Cogent Education

ISSN: (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/oaed20

Toddler and preschool teachers’ beliefs and

perceptions about the use of developmentally
appropriate practice

June Cade, Francis Wardle & Jan Otter

To cite this article: June Cade, Francis Wardle & Jan Otter (2022) Toddler and preschool
teachers’ beliefs and perceptions about the use of developmentally appropriate practice,
Cogent Education, 9:1, 2018908, DOI: 10.1080/2331186X.2021.2018908

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2021.2018908

© 2022 The Author(s). This open access

article is distributed under a Creative
Commons Attribution (CC-BY) 4.0 license.

Published online: 16 Jan 2022.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 4635

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Citing articles: 1 View citing articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=oaed20
Cade et al., Cogent Education (2022), 9: 2018908
https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2021.2018908

PROFESSIONAL EDUCATION & TRAINING | RESEARCH ARTICLE

Received 22 April 2021
Accepted 4 December 2021
*Corresponding author: June Cade,
College of Doctoral Studies, Center
for Educational and Instructional
Technology Research, University of
Phoenix, Phoenix, Arizona, USA
E-mail: jcade13@email.phoenix.edu
Reviewing editor:
Ramanathan Subramaniam,
Nanyang Technological University
National Institute of Education,
SINGAPORE
Additional information is available at
the end of the article
Toddler and preschool teachers’ beliefs and
perceptions about the use of developmentally
appropriate practice
June Cade1*, Francis Wardle and Jan Otter1
Abstract: A developmentally appropriate learning environment provides learning
experiences that support whole child development as young children are provided
with opportunities to engage in meaningful experiences that promote inquiry,
exploration, problem solving, and discovery. The intent of developmentally appro­
priate practice (DAP) is shifting the K–12 pushdown curriculum in early childhood
education (ECE) to a child-centered approach to learning. Qualification in fields
unrelated to ECE might result in a lack of knowledge about child growth and
development and in childcare centers functioning like K–12 programs. The purpose
of this qualitative explanatory multi-case study was to examine toddler and pre­
school teachers’ beliefs and perceptions about the use of DAP within toddler and
preschool classrooms. Data were collected from a purposeful sample of 16 teachers
on their beliefs and perceptions about classroom practices and the forces that
shape such practices in toddler and preschool classrooms. Findings suggest that
a disturbing amount of toddler and preschool teachers endorsed a K–12 pushdown
curriculum with the belief that young children should be able to sit and complete
worksheets.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR PUBLIC INTEREST STATEMENT

Dr. June Cade, EdD is a consultant working with
private childcare centers in designing
a stimulating learning environment. She is
a member of the Center for Educational and
Instructional Technology Research at the
University of Phoenix. Her research interest
includes early childhood theory and child growth
and development. Dr. Francis Wardle, PhD tea­
ches for the University of Phoenix and the Early
Childhood Department at Red Rocks Community
College. His research interests include racial
identity development in young children, interna­
tional education, developmental needs of young
June Cade children in all domains, and expectations, and
instructions used with young children. Dr. Jan
Otter, PhD is an associate faculty member in the
College of Doctoral Studies at the University of
Phoenix. She is a member of the Center for
Educational and Instructional Technology
Research. Research interests include STEM edu­
cation, Preschool–12 curriculum and instruction,
gifted education, educational leadership, and
mentoring doctoral students.
This research study explores the beliefs of tod­
dler and preschool teachers regarding how they
care for and teach young children. The
researchers were interested in the degree to
which their beliefs support developmentally
appropriate practice (DAP) and the extent to
which their classroom practices adopted a K-12
approach to working with young children
(teaching specific academic skills in isolation,
direct instruction, and solitary, passive learning).
DAP focuses on whole-child development, learn­
ing through play, and matching child-centered
expectations to each child’s overall development.
Results indicated that a disproportionate number
of the teachers believed in and practiced a K-12
approach to the care and education of young
children. This research study is significant in
examining the match between the developmen­
tal needs of young children and how we care for
and educate them. It addresses the broader
issue of the downward trajectory of K-12 curri­
cula and expectations in many infant and toddler
programs.

© 2022 The Author(s). This open access article is distributed under a Creative Commons
Attribution (CC-BY) 4.0 license.

Page 1 of 25
Cade et al., Cogent Education (2022), 9: 2018908
https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2021.2018908

Subjects: Educational Research; Philosophy of Education; Childhood; Early Childhood;

Classroom Practice; Early Years;; Education Policy & Politics; Philosophy

Keywords: Developmentally appropriate practice; child development; toddler and

preschool teachers’ beliefs; early childhood education curriculum; early childhood
education staff qualifications; K–12 pushdown curriculum

1. Introduction
The early childhood years are critical times in young children’s lives because neurological networks
are forming (Blakemore & Frith, 2005; Klingberg, 2013; Rushton et al., 2010) and the foundation for
future cognitive, language, social, emotional, and physical development is being laid. The early
childhood years are designated as birth to age 8 (Copple & Bredekamp, 2009). Young toddlers (16–
26 months) are developing self-awareness, language skills, physical control, and emotional reg­
ulation. Older toddlers (24–35 months) are learning to play together but are not yet able to sit still,
engage in group work, or focus on a task for any extended period of time (Copple & Bredekamp,
2009; New Jersey Council for Young Children, 2013; Washington, 2013). Preschool children (3–
5 years) are developing language skills, physical control, self-awareness, emotional regulation, and
learning through exploration but still require regular movement opportunities and whole-child
learning (Washington, 2013).

The National Association for the Education of Young Children’s (National Association for the
Education of Young Children, 2009, 2020) position statement outlines best classroom practices
that can help teachers of young children understand how to implement DAP in their classrooms.
National Association for the Education of Young Children (2020) position statement highlights the
importance of children actively engaging in exploration and inquiry-based learning as they learn
through play. This is an essential approach for supporting whole child (socially, emotionally,
physically, language, and cognitive) development. The foundation for DAP is based on constructi­
vism and the child-centered approach to learning (Hegde & Cassidy, 2009; Pyle & DeLuca, 2013).
With this approach, teachers function as facilitators, capitalizing on teachable moments and
considering each child’s interests and abilities to guide children’s learning. Conceptualizing tea­
chers’ use of DAP in the classroom is embedded in their beliefs, perceptions, and qualifications.

2. DAP in early childhood education

The 1987 guidelines for DAP were published as a direct reaction to the increasing tendency for
teacher-imposed academic instruction in ECE programs in the U.S. (Copple & Bredekamp, 2009).
Pressure from a K–12 pushdown curriculum originating from No Child Left Behind (NCLB) resulted
in the growing trend towards academic expectations in ECE programs (Bagnato & Ho, 2006;
Gallant, 2009). The intent was to shift the K–12 push-down curriculum in ECE programs to a child-
centered approach based on research that supports the child-centered approach to learning (Abu
Taleb, 2013; Copple & Bredekamp, 2009). National Association for the Education of Young
Children’s (2020) updated statement on DAP underscores the implementation of developmentally
appropriate learning experiences that advance high-quality early learning for young children that
incorporates a standard-based approach to learning.

Based on the leading theorists of the field and current research on brain development about young
children and how they grow, develop, and learn, DAP takes into consideration what is known about
each individual child from a socio-cultural and holistic perspective in order to design classroom
practices that address each child’s individual developmental needs (Copple & Bredekamp, 2009;
National Association for the Education of Young Children, 2020). According to the DAP document,
the first step in engaging in DAP when working with and teaching young children is awareness of
children’s development and that each child enters the classroom with individual differences

Page 2 of 25
Cade et al., Cogent Education (2022), 9: 2018908
https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2021.2018908

(Bredekamp, 2010). Therefore, a one-size-fits-all approach to curriculum and instruction is

inappropriate.

