, such as positive reinforcement, modelling appropriate behaviour, and problem-solving techniques, would effectively promote desirable behaviours and foster positive learning environments (Gershoff et al., 2018).

Limitations

Despite the study’s unique strengths in providing observational data in urban Anganwadis, it is subject to several limitations. Firstly, data were collected at the end of the COVID 19 pandemic, and we cannot ascertain what, if any, changes were made in the centre as a result of this. Thus, the data needs to be interpreted in this context. Secondly while the study comprehensively captures a set of Anganwadis these are in a prespecified urban location. Practices in rural settings may differ significantly. Despite a sample size of 36 providing rich data on the children’s early learning context, further data are needed to capture a more representative sample and to capture potential moderating variables such as population mobility, the impact of teacher education and setting size. Although the MELE domains are expected to vary across cultures the lack of any clear statistical factors from the tool requires further research. Focusing on single items seriously limits the tool as a measure of capturing potential impacts on learning (see Perlman et al., 2016 for a discussion in relation to CLASS).

Anganwadis provide a unique opportunity to nurture children’s body and mind. Several factors are associated with optimal ECEC, including positive, responsive, and enriching experiences that protect children from environmental risks. While our data indicated that children in Anganwadis are receiving nutrition, the current study raises questions about how the settings are supporting the children’s cognitive development and implementing the intended curricular guidance in their activities. The term ‘quality’ is often used in ECEC to describe the structural and process features of the environment that promote learning and development. Many of these indicators of quality were missing in the observed settings and offer scope for further research and development.

While strong learning environments are an important precursor to support children’s learning they are not sufficient. Both evidence-informed learning opportunities and interactions need to be present. The current Anganwadis data suggests that at best quality is variable and certain opportunities are not occurring at all. Enabling continuous improvement and collaboration can address these barriers. By providing tailored support for educators, emphasizing positive discipline strategies, and promoting individualized instruction, Anganwadis can enhance children's holistic development and create nurturing environments conducive to learning. This evaluation also emphasizes the complexity of assessment tools and the importance of reliability and dimensionality in such evaluations. The lack of factor structure found is not new, as it has been reported when using MELE (Anderson & Sayre, 2016), and other measures, such as CLASS (Perlman et al., 2016) and ECERS-R (Betancur et al., 2021). While a limitation, it is a trade-off of adapting and using these tools in diverse settings. Yet, the detailed description of the theoretical dimensions of learning environment, learning opportunities and learning interactions are useful to understand the learning environments and suggest to increase its quality. Lastly, investing in professional development and implementing innovative teaching practices will not only improve resource utilization but also contribute to the overall quality of early childhood education in India.

