4.7 Review

Measuring the Quality of Early Childhood Education in Low- and Middle-Income Countries

Journal

FRONTIERS IN PSYCHOLOGY
Volume 12, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.774740

Keywords

early childhood education; low- and middle-income countries; psychometrics; process quality; measurement

Funding

  1. NAEd/Spencer Postdoctoral Fellowship to SC and SW

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Access to early childhood education is increasing in low- and middle-income countries, but quality often lacks attention. Observation tools for measuring ECE quality are mostly developed in high-income countries and may not be suitable for LMICs. Replication of constructs and predictive ability of ECE quality measures from high-income countries to LMICs are limited, indicating the need for further research on building a stronger knowledge base globally.
Young children's access to early childhood education (ECE) is increasing in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), though often without attention to service quality. Monitoring quality requires classroom observations, but most observation tools available were developed in high-income western countries. In this article, we examine key issues in measuring ECE quality in LMICs and consider challenges and opportunities in balancing theoretical grounding, cultural- and contextual-adaptation, and empirical rigor. We then review the literature on observed classroom quality in LMICs, focusing on process quality. We find limited evidence that the constructs identified in high-income countries replicate in LMICs. Further, the very limited evidence that ECE quality measures used in LMICs predict child outcomes is almost exclusively cross-sectional and associations are mixed. We conclude by discussing how future research can build a stronger knowledge base about ECE quality and child development globally.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available