A DAP play-based social learning environment provides learning experiences that support whole
child development as children are provided with opportunities to engage in everyday experiences
that promote critical brain development, social and emotional development, inquiry, exploration,
problem solving, and discovery (Jechura et al., 2016). Experiences that promote exploration and
discovery help with the production of bio-chemical changes in the brain thus aiding in synaptic
growth (Klingberg, 2013), which helps children make connections to their learning experiences as
they develop skills that help them make sense of the world around them.

Bredekamp (2010) highlighted an essential basis for understanding the purpose of DAP: the
importance of establishing age appropriate expectations that encourage teachers to engage in
intentional teaching. Teachers should establish appropriate goals for individual children, observe
children’s learning, and modify classroom practices. Researchers have pointed out that due to
recent educational shifts, new teacher qualification, and adaptation to a standard-based approach
to early childhood curriculum, DAP is coming under increased scrutiny and outright rejection
(Bassok et al., 2016; Pyle & DeLuca, 2013). The current trend in the early childhood field in the
U.S. is a downward extension of the K–12 approach to curriculum, instruction, assessment, and
support of student learning (Bagnato & Ho, 2006; Graue et al., 2014). Using this approach can be
harmful to children’s social and emotional development and inhibit their overall cognitive devel­
opment and learning (Donaldson, 2019).

3. Conceptual framework
The framework for DAP is a broad overarching concept that is grounded in research on child
growth and development and the theoretical contributions of early childhood pioneers such as
Jean Piaget and Lev Vygotsky (Copple & Bredekamp, 2009). A fundamental variation in theoretical
ideology is that Piaget argued that development drives learning, whereas Vygotsky argued that
learning drives development (Fowler, 2017; Semmar & Al-Thani, 2015). Although Piaget and
Vygotsky embraced different viewpoints, their contributions are instrumental in helping us under­
stand young children’s learning.

Piaget’s main focus was in studying cognitive development of children (Simatwa, 2010). Piaget’s
work in studying cognitive development lead to his theory that claims children create their own reality.
It also contributes to the belief that children’s interactions with the social and physical environment
result in children constructing their own understanding of the world around them (Mooney, 2013;
Simatwa, 2010; Vaksalla & Hodshire, 2013). Piaget described children as moving through four inter­
related stages of cognitive development: (a) sensorimotor stage (birth to 2 years); (b) preoperational
stage (2 years to 7 years); (c) concrete operational stage (7 years to 11 years); and (d) formal
operational stage (11 years and beyond; Ginsburg & Opper, 1988; Vaksalla & Hodshire, 2013).

As children actively interact with their social and physical environment, they create schemes or
structures that change continually as children organize their thinking and intellectually make adap­
tations (Piaget & Inhelder, 1969). Children create these mental schemas by way of assimilation (using
prior knowledge to make meaningful connections), accommodation (using existing knowledge to
alter thinking), and equilibrium (exhibiting a change in perception; S. Kim, 2015; Vaksalla & Hodshire,
2013). Piaget’s theory of cognitive development highlights the constructivist approach to learning in
which teachers guide children’s cognitive processing as they actively interact with the social and
physical environment rather than provide direct instruction (Mooney, 2013).

Page 3 of 25
Cade et al., Cogent Education (2022), 9: 2018908
https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2021.2018908

Vygotsky’s groundbreaking work in social learning theory is pivotal in providing knowledge about
the role that social interaction and language plays in understanding children’s learning (Cole et al.,
1978; Kirch, 2014; Mahn, 1999; Semmar & Al-Thani, 2015). Piaget believed they were intercon­
nected, but concepts came first, then labels. Vygotsky believed that knowledge is constructed by
way of socio-cultural interaction with peers and adults as expressed through language (Berk &
Winsler, 1995; Mooney, 2013; Vaksalla & Hodshire, 2013). Like Piaget, Vygotsky believed in the
notion that children are active participants in knowledge construction (Hedges, 2012; Nilsson et al.,
2017; Piaget, 1950; Semmar & Al-Thani, 2015).

While Piaget placed an emphasis on the interrelationship between children and their environment
and asserted that children’s cognitive development and learning consist of four interrelated stages of
development (Ginsburg & Opper, 1988; Hebe, 2017; Ilias & Esa, 2017; Simatwa, 2010) and postulated
that abstract thinking differentiates older children from younger (Kirch, 2014), Vygotsky accentuated
another approach to looking at children’s cognitive development and learning whereby children’s
social experiences and an emphasis on language is the context in which learning occurs (Berk &
Winsler, 1995; Hebe, 2017; Kirch, 2014). Four of Vygotsky’s most valuable contributions are the
concepts of the zone of proximal development (ZPD), scaffolding, private speech, and language in
the context of learning (Bodrova & Leong, 2007; Hedges, 2012; Vaksalla & Hodshire, 2013).

Research in the field of neuroscience underscores the contributions of Piaget’s position on the
relationship between children and the learning environment and Vygotsky’s position on social inter­
action (Liu & Chaing, 2014; Mayer, 2017; Rushton et al., 2010). Children’s brains are physically altered as
they explore their environment and experience learning (Blakemore & Frith, 2005; Frey & Fisher, 2010;
Klingberg, 2013). A stimulating learning environment that creates an intrinsic motivation for explora­
tion, discovery, and positive emotional experiences is an essential component for neural-development
and functioning (Glaser & Barlow, 2014; Klingberg, 2013; Rushton et al., 2010). As children are afforded
the opportunity to positively explore and experience a stimulating environment, neurons fire which
increases the number and length of dendrites, thus altering the physical architecture of the brain (Frey
& Fisher, 2010; Klingberg, 2013; Medina, 2008; Schachl, 2016). A critical component to a stimulating
and engaging environment is adult-child social interaction where adults can provide temporary support
to children based on their ZPD so they can fully engage in their learning experiences, develop skills, and
acquire independence (Hohnen & Murphy, 2016; Malik & Wiseman, 2017).

A central component of DAP is the importance of young children learning through a child-
centered play-based approach (Copple & Bredekamp, 2009; National Association for the
Education of Young Children, 2020). Early childhood educators are faced with the challenge of
incorporating a DAP child-centered play-based approach to learning while adhering to the pressure
for inappropriate academic achievement (Pyle & Bigelow, 2015). Such challenges are triggered by
ECE teacher’s beliefs and perceptions about how children learn, professional development training,
teacher qualification, and the program’s curriculum (Abu-Jaber et al., 2010). Research conducted
by Abu-Jaber et al. (2010) examined the beliefs of Jordanian kindergarten teachers about the use
of DAP. Although results suggested that ECE teachers’ beliefs were based on DAP with the
exception of a reciprocal relationship with parents, results also indicated that ECE teachers also
implemented developmentally inappropriate (DIP) classroom practices.

4. Literature review
Curricular demands stemming from NCLB and accountability have transformed the landscape of ECE
programs in the U.S. resulting in a sense of cognitive dissonance between beliefs about DAP and
curricular demands originating from the pressure for evidence of academic achievement as expected
in NCLB (Rushton & Juola-Rushton, 2008). Consequently, researchers have studied the link between
teachers’ beliefs and DAP (Han & Neuharth-Pritchett, 2010; Hegde & Cassidy, 2009; H. K. Kim, 2011;

Page 4 of 25
Cade et al., Cogent Education (2022), 9: 2018908
https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2021.2018908

McMullen, 1999). Pyle and Bigelow (2015) and Lynch (2015) examined the perceptions of kindergar­
ten teachers about integrating a child-centered play-based approach to learning in kindergarten.