Anderson, Sayre R (2016) Measuring Early Learning Quality and Outcomes in Tanzania. Institutional assessment for integrating early childhood measurement in the pre-primary system. Center for Universal Education at the Brookings Institution
Anjaneyulu P (2023) Role of Preschool Teachers in Early Childhood Care and Education: A Study of Anganwadis/Anganwadi Schools Located in Scheduled Caste Colonies of Telangana State. Contemp Voice Dalit 0(0). https://doi-org.libproxy.ucl.ac.uk/ 10.1177/2455328X231163387
Berry D, Blair C, Willoughby M, Garrett-Peters P, Vernon-Feagans L, Mills-Koonce WR (2016) Household chaos and children’s cognitive and socio-emotional development in early childhood: Does childcare play a buffering role? Early Child Res Q 34:115–127. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2015.09.003
Betancur L, Maldonado-Carreño C, Votruba-Drzal E, Bernal R (2021) Measuring preschool quality in low- and middle-income countries: Validity of the ECERS-R in Colombia. Early Child Res Q 54:86–98. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2020.08.001
Bowen A, Ma H, Ou J, Billhimer W, Long T, Mintz E, Hoekstra RM (2007) A cluster-randomized controlled trial evaluating the effect of a handwashing-promotion program in Chinese primary schools. Am J Trop Med Hyg 76(6):1166–1173
Britto PR, Lye SJ, Proulx K, Yousafzai AK, Matthews SG, Vaivada T, Perez-Escamilla R, Rao N, Ip P, Fernald LC, MacMillan H, Hanson M, Wachs TD, Yao H, Yoshikawa H, Cerezo A, Leckman JF, Bhutta ZA (2017) Nurturing care: Promoting early childhood development. Lancet 389(10064):91–102. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(16)31390-3
Britto PR, Yoshikawa H, Boller K (2011) Quality of Early Childhood Development Programs in Global Contexts: Rationale for Investment, Conceptual Framework and Implications for Equity and commentaries. Social Policy Rep 25(2):1–31. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2379-3988.2011.tb00067.x
Burchinal M, Howes C, Pianta R, Bryant D, Early D, Clifford R, Barbarin O (2008) Predicting child outcomes at the end of kindergarten from the quality of pre-kindergarten teacher-child interactions and instruction. Appl Dev Sci 12(3):140–153. 10.1080/10888690802199418
Cabell SQ, Zucker TA, DeCoster J, Melo C, Forston L, Hamre B (2019) Prekindergarten interactive book reading quality and children’s language and literacy development: Classroom organization as a moderator. Early Educ Dev 30(1):1–18
Cassidy DJ, Hestenes LL, Hegde A, Hestenes S, Mims S (2005) Measurement of quality in preschool child care classrooms: An exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis of the early childhood environment rating scale-revised. Early Child Res Q 20(3):345–360. 10.1016/j.ecres.2005.07.005
Causa O, Johansson Å (2010) Intergenerational Social Mobility in OECD Countries. OECD Journal: Economic Stud 2010/1. https://doi.org/10.1787/eco_studies-2010-5km33scz5rjj
Chen S, Wolf S (2021) Measuring the Quality of Early Childhood Education in Low- and Middle-Income Countries. Front Psychol 12:774740–774740. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.774740
Conti G, Heckman JJ, Pinto R (2016) The Effects of Two Influential Early Childhood Interventions on Health and Healthy Behaviour. Econ J 126(596):F28–F65. 10.1111/ecoj.12420
Cristóvão AM, Candeias AA, Verdasca JL (2020) Development of Socio-Emotional and Creative Skills in Primary Education: Teachers’ Perceptions About the Gulbenkian XXI School Learning Communities Project. Front Educ 4:160. 10.3389/feduc.2019.00160
Cuartas J, McCoy DC, Rey-Guerra C, Britto PR, Beatriz E, Salhi C (2019) Early childhood exposure to non-violent discipline and physical and psychological aggression in low- and middle- income countries: National, regional, and global prevalence estimates. Child Abuse Negl 92:93–105. 10.1016/j.chiabu.2019.03.021
Debata I, Ranganath TS, Priya KJ, Tejas J (2023) A cross-sectional study of anthropometry and immunization coverage of Anganwadi children in a rural area of Karnataka. J Family Med Prim Care 12(8):1679–1684. 10.4103/jfmpc.jfmpc_370_23
DeVellis RF (2016) Scale Development: Theory and Applications, 4th edn. Sage
Dickinson DK, Tabors PO (2001) Beginning literacy with language: Young children learning at home and school. Brookes Publishing Company
Dockrell J, Massonnié J, Ang L, Munoz-Chereau B, Rao SF, Kolopaking R, Heffernan C (2024) Measurement of cognition and profiling early learning environments in India, Indonesia and Senegal: a UKRI GCRF Action Against Stunting Hub protocol paper. Bmj Paediatrics Open 8(SUPPL1). 10.1136/bmjpo-2022-001685
Dreibelbis R, Freeman MC, Greene LE, Saboori S, Chase RP, Rheingans R (2014) Water, sanitation, and primary school attendance: A multi-level assessment of determinants of household reported absence in Kenya. Int J Educational Dev 41:92–99
Epstein AS, Gipson K (2018) Assessing the Early Childhood Environment Rating Scale-Revised (ECERS-R) for Use in Family Child Care Homes. Early Childhood Educ J 46(1):73–82. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10643-017-0872-1
Ganimian AJ, Muralidharan K, Walters CR (2024) Augmenting state capacity for child development Experimental evidence from India. J Polit Econ, 132(5), 000–000
Gershoff ET, Goodman GS, Miller-Perrin CL, Holden GW, Jackson Y, Kazdin AE (2018) The strength of the causal evidence against physical punishment of children and its implications for parents, psychologists, and policymakers. Am Psychol 73(5):626–638. https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0000321
Girolametto L, Weitzman E (2002) Responsiveness of child care providers in interactions with toddlers and preschoolers. Lang Speech Hear Serv Sch. 2002;33(4):268–281. 10.1044/0161-1461(2002/022). PMID: 27764500
Girolametto L, Weitzman E (2007) Promoting peer interaction skills - Professional development for early childhood educators and preschool teachers. Top Lang Disorders 27(2):93–110
