Are Campus Child Development Laboratories Obsolete?

Students completed two sets of semantic differentials created for the study. The first set of scales was completed on the first day of class, prior to any exposure to the child development laboratory. The second set of scales was completed during the final examination period, after all students had completed the fifteen week course.

Each semantic scale consisted of fifteen adjectives relating to infants. Adjectives were drawn from qualitative analysis of journals kept by previous cohorts during the same clinical experience. The first scale was designed to assess students' attitudes towards infants, and included adjectives such as interesting/dull and responsive/unresponsive (see Appendix A). The second scale was designed to assess students' sense of competence as infant caregivers, and included adjectives such as anxious/not anxious and knowledgeable/not knowledgeable (Appendix B). All students completed Scale 1 (Infant Attitudes) first, followed by Scale 2 (Self-Competence) at each administration. The fifteen items on each scale were coded using a 7-point likert system, with a lower score indicating more favorable attitudes.

Results

Reliability analysis indicated a=.70 for Scale 1 (Infant Attitudes) and a=.85 for Scale 2 (Self Competence). Scores for the hands-on group decreased from M=33.7 (range 19-50, scale range 7-105) to M=29.7 (range 21-41)on Infant Attitudes. Scores for the observation group decreased from M=34.1 (range 24-55) to M=31.0 (range 23-60) on Infant Attitudes. On the Self-Competence Scale, scores for the hands-on group decreased from M=34 (range 1563) to M=33.9 (range 17-62), and scores for the observation group decreased from M=30.9 (range 19-57) to M=30.5 (range 19-56).

Paired t-tests indicated a significant difference for the hands-on group between Time 1 and Time 2 on Infant Attitudes (t (18)=3.46, p [is less than] .01). Infant Attitudes did not differ significantly between Time 1 and Time 2 for the observation group ([(22)=1.83, p [is greater than] .05). Analysis of both groups on the Self Competence Scale indicated no significant difference for either group [(t(18)=.52, p [is greater than] .05) for the hands-on group and t(22)=1.75, p [is greater than] .05 for the observation group)]. Analysis of individual items indicated a trend for the hands-on group to rate infants as more willful [t(18)=4.01, p [is less than] .01)] and more capable [t(18)=2.90, p [is less than] .01)] over time. Additionally, analysis indicated a trend for the observation group to rate infants as easier over time [t(22)=2.40, p [is less than] .05)].

Discussion

Results from this study suggest that hands-on training in the child development laboratory is an effective means of training students enrolled in early childhood education and child development. Specifically, the data support the premise that hands-on experience with infants and toddlers helps students develop more positive attitudes towards them. In the present study, attitudes of students enrolled in the hands-on section became more favorable, while attitudes of the group who observed only did not change significantly.