Classroom practices were influenced by curricular standards and academic pressure resulting in
teacher-directed instruction. Results from Pyle and Bigelow’s (2015) research study underscored the
conflict of engaging in teacher-directed practices based on the one-size-fits-all approach and a play-
based approach to learning. The pressure for evidence of academic achievement in young children
often translates into early childhood educators abandoning DAP in favor of DIP (Lynch, 2015). Lynch
(2015) underscored that constraints in DAP in the classroom was influenced by administrators who
lacked knowledge about child growth and development and who maintained a belief that preschool
is the first rung on the K–12 curriculum ladder. To maintain this belief, some early childhood centers
shifted their focus to employing teachers with a bachelor’s or master’s degree in a K–12 related
education field as a means of addressing student achievement and learning (Bueno et al., 2010);
however, such a shift does not guarantee positive child outcomes (Han & Neuharth-Pritchett, 2010)
and often dilutes a DAP approach to development and learning in these programs.

Although researchers have examined ECE teachers’ beliefs and perceptions about DAP (Alford
et al., 2016; Buettner et al., 2016; Lynch, 2015; Pyle & Bigelow, 2015), exploring the beliefs and
perceptions of ECE teachers working in childcare centers with young children under 6 years of age
is not sufficiently documented. Research pertaining to the beliefs and perceptions of toddler and
preschool teachers can provide insight into what strategies they use and why they use those
strategies. The inclusion of toddler and preschool teachers in this study can add to the existing
body of knowledge. Our research study builds on the recommendations of Bassok et al. (2016) and
Pyle and Bigelow (2015) who found that more research needs to be conducted to further explore
the K–12 push-down curriculum and the use of DAP.

4.1. Early care and learning in New Jersey

The State of New Jersey Department of Children and Families Office of Licensing regulates class­
room practices. Classroom practices highlight whole child development; cultural responsiveness;
and children’s needs, abilities, and interests. Regulations are further characterized by classroom
activities that focus on children’s age and developmental level; free choice; accessibility to materi­
als; adequate time and space for classroom activities; and classroom activities that promote
exploration, discovery, collaboration, social competence, and positive self-identity (State of New
Jersey Department of Children and Families, 2017).

Early care and learning in New Jersey covers a range of services within diverse settings that are
provided to young children under the age of 6. Childcare centers in the state of New Jersey that
care for six or more children under 13 years of age for less than 24 hours a day must be licensed
and regulated by the Department of Children and Families Office of Licensing (State of New Jersey
Department of Children and Families, 2017). In 2017, there were approximately 3,965 licensed
childcare centers with a capacity of 361,680 children in New Jersey (Advocates for Children of New
Jersey, 2019). Licensed childcare centers serve a minimum of six children and must adhere to state
licensing requirements. Some licensing regulations pertain to classroom activities and qualifica­
tions for toddler and preschool teachers.

4.1.1. Classroom activities

Children are active learners and seek to explore the nature of cause and effect; therefore, they
should be active participants in their learning experiences (Dewey, 1990; Piaget, 1952; Ulrich,
2016). Classroom environments require space and materials where children can freely move and
actively engage in playful learning activities based on their interests (Nilsson et al., 2017), over­
come challenges, and gain learning experiences based on process as opposed to the end product

Page 5 of 25
Cade et al., Cogent Education (2022), 9: 2018908
https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2021.2018908

(Berk & Winsler, 1995; Copple & Bredekamp, 2009; Hart et al., 1997). Classroom curriculum should
be individualized, culturally responsive, centered on the interests of children and their develop­
mental level, and encourage social interaction and peer learning (Bodrova & Leong, 2007;
Bredekamp, 2010; Piaget & Inhelder, 1969). An individualized approach provides the opportunity
for critical thinking, the expression of ideas through creativity and imagination, development of
skills through scaffolding based on a child’s ZPD, and the engagement in multiple experiences that
create neurological networks and develop emotional regulation (Hohnen & Murphy, 2016; Rushton
et al., 2010).

4.1.2. Qualification requirements

As a result of the current trend of requiring that early childhood educators hold a bachelor’s or
master’s degree (Bueno et al., 2010), the State of New Jersey Department of Children and Families
Office of Licensing shifted qualifications for ECE teachers working in a childcare center to include that
ECE teachers can hold a master’s or bachelor’s degree in fields not related to early childhood
education. Before this change, the state requirement for ECE teachers was a high school diploma
and a child development associate (CDA) credential. Allowing a bachelor’s or master’s degree in any
field other than early childhood education can result in toddler and preschool teachers who lack
knowledge about child growth and development and DAP and who use inappropriate approaches to
caring for and educating young children (Bassok et al., 2016; Buettner et al., 2016; Zambo, 2008).

5. Purpose of the study

This study aimed to examine the extent to which classroom practices were developmentally
appropriate in state licensed toddler and preschool classrooms in New Jersey. The researchers
were interested in examining the extent to which toddler and preschool teachers’ classroom
practices reflect current views of best practices in the care and education of young children. The
following questions guided the research study:

● What do toddler and preschool teachers believe their roles are within toddler and preschool
classrooms?
● What do toddler and preschool teachers know and perceive about the application of devel­
opmentally appropriate practice in toddler and preschool classrooms?
● What strategies do toddler and preschool teachers use to implement developmentally appro­
priate practice in their classrooms?

5.1. Significance of the study

This study is significant because we sought to explore and explain whether toddler and preschool
teachers implemented the state’s guidelines for DAP. Results of the study can provide useful data to
help in bridging the gap between early childhood theories and research and classroom practices. This
can help in planning developmentally appropriate activities for young children. The study can aid
educational leaders and stakeholders in New Jersey and beyond understand the negative impact that
educational changes in grades K–12 have had on the childcare community. Results can be useful in
providing more oversight to childcare centers due to fact that toddler and preschool teachers can
hold a bachelor’s or master’s degree in fields unrelated to early childhood education.

6. Methodology and design

A recruitment letter was emailed to 15 childcare centers in northern New Jersey from a public
listing of licensed childcare centers. Three centers agreed to participate in the study. The research­
ers had no prior relationships or knowledge about the three childcare centers that agreed to
participate. A total of 16 teachers agreed to participate from the three childcare centers.
Participants were not compensated.

Page 6 of 25
Cade et al., Cogent Education (2022), 9: 2018908
https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2021.2018908

The researchers used a qualitative case study design, which included semi-structured one-on-
one interviews, a focus group, and collection of documentation (lesson plans, pictures of partici­
pants’ classrooms, and children’s work samples). A qualitative case study provided the opportunity
to obtain rich in-depth data for the purpose of exploring and explaining to what extent classroom
practices were developmentally appropriate in toddler and preschool classrooms. Semi-structured
interviews provided the opportunity for teachers to respond to open-ended questions for the
purpose of gathering data on teachers’ beliefs and perceptions (Cohen et al., 2007; Merriam, 2009).

6.1. Informed consent

ECE teachers were informed about the purpose of the study, study details, the benefits of the study,
that participation was voluntary, that there is no intended harm, and that they can withdraw at any
time without penalty (Bogdam & Bikken, 2007; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Teachers were informed
about the time commitment required to complete the one-on-one interviews and focus group, that
all information would be kept confidential, and that they were required to read and sign the informed
consent as ethically required (Greener, 2011; Thomas, 2015). Teachers were required to submit
informed consent forms prior to their participation and data collection. Prior to data collection, this
research received IRB approval from the University of Phoenix. Teachers who participated chose
whether they wanted to participate in one-on-one interviews or the focus group.

Two teachers from childcare center A and five teachers from childcare center B chose to participate
in the one-on-one interview for a total of seven participants. The nine teachers from childcare center
C all chose to participate in the focus group. No classroom observations were conducted. During the
one-on-one interviews and focus group interview, participants provided photographs of their class­
rooms, copies of lesson plans, and copies of children’s work samples with no identifying markers.
Toddler and preschool teachers who were recruited met the State of New Jersey Department of
Children and Families Office of Licensing qualifications for working in a childcare center.