Gordon RA, Fujimoto K, Kaestner R, Korenman S, Abner K (2013) An Assessment of the Validity of the ECERS-R With Implications for Measures of Child Care Quality and Relations to Child Development. Dev Psychol 49(1):146–160. 10.1037/a0027899
Grolig L, Cohrdes C, Tiffin-Richards SP, Schroeder S (2020) Narrative dialogic reading with wordless picture books: A cluster-randomized intervention study. Early Child Res Q 51:191–203
Harms T, Clifford R, Cryer D (2015) Early Childhood Environment Rating Scale, 3rd edn. Teachers College, New York, NY
Hulme C, Snowling MJ, West G, Lervag A, Melby-Lervag M (2020) Children's Language Skills Can Be Improved: Lessons From Psychological Science for Educational Policy. Curr Dir Psychol Sci 29(4):372–377. 10.1177/0963721420923684
Jain A, Walker DM, Avula R, Diamond-Smith N, Gopalakrishnan L, Menon P, Fernald LCH (2020) Anganwadi worker time use in Madhya Pradesh, India: a cross-sectional study. BMC Health Serv Res 20(1). 10.1186/s12913-020-05857-4
Justice LM, Pullen PC (2003) Promising interventions for promoting emergent literacy skills: Three evidence-based approaches. Top Early Child Special Educ 23(3):99–113
Kim J, Womack S (2021) Teachers' Perceptions and Practices of Integrating Technology into Early Childhood Classrooms: A Systematic Review. Educational Technol Soc 24(1):213–228
Malik A, Bhilwar M, Rustagi N, Taneja DK (2015) An assessment of facilities and services at Anganwadi centers under the Integrated Child Development Service scheme in Northeast District of Delhi, India. Int J Qual Health Care 27(3):201–206. 10.1093/intqhc/mzv028
Melhuish E, Ereky-Stevens K, Petrogiannis K, Ariescu A, Penderi E, Rentzou K (2015) Curriculum Quality Analysis and Impact Review of European Early Childhood Education and Care (ECEC). CARE project; D4.1: A review of research on the effects of early childhood education and care (ECEC) upon child development
Mol SE, Bus AG, De Jong MT (2009) Interactive book reading in early education: A tool to stimulate print knowledge as well as oral language. Rev Educ Res 79(2):979–1007
Neuman SB, Celano D (2001) Access to print in low-income and middle-income communities: An ecological study of four neighborhoods. Reading Res Q 36(1):8–26
Pellegrino M, Luisa M, Scopesi A (1990) Structure and function of baby talk in a day-care centre. J Child Lang 17(1):101–114. 10.1017/S030500090001312X
Perlman M, Falenchuk O, Fletcher B, McMullen E, Beyene J, Shah PS (2016) A Systematic Review and Meta- Analysis of a Measure of Staff/Child Interaction Quality (the Classroom Assessment Scoring System) in Early Childhood Education and Care Settings and Child Outcomes. PLoS ONE 11(12):e0167660. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0167660
Pesco D, Gagné A (2017) Scaffolding narrative skills: A meta-analysis of instruction in early childhood settings. Early Educ Dev 28(7):773–793
Pratik K, Deshpande SR, Domple VK (2021) Assessment of Learning and Development of Children Aged 4–5 Years Attending Anganwadi at Urban Field Practice Area -A Cross Sectional Study. (2021). Indian Journal of Public Health Research & Development, 13(1), 249–256. https://doi.org/10.37506/ijphrd.v13i1.17359
Raikes, Koziol N, Davis D, Burton A (2020) Measuring quality of preprimary education in sub-Saharan Africa: Evaluation of the Measuring Early Learning Environments scale. Early Child Res Q 53:571–585. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2020.06.001
Rao N, Ranganathan N, Kaur R, Mukhopadhayay R (2021) Fostering equitable access to quality preschool education in India: challenges and opportunities. Int J Child Care Educ Policy 15. 10.1186/s40723-021-00086-6
Rouse CE, Brooks-Gunn J, McLanahan S (2005) Introducing the Issue. Future Child 15(1):5–14. https://doi.org/10.1353/foc.2005.0010
Sharma P, Kaur R (2022) Fun worksheets for preschool learning. Learning Curve (12). pp. 21–27. ISSN 2582 – 1644
Somani A, Shah SA, Patel M, Parmar PC (2023) A study to compare the performance of anganwadi workers in owned and rented anganwadi centers in a district of the western part of India. J Family Med Prim Care 12(10):2255–2259. 10.4103/jfmpc.jfmpc_2299_22
Turnbull KP, Anthony AB, Justice L, Bowles R (2009) Preschoolers' exposure to language stimulation in classrooms serving at-risk children: The contribution of group size and activity context. Early Educ Dev 20(1):53–79
UNESCO, United Nations Children’s Fund, Bank W, Institution B, Center for Universal Education (2017). Overview: MELQO: Measuring Early Learning Quality and Outcomes. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000248053
Women Development and Child Welfare Department Privacy Policy website (no date) https://wdcw.tg.nic.in/Pre_School_Education.html
Yoshikawa H, Wuermli AJ, Raikes A, Kim S, Kabay SB (2018) Toward High-Quality Early Childhood Development Programs and Policies at National Scale: Directions for Research in Global Contexts. Social Policy Rep 31(1):1–36. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2379-3988.2018.tb00091.x
Zucker TA, Cabell SQ, Justice LM, Pentimonti JM, Kaderavek JN (2013) The role of frequent, interactive prekindergarten shared reading in the longitudinal development of language and literacy skills. Dev Psychol 49(8):1425

Full details are available from Dr Fernandes Rao
Alphas between .60 and .69 are regarded as uncertain and below .59 as unacceptable.

The authors declare no competing interests.

IndiaMeleAppendices.docx
Appendices

Download PDF

Version 1

posted

You are reading this latest preprint version

Capturing Early Learning Environments in Urban Anganwadis

Status:

Version 1

Abstract

Figures

Introduction

Methods

Results

Discussion

Limitations

Conclusions and Implications

References

Footnotes

Additional Declarations

Supplementary Files

Status:

Version 1