6.2. Participants
Toddler and preschool teachers for the study came from three licensed childcare centers located in
culturally diverse cities in the state of New Jersey. The group of participants included three
supervising head teachers, four toddler teachers, four teachers of three-year-olds, and five tea­
chers of four-year-olds for a total of 16 teachers from three different childcare centers. Each
teacher who participated worked with young children between the ages of 2 and 5 years old. There
were two participants from Center A, five from Center B, and nine from Center C.

6.3. Data collection

The purpose of this study was to examine toddler and preschool teachers’ perceptions about the
use of DAP within their classrooms. Data were gathered through in-depth semi-structured one-on-
one interviews; a focus group; and collection of lesson plans, children’s work samples, and photo­
graphs of toddler and preschool classrooms. Semi-structured one-on-one interviews with toddler
and preschool teachers were approximately 60 minutes in length, and the focus group was
approximately 75 minutes in length. The same questions were used with both groups. A total of
16 teachers from three childcare centers participated in the study: the seven who participated in
the one-on-one interviews were from Centers A and B and the nine who participated in the focus
group were from Center C.

6.4. Data analysis

The constant comparative method was used to compare classroom photographs against the Early
Childhood Environmental Rating Scale (ECERS-3; Harms et al., 2015) and the Infant/Toddler
Environmental Rating Scale (ITERS-R; Harms et al., 2006) to answer the research questions and
examine strategies that toddler and preschool teachers used in their classrooms. The constant

Page 7 of 25
Cade et al., Cogent Education (2022), 9: 2018908
https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2021.2018908

comparative method is a process of gathering and sorting data into categories to determine
similarities and differences (Creswell, 2012; Lodico et al., 2010). Children’s work samples, lesson
plans, and classroom photographs were gathered, sorted, and categorized in order to determine
similarities and differences. Photographs of the classroom learning environments and children’s
work samples were constantly compared against the guidelines in the two subscales, room
arrangement and art, in the Early Childhood Environmental Rating Scale (ECERS-3; Harms et al.,
2015) and the Infant/Toddler Environmental Rating Scale (ITERS-R; Harms et al., 2006). Lesson
plans were compared against two of five guidelines for DAP as described in National Association
for the Education of Young Children’s (2009) position statement: (a) teaching to enhance devel­
opment and learning and (b) planning curriculum to achieve important goals (Copple &
Bredekamp, 2009).

To further answer the questions, the following were investigated: how toddler and preschool
teachers perceive their roles in the classroom, how toddler and preschool teachers integrate the
theoretical ideology of early childhood pioneers and classroom practice, what toddler and pre­
school teachers’ beliefs and perceptions are about the use of DAP, and why toddler and preschool
teachers do what they do. Open and axial coding was used in order to descriptively analyze and
uncover patterns of regularities in comments. Columns of quotes were assigned categories and
those categories were further assigned supporting themes that interpreted and explained toddler
and preschool teachers’ beliefs and perceptions about the use of DAP and the extent to which
teaching strategies were developmentally appropriate within toddler and preschool classrooms.
Table 1 shows a summary of codes, categories, and themes based on the research questions.

7. Results
The study aimed to examine the extent to which classroom practices were developmentally
appropriate in state licensed childcare centers, specifically toddler and preschool classrooms in
New Jersey. Data analysis led to three themes: the schooling approach, why toddler and preschool
teachers do what they do, and qualifications, knowledge, and training. Toddler and preschool
teachers shared their beliefs and perceptions about their role within the classroom and their use of
DAP in their classrooms. Findings revealed that classroom practices were based on the childcare
program’s curriculum. Two of the three childcare centers used a traditional K–12 pushdown
approach to classroom practices while the other center used a more DAP curriculum. Findings
also revealed that of the 16 teachers, seven had no knowledge about the theoretical foundations
of DAP or about early childhood pioneers such as Jean Piaget and Lev Vygotsky. Responses from all
participants in the study perceived their childcare centers as school highlighting the connection
between early care and learning and the K–12 school system (Atchion etal., 2014) rather than
a childcare center that is focused on the care and development of the young child (State of New
Jersey Department of Children and Families, 2017).

7.1. The schooling approach

The intent of Research Question 1 was to obtain an in-depth understanding of how toddler and
preschool teachers perceive their roles in the classroom. Although all 16 teachers perceived their
early childhood program as school, classroom practices varied. Teachers were asked to explain what
they believed their roles were within the classroom. Of the 16 teachers, seven believed that their role
in the classroom was to prepare young children for kindergarten using a K–12 pushdown curriculum.
Susan, a preschool teacher of 4-year olds, illustrated this view of her role in the classroom. She
explicitly communicated the academic nature of her classroom practices by stating:

So, my role is to help them progress and help them learn and get ready for kindergarten
’cause that’s where they’re going to be. So I have to make sure that they’re ready so that
way they won’t be behind once they get to another teacher.

Page 8 of 25
Cade et al., Cogent Education (2022), 9: 2018908
https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2021.2018908

Table 1. Summary of codes, categories, and themes

Research Questions Codes Categories Themes
What do toddler and -Creating lesson -Teacher-imposed The schooling approach
preschool teachers planning-Using practices-Lesson
believe their roles are a teacher- directed planning-Rote learning-
within toddler and instructional approach- K–12 push down
preschool classrooms? Teaching children based approach-Kindergarten
on their age-Preparing preparation-Observation-
children for kindergarten- Child-centered approach
Teaching young children
base on a subject-matter
app roach.-Observations-
Facilitation
What do toddler and -Classroom instruction -Teacher-imposed Why toddler and
preschool teachers know based on curriculum practices-Rote learning- preschool teachers do
and perceive about the expectation-Generalizing One-size-fits all what they do
application of instruction seen as approach-Program’s
developmentally developmentally curriculum-K-12 push
appropriate practice in appropriate practice down approach-Learning
toddler and preschool (DAP)-Perceiving through play-Facilitation
classrooms? a scripted curriculum as
DAP-Seatwork, rote
learning, and worksheets
perceived as DAP-Subject
matter approach based
on academics, rote
learning, and
memorization as DAP-
Child-guided approach as
DAP
What strategies do -Training from center -Qualifications relative to Qualifications,
toddler and preschool director-Professional ECE-Knowledge about knowledge, and training
teachers use to development-Self-taught early childhood theory-
implement -Internet searches- Practices influenced by
developmentally Pinterest.-Reggio training
appropriate practice in approach-Bank Street
their classrooms? Teacher’s College

Claire, a toddler teacher of 2-year olds, explained her role in the classroom. She explained how
classroom practices are based on the program’s curriculum by stating:

I think that for the 2-year olds, they should have a bit more free play but our program is very
academic. Our Pre-K curriculum is actually a kindergarten curriculum so my role is to prepare
them for kindergarten.

These seven teachers, who viewed their role as preparing young children for school, communi­
cated how program expectations are based on what children should know and be able to do and
the need for the teachers to follow a scripted curriculum. When asked about her understanding
about DAP, Susan explained her perceptions by stating:

When you say developmentally appropriate, I think of a curriculum, lesson plans, and also
worksheets from schoolwork that they can handle for their age group. We place them in
groups according to who we think they’ll pay attention more with according to who is on
their academic level.

Page 9 of 25
Cade et al., Cogent Education (2022), 9: 2018908
https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2021.2018908

They described DAP as a curriculum and lesson plans that are based on rote learning, memoriza­
tion, and a one-size-fits-all approach. They also described the importance of teaching first
and second grade subject-matter in their classrooms. Dee, a preschool teacher of 4-year olds,
perceived DAP from an academic platform. She explicitly communicated the academic nature of
her classroom practices as preparing preschool children for kindergarten by stating:

I teach them things that I know are taught in the upper grades. Like first and second grades.
We talked about vowels the other day. The 4-year olds, why not? Why not? You know
whether you digest it or not; that’s up to the individual. So that individual, who was able to,
got a reward. That individual, who wasn’t able at least somewhere in her or his brain, maybe
it’s locked in. So, I don’t mind educating a little bit beyond the so called developmentally
ready.

Joanne, a preschool teacher of 4-year olds, explained her perception of DAP by stating:

We are teaching the students at an age level that is appropriate for them where they can
learn and grow.

In contrast, nine of the 16 teachers did not follow a scripted curriculum and did not support
a teacher-directed one-size-fits-all approach to classroom practices. Those nine teachers commu­
nicated that they perceived their roles within toddler and preschool classrooms from the perspec­
tive of individual child observations and facilitation in order to determine children’s interests and
children’s developmental levels. Loleita, a preschool teacher of 4-year olds, perceived her role as
an observer and facilitator. She explained the nature of her classroom practices by stating:

When I think of what I do on a daily basis is that I’m an observer. So, I’m constantly
watching the children at work to see how they’re interacting socially and emotionally, to see
what they’re interested in, and where we might want to facilitate more, but constantly
listening, constantly watching. I feel that observing is a good word to describe what I’m
doing most of the day.

Sonia, a toddler teacher of 2-year olds, perceived her role in the classroom by stating:

You’re always engaging in guided play. At times, you’re following them; other times, you’re
leading them. You are inspiring them. But most of all, you are facilitating.

Laura, a preschool teacher of 4-year olds, echoed Sonia’s view and explained her role by stating:

We also listen to what the children have to say. We would like to see, maybe things going in
a certain direction, but then we see the children going in another direction, and learning to
switch gears and following the directions that they are taking, and being that link between
the classroom environment and the children. For our age group the 4 and 5, I want to make
sure most importantly that they are socially and emotionally ready to transition to
kindergarten.

When asked to further explain her perception of kindergarten preparation, Laura stated:

I don’t think there is a place for it yet. I think that they’re too young. It shouldn’t be the main
focus of the classroom. If you haven’t given them that good cognitive and social foundation, that
tends to go by the wayside and tends to be overlooked. Then you get this chasm that just gets
wider and harder to bridge. Really, ideally you want them to be fairly balanced and even planed.

When asked about her understanding of DAP, Sonia explained her perception by stating:

Page 10 of 25
Cade et al., Cogent Education (2022), 9: 2018908
https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2021.2018908

If you understand child development and you know the markers of where kids usually are at
different ages, then you can set up your room so that the children can be successful and not
expecting them to do things that’s beyond their realm.

These nine teachers described using DAP as being aware of children’s developmental levels in
order to provide young children with the opportunity to be successful and creative and to see
themselves in their creations.

7.2. Why toddler and preschool teachers do what they do

Research Question 2 focused on what toddler and preschool teachers know and perceive about the
application of DAP in toddler and preschool classrooms. Teachers were asked to describe how their
classroom practices related to developmentally appropriate practice. All 16 teachers explained
that the center’s curriculum guided classroom activities. Of the 16 teachers, seven described
a curriculum that was focused on rote learning and teacher-imposed instructions based on a one-
size-fits-all approach to teaching young children. Susan perceived classroom practices relative to
DAP from an academically-based curriculum that consisted of worksheets. Susan stated:

We do worksheets and rhyming. We do counting, 1 to 10. We just got up to 20; now we’re
counting by 10s. So, like last week we were counting in 20s, and we started to introduce
counting by 10s. So, the kids know this week they already have 10s and now we’re learning
place value, vowels, and sight words where they get tested on Fridays.

Mary, a preschool teacher of 3-year olds explained the role of the school’s curriculum in relation to
DAP based on classroom periods. She stated:

So, there’s really like two academic periods. So out of those times, we do a journal. So that’s
more or less the curriculum. The director likes a little bit of social science, a little bit of math,
a little bit of language arts.

She explained that she used workbooks and worksheets to teach academic content because they
believed that young children should be able to sit, pay attention, and begin writing. Gym,
a preschool teacher of 3-year olds, also perceived classroom practices relative to DAP from an
academically-based curriculum that consisted of rote learning and memorization. She stated:

Some of the kids, they are ready. We do, it’s a lot of repetition in the program.

When asked to further explain what she meant by repetition in the program, Gym stated:

Repetition meaning we’re always going over academic content like letters, writing, using
worksheets, constantly going over them. I know that this is pretty much rote learning.

Those seven teachers described having specific instructional blocks in their daily schedule when
they teach young children specific content that is based on the program’s curriculum, assess­
ments, and expectations.

Conversely, nine teachers explained that they perceived the child as the curriculum and
described children learning through play as the basis for the application of DAP. When asked to
describe how classroom practices relate to DAP, Olive viewed the classroom environment as an
important component to DAP. She stated that:

Page 11 of 25
Cade et al., Cogent Education (2022), 9: 2018908
https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2021.2018908

Table 2. Teacher qualifications

Participant Childcare Center Years of experience Academic Degree or
Credential
Joanne A 7 BA in General Psychology
and Counseling
Susan A 3 BA in Art Therapy
Katie B 4 CDA in Early Childhood
Mary B 16 BA in Business
Administration
Claire B 4 BA in Fine Arts
Dee B 11 BA in Science
Gym B 7 BA in Elementary
Education
Loleita C 9 BA in MarketingMA in Art
and Teaching
Sonia C 5 BA in Art HistoryMA in
Education with
a specialization in
Museum Education
Esther C 20 BA in Elementary
Education
Marion C 3 BA in Art HistoryMA in
Museum Education with
a specialization in
Elementary Education
Saline C 4 BA in Liberal and
Performing ArtsMAED in
Early Childhood
Education
Jennifer C 20 BA in Early Childhood
Education
Laura C 16 BA in General Psychology
Anita C 5 BA in Elementary
Education
Olive C 4 BA in Fine Arts in
Photography
Note. BA = Bachelor of Arts; MAED = Master of Art in Education; MA = Master of Arts; CDA = Child Development
Associate

I think that the classroom itself is the third teacher. So when you have your room and your
materials set up, the kids have the freedom to explore and manifest an idea in a third
dimension such as space. There’s a lot of freedom in doing that.

These teachers described a classroom environment that was center-based and provided for
children’s active learning based on each child’s interest and developmental level. Marion,
a preschool teacher of 3-year olds perceived curriculum and DAP from a child-centered perspec­
tive. She stated:

I would also say that if something is developmentally appropriate it allows them to be

successful, but also allows them to be creative. I think a lot of what we’re doing is heading
up that experience. Facilitating the experience so that each child is viewed as a very well-

Page 12 of 25
Cade et al., Cogent Education (2022), 9: 2018908
https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2021.2018908

Figure 1. Lack of clearly defined

play centers.

developed person with a lot of interesting ideas. So, every activity allows them to bring
a little bit of themselves and a little bit of their own creativity.

Those teachers who viewed DAP from a child-centered approach to development and learning also
explained that the program’s expectations focused on the child-centered approach to learning in
order to scaffold math, literacy, social, and emotional skills. Results showed that these nine
teachers perceived a relationship between children’s developmental levels, interests, and abilities
as the basis for the application of DAP.

7.3. Qualifications, knowledge, and training

The intent of Research Question 3 was to determine what strategies toddlers and preschool
teachers use to integrate early childhood theory and classroom practice, where toddler and pre­
school teachers get their information about DAP, and how classroom practices relate to theories
and research that are the basis of DAP.

Table 2 shows teacher qualifications. More teachers in the study had qualifications in fields
unrelated to ECE. Of the 16 teachers, only three held a degree or credential in ECE: one held
a bachelor’s degree in ECE, one held a master’s degree in ECE, and one held a child CDA credential.
Of the remaining 13 teachers, six held a bachelor’s degree in a field unrelated to education, while

Page 13 of 25
Cade et al., Cogent Education (2022), 9: 2018908
https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2021.2018908

Figure 2. Clearly defined play

centers.

seven held either a bachelor’s degree or a master’s degree in an education-related field. The four
teachers who held a master’s degree all of which were education-related, all had a bachelor’s
degree in a field unrelated to education.

Interestingly, the teachers from Centers A and B had five of seven teachers with a degree
unrelated to ECE. Center C had two of nine with a degree unrelated to ECE.

Of the 16 teachers, seven explained that they had no knowledge about Jean Piaget, Lev
Vygotsky, and other foundational aspects of DAP. When asked where teachers get their informa­
tion about DAP, these seven teachers explained that they obtain information about DAP from the
director, Internet, Pinterest, or are self-taught. In comparison, nine teachers who understood and
apply DAP, explained that they were knowledgeable about Jean Piaget, Lev Vygotsky, and other

Page 14 of 25
Cade et al., Cogent Education (2022), 9: 2018908
https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2021.2018908

Figure 3. Worksheet activity.

foundational aspects of DAP. When asked where they get their information about DAP, they
explained that their classroom practices were directly influenced by training from Bank Street
College of Education, a college in New York that focuses on DAP and the Reggio Emilia inspired
approach. The Reggio Emilia inspired approach to the education and care of young children draws
on the theoretical ideology of early childhood theorists such as John Dewey and Lev Vygotsky,
where the child is perceived as an active researcher, capable of contributing to their learning as
they solve problems and engage in creative expression (Hewett, 2001; Wood et al., 2015). Within
Reggio Emilia inspired programs, the classroom is perceived as the third teacher and toddler and
preschool teachers function as facilitators who scaffold children’s developmental learning (Wood
et al., 2015). The primary focus of the Reggio Emilia approach is to center learning and develop­
ment on each child, not the teacher (Wood et al., 2015).

7.4. Classroom arrangement

To further understand the strategies that toddler and preschool teachers used in their classrooms
and to determine the extent classroom practices were developmentally appropriate, we examined
documentation of children’s activities, classroom environments, and lesson plans. Based on an
analysis of these documents using the ECERS-3 and ITERS-R quality indicators of room arrange­
ment for play and learning, the results revealed that interest areas of the seven teachers who did
not understand or apply DAP were not clearly defined; space was not arranged to create clear,
non-obstructed pathways; and quiet and noisy play areas were not separated from one another.

Page 15 of 25
Cade et al., Cogent Education (2022), 9: 2018908
https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2021.2018908

Figure 4. Worksheet activity.

Figure 5. Worksheet activity.

An indicator of teacher-imposed practices in these classrooms was that tables and chairs were
arranged in rows with children facing a board. In one of these childcare centers, interest areas
were located in other classrooms, requiring the children to travel. In these centers, children did not
choose their interest area. Instead, teachers assigned interest areas to children (Figure 1).

Conversely, based on the ECERS-3 and ITERS-R quality indicators of room arrangement for play
and learning, results revealed that interest areas for nine teachers who understood and applied
DAP were clearly defined. Classroom arrangement indicated that quiet and noisy areas were all

Page 16 of 25
Cade et al., Cogent Education (2022), 9: 2018908
https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2021.2018908

Figure 6. Classroom activities

based on children’s interest.

separated from one another by physical space. All play areas requiring special provisions were
conveniently equipped, and all learning centers requiring more space had sufficient space to
accommodate the type of play required and the number of children who wanted to participate.
All interest areas were clearly defined and located within the classroom (Figure 2).

In these classrooms, teachers explained that children chose their interest areas and children
were given the opportunity to be creative.

7.5. Lesson planning and children’s work samples

Teachers in this study explained that the practice of lesson planning informed class practices and
children’s activities based on the program’s curriculum and expectations. Results revealed that
lesson plans for seven teachers who did not understand or apply DAP consisted of rote learning
worksheets based on a scripted curriculum.

Figure 3 is an example of seatwork and K–12-pushdown curriculum meant to gain abstract

knowledge. In this letter of the week worksheet, children were expected to identify and recognize

Page 17 of 25
Cade et al., Cogent Education (2022), 9: 2018908
https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2021.2018908

all objects that begin with the “e” sound. In this worksheet, the teacher wrote that the child was
able to recognize all “e” sounds.

Figure 4 is another example of seatwork and K–12-pushdown curriculum meant to gain abstract
knowledge where children are expected to correctly paste corresponding chips. In this worksheet,
the teacher placed a check mark to indicate whether the child correctly completed each item.

Figure 5 is another example of seatwork and K–12 pushdown curriculum meant to gain abstract
knowledge where children are expected to write, identify, count, and paste numbers in the correct
order.

Based on the quality indicators of teaching to enhance development and learning and planning
curriculum to achieve important goals described in the DAP document (Copple & Bredekamp,
2009), these lesson plans and activities did not meet these indicators. Lesson plans in the K–12
pushdown classrooms consisted of activities for rote learning, use of worksheets, and teacher-
directed instructions that did not underscore learning through play. Some lesson plan objectives
for classroom activities included: students will name tens and ones in numbers up to 20; students
will estimate quantities 1–100 with increasing accuracy; and students will read and write whole
numbers 0 to 100. Some classroom activities included reviewing numbers, identifying and writing
letters, writing in a journal, and participating in weekly spelling tests from a vocabulary list. Based
on the ECERS-3 (Harms et al., 2015) and ITERS-R (Harms et al., 2006) quality indicators for art,
children’s work samples showed no individual expression in these classrooms. Children’s work
samples consisted of worksheets and cookie cutter artwork where children’s artwork and work
samples all looked the same. Seven teachers who did not understand or apply DAP explained that
they used worksheets that consisted of filling in the blank to complete a sentence.

In comparison, artifacts collected from nine teachers (see, Figure 6) who understood and applied
DAP were aligned with two of the quality indicators from the DAP document as noted by Copple
and Bredekamp (2009): (a) teaching to enhance development and learning and (b) planning
curriculum to achieve developmentally appropriate goals. Figure 6 shows activities that are
examples of developmentally appropriate activities based on the child-centered approach to
learning. In these activities, children were active participants in their learning experiences and
activities were not based on the one-size-fits-all approach to learning.

Those nine teachers explained that they do not write lesson plans, but perceived the child as the
curriculum. They used planning notes and individual child observations to suggest classroom
activities that would interest the children. When compared to the ECERS-3 and ITERS-R quality
indicators of art, children’s work samples from these teachers’ classrooms revealed individualized
self-expression and creativity with various art materials and art mediums.

Data provided important insight into how toddler and preschool teachers perceive their roles,
what strategies they use, and why toddler and preschool teachers do what they do with regard to
DAP. Although there are different beliefs and perceptions about DAP, the fundamental premise of
DAP is rooted in the child-centered approach to learning and in constructivism where children have
the freedom to actively engage in their own learning experiences. A child-centered approach
recognizes that children grow and develop at their own pace. The implementation of such an
approach underscores the importance of providing an environment where ECE teachers function as
facilitators, guiding children’s learning through play as they engage in exploration and discovery.
Some teachers, who have no knowledge about the importance of aligning early childhood theory
and classroom practice, tend to implement a passive approach to learning that centers on

Page 18 of 25
Cade et al., Cogent Education (2022), 9: 2018908
https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2021.2018908

teacher-imposed instruction, rote learning, and memorization. This approach hinders the child-
centered approach to learning and children’s autonomy.

8. Discussion
Results from this study contribute to previous research related to teachers’ beliefs about the use of
DAP because toddler and preschool teachers’ beliefs and perceptions about the use of DAP were
specifically explored and explained. The researchers had no prior knowledge of the three childcare
centers. After reviewing the data, it was evident that teachers at Centers A and B were more likely
to use practices that were not developmentally appropriate, while teachers at Center C were more
likely to use developmentally appropriate practices. A possible explanation for the differing
approaches in classroom practices may be due to lack of awareness, knowledge, and training on
early childhood theory and child growth and development.

Results of this study indicate that toddler and preschool teachers consider children’s learning as
important; however, results show variation in approaches to caring and teaching based on tea­
chers’ beliefs and perceptions and the program’s curriculum. Differing approaches were informed
by diverse perceptions of DAP and ways in which toddler and preschool teachers approach young
children’s learning. Classroom practices that were primarily teacher-imposed seatwork demon­
strated how changes in early childhood education have influenced some teachers’ beliefs and
perceptions about how young children should learn, resulting in using inappropriate instructional
methods with young children, pushing young children too quickly through developmental stages,
and causing emotional stress for toddler and preschool children (Cherry et al., 1989; Donaldson,
2019).

Beliefs and perceptions of ECE teachers are important in their decision-making in regards to
meeting the developmental needs of young children. The research findings revealed that seven of
the 16 teachers believed that a K–12 pushdown curriculum approach should begin in childcare
centers. This study aligns with the studies conducted by Alford et al. (2016) and Pyle and Bigelow
(2015). These studies emphasized that the schooling approach to classroom practices has negated
the constructivist foundation of DAP, which is learning through play where early childhood edu­
cators function as facilitators instead of traditional teachers. Results suggest that some toddler
and preschool teachers in the study believed that it was important to teach traditional K–12
academics with the misguided belief that this would prepare toddler and preschool children for
success in kindergarten. Changes in the field of early childhood education can be a possible
explanation for aligning childcare practices with a K–12 pushdown curriculum approach; however,
the misguided view of implementing traditional K–12 academics in childcare not only causes
emotional stress, but is at the expense of the constructivist child-centered approach to learning.

One of the criteria of DAP is providing the opportunity for young children to actively engage in
exploration, investigation, and discovery-based learning. Results show that classroom practices by
seven participants were influenced by the program’s K–12 pushdown curriculum, where teachers
required young children to be passive rather than active learners. A passive academic-focused
approach is contradictory to the constructivist approach and to the DAP position that children
benefit more from a child-centered curriculum where children can actively participate in their
learning experiences and that all developmental domains are incorporated equally in classroom
practices. This passive academic-focused approach contradicts a body of evidence that supports
the belief that young children (2–7 years old) learn best through a play-based, hands-on interac­
tion with the social and physical environment, a whole child approach to learning, and a deep
understanding of the impact of the emotional component of development and learning (Berk &
Winsler, 1995; Copple & Bredekamp, 2009; Hart et al., 1997; Vygotsky, 1978; De Young et al., 2011).
It also goes against the state’s own professed standards. Toddlers and preschoolers need ECE

Page 19 of 25
Cade et al., Cogent Education (2022), 9: 2018908
https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2021.2018908

teachers who are aware of and understand that they are helping young children to develop
language skills, emotional regulation, and physical control; these young children are not yet able
to sit still or focus on a task for any extended period of time (Copple & Bredekamp, 2009; New
Jersey Council for Young Children, 2013; Washington, 2013).

The study results show that teachers who implemented a DIP curriculum perceived
a relationship between children’s chronological age and what they should know and be able to
do, along with individual differences and development. This suggests that to be effective in
aligning practices with whole child development, toddler and preschool teachers need to be
knowledgeable about child growth and development, each child’s individual differences, and the
child-centered constructivist approach of DAP (Zambo, 2008). The constructivist approach to
learning underscores the importance of ECE teachers guiding children’s thinking by functioning
as facilitators who do not subscribe to the traditional one-size-fits all approach to teaching. The
constructivist approach uses a curricular approach of intentional teaching that is based on the
knowledge of children’s individual needs and interests to structure relevant activities and experi­
ences for children (Graue et al., 2014).

8.1. Limitations
This study was part of a larger explanatory dissertation project that examined toddler and pre­
school teachers’ perceptions about the use of DAP within their classrooms. One limitation of this
study was that a small sample size of 16 teachers from three licensed childcare centers in northern
New Jersey were interviewed. Another limitation was the inability to observe toddler and preschool
teachers in their classrooms, which could have provided in-depth information regarding classroom
practices. In spite of this potential limiting factor, it did not skew the data collection, but presented
an opportunity for toddler and preschool teachers to describe their classroom practices based on
their beliefs and perceptions.

8.2. Recommendations for future research

Our study did not describe the beliefs and perceptions of childcare directors, which highlights the
need for future research to be conducted on how curricula are chosen and why some early
childhood programs select developmentally inappropriate curricula. Interview questions asked
toddler and preschool teachers to describe where they get information about DAP. However, the
interview questions did not ask toddler and preschool teachers if they believed that professional
development training was effective or sufficient for supporting classroom practices that are
developmentally appropriate. Research is needed to examine the effectiveness of professional
development training in ECE programs.

8.3. Conclusion
Although the 1987 guidelines for DAP were published as a direct reaction to the increasing
tendency for teacher-imposed academic instruction in ECE programs, as we progress through
the 21st century, classroom practices in two of the three childcare centers continues to mirror
the increasing tendency for teacher-imposed academic instructions. Teachers from one center
did understand and apply DAP while teachers from two centers did not understand or apply
DAP. Qualifications and training appear to be link to knowledge about child growth and
development and the use of DIP classroom practices (Buettner et al., 2016; Han & Neuharth-
Pritchett, 2010; Zambo, 2008). Training pertaining to the application of DAP in the classroom
can be beneficial to ensuring that classroom environments, materials, activities, and practices
are developmentally appropriate and geared towards supporting the whole child development
of every young child. It also appears that limited oversight from the Department of Children
and Families Office of Licensing results in programs adopting an inappropriate K–12 approach
to curriculum and instruction.

Page 20 of 25
Cade et al., Cogent Education (2022), 9: 2018908
https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2021.2018908

To some extent, the National Association for the Education of Young Children (2020) position
statement on DAP can be seen as reinforcing a play-based approach to learning. However, the inclusion
of learning standards and competencies withing the position statement can reinforce teacher-imposed
practices thereby, nullifying Copple and Bredekamp (2009) emphasis on shifting from a K–12 push-
down curriculum, particularly in childcare centers to a child-centered approach based on research that
supports whole child development. Furthermore, considering that quality education is one of the
United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (UNSDG-4), which focuses on “ensuring inclusive and
equitable quality education and promoting lifelong learning opportunities for all” (United Nations
Department of Economic and Social Affairs, 2016), it is important that that ECE teachers align early
childhood theory and child growth and development with classroom practices as a means of meeting
the diverse needs of all children, especially children with special needs. Although the childcare licensing
regulations underscore the importance of active learning experiences and programs implementing
a curriculum that should be individualized, culturally responsive, centered on the interests and cap­
abilities of children based on their developmental level, and encouraging social interaction, study
results show that in some centers, classroom activities provided to young children less than 6 years
of age were primarily centered on teacher-imposed academic instruction with limited emphasis on
whole child development and the constructivist child-centered approach to learning. This approach is
contrary to the UNSDG-4 concept of inclusive and equitable quality education, in that it does not
address meeting the diverse needs of all children, particularly children with special needs.

In closing, results suggest that toddler and preschool teachers need to be aware of early
childhood theory and the developmental needs of young children. The use of DIP in some of
the centers studied also suggests the need for a monitoring and evaluation system that can
ensure ongoing professional development training in child growth and development relative to
aligning early childhood theory to classroom practices. As early childhood education continues
to experience educational changes, sometimes the beliefs and perceptions of ECE teachers are
not ideal or appropriate for young children. Therefore, it is important for educational leaders of
ECE programs in New Jersey and beyond to deeply understand the negative results of
a curricular and instructional approach that forces young children too quickly through devel­
opmental stages. This understanding may lead to eliminating qualifications in a non-ECE field.
This is a significant finding in the study. Since the state has developed and disseminated
specific regulations regarding curriculum and instruction for the childcare programs they
regulate, it is incumbent that they implement a program evaluation and monitoring system
to make sure programs are knowledgeable about child growth and development and support
classroom activities that are developmentally appropriate, child-centered, and supportive of
whole child development.

Funding Citation information

The authors received no direct funding for this research.
Author details
June Cade1
E-mail: jcade13@email.phoenix.edu
Francis Wardle
E-mail: jcade13@email.phoenix.edu
Jan Otter1
E-mail: wardle00@email.phoenix.edu
1 garten context. Early Childhood Education Journal, 41(4),
Nanyang College of Doctoral Studies, Center for
Educational and Instructional Technology Research,
University of Phoenix, Phoenix, Arizona, USA.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the
author(s).
Cite this article as: Toddler and preschool teachers’ beliefs
and perceptions about the use of developmentally
appropriate practice, June Cade, Francis Wardle & Jan
Otter, Cogent Education (2022), 9: 2018908.
References
Abu Taleb, T. F. (2013). “NAEYC’s key attributes of quality
preschool programs” applied to the Jordanian kinder­
307–314. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10643-012-0550-9
Abu-Jaber, M., Al-Shawareb, A., & Gheith, E. (2010).
Kindergarten teachers’ beliefs towards developmen­
tally appropriate practice in Jordan. Early Childhood
Education Journal, 38(1), 65–74. https://doi.org/10.
1007/s10643-010-0379-z
Advocates for Children of New Jersey. (2019). New Jersey
kids count. https://acnj.org/kids-count

Page 21 of 25
Cade et al., Cogent Education (2022), 9: 2018908
https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2021.2018908
Alford, B., Rollins, K., Padron, Y., & Waxman, H. (2016).
Using systematic classroom observation to explore
student engagement as a function of teachers’
developmentally appropriate instructional practices
(DAIP) in ethnically diverse pre-kindergarten
through second-grade classrooms. Early Childhood
Education Journal, 44(6), 623–635. https://doi.org/10.
1007/s10643-015-0748-8
Atchion, B., Daily, S., Workman, E. (2014). Initiatives from
preschool to third grade: A policy maker’s guide.
Education Commission of the States. http://www.ecs.
org/docs/early-learning-primer.pdf
Bagnato, S. J., & Ho, H. Y. (2006). High-stakes testing with
preschool children: Violation of professional stan­
dards for evidence-based practice in early childhood
intervention. KEDI Journal of Educational Policy, 3(1),
23–43. https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?
direct=true&AuthType=shib&db=edo&AN=
22149067&site=eds-live&scope=site
Bassok, D., Latham, S., & Rorem, A. (2016). Is kindergarten
the new first grade? AERA Open, 1(4), 1–31. https://
doi.org/10.1177/2332858415616358
Berk, L. E., & Winsler, A. (1995). Scaffolding children’s
learning: Vygotsky and early childhood education. The
National Association for the Education of Young
Children.
Blakemore, S. J., & Frith, U. (2005). The learning brain:
Lessons for education. Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
Bodrova, E., & Leong, D. (2007). Tools of the mind: The
Vygotskian approach to early childhood education
(2nd ed.). Pearson Education Inc.
Bogdam, R. C., & Bikken, S. D. (2007). Qualitative research
for education: An introduction to theories and meth­
ods. Pearson Education, Inc.
Bredekamp, S. (2010). Effective practices in early child­
hood education: Building a foundation. Pearson.
Bueno, M., Darling-Hammond, L., & Gonzales, D. (2010).
A matter of degrees: Preparing teachers for the pre-k
classroom. http://www.pewtrusts.org/~/media/
legacy/uploadedfiles/wwwpewtrustsorg/reports/pre-
k_education/pkneducationreformseriesfinalpdf.pdf
Buettner, C. K., Hur, E. H., Jeon, L., & Andrews, D. W.
(2016). What are we teaching the teachers? Child
development curricula in US higher education. Child
& Youth Care Forum, 45(1), 155–175. https://doi.org/
10.1007/s10566-015-9323-0
Cherry, C., Godwin, D., & Staples, J. (1989). Is the left brain
always right? A guide to whole child development.
Fearon Teacher Aids.
Cohen, L., Morrison, K., & Manion, L. (2007). Research
methods in education (6th ed.). Routledge.
Cole, M., John-Steiner, V., Scribner, S., & Souberman, W.
(1978). L. S. Vygotsky mind in society: The develop­
ment of higher psychological processes. Harvard
University Press.
Copple, C., & Bredekamp, S. (2009). Developmentally
appropriate practice in early childhood programs ser­
ving children from birth through Age 8 (3rd ed.).
National Association for the Education of Young
Children.
Creswell, J. W. (2012). Educational research planning,
conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualita­
tive research (4th ed.). Pearson Education, Inc.
De Young, A. C., Kenardy, J. A., & Cobham, V. E. (2011).
Trauma in early childhood: A neglected population.
Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review, 14(3),
231–250. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10567-011-0094-3
Dewey, J. (1990). The school and society: The child and the
curriculum. The University of Chicago Press.
Donaldson, M. (2019). Teacher accounts of children’s
mistakes in the kindergarten classroom. Journal of
Ethnographic and Qualitative Research, 13(3), 87–
197. https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=
true&AuthType=shib&db=eric&AN=EJ1256878&site=
eds-live&scope=site. Acesso em: 18 dez. 2021
Fowler, R. C. (2017). Reframing the debate about the
relationship between learning and development: An
effort to resolve dilemmas and reestablish dialogue
in a fractured field. Early Childhood Education
Journal, 45(2), 155–162. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s10643-015-0770-x
Frey, N., & Fisher, D. (2010). Reading and the brain: What
early childhood educators need to know. Early
Childhood Education Journal, 38(2), 103–110. https://
doi.org/10.1007/s10643-010-0387-z
Gallant, P. A. (2009). Kindergarten teachers speak out:
“Too much, too soon, too fast! Reading Horizons, 49
(3), 201–220. https://search.ebscohost.com/login.
aspx?direct=true&AuthType=shib&db=eric&AN=
EJ867138&site=eds-live&scope=site. Acesso em: 18
dez. 2021
Ginsburg, H., & Opper, S. (1988). Piaget’s theory of intel­
lectual development: An introduction (3rd ed.).
Prentice-Hall.
Glaser, D. (2014). Neurodevelopment in the first three
years: Implications for child development, profes­
sional practice, and policy. Journal of Children’s
Services, 9(2), 154–164. https://doi.org/10.1108/JCS-
01-2014-0005
Graue, E., Whyte, K., & Delaney, K. (2014). Fostering cul­
turally and developmentally responsive teaching
through improvisational practice. Journal of Early
Childhood Teacher Education, 35(4), 297–317. https://
doi.org/10.1080/10901027.2014.968296
Greener, I. (2011). Designing social research. Sage.
Han, J., & Neuharth-Pritchett, S. (2010). Beliefs about
classroom practices and teachers’ education level: An
examination of developmentally appropriate and
inappropriate beliefs in early childhood classrooms.
Journal of Early Childhood Teacher Education, 31(4),
307–321. https://doi.org/10.1080/10901027.2010.
523775
Harms, T., Clifford, R., & Cryer, D. (2015). Early childhood
environmental rating scale (3rd ed.). Teachers College
Press.
Harms, T., Cryer, D., & Clifford, R. (2006). Infant/toddler
environmental rating scale. Teachers College Press.
Hart, C. H., Burts, D. C., & Charlesworth, R. (1997).
Integrated curriculum and developmentally appropri­
ate practice: Birth to age eight. State University of
New York Press.
Hebe, H. N. (2017). Towards a theory–driven integration of
environmental education: The application of Piaget
and Vygotsky in Grade R. International Journal of
Environmental and Science Education, 12(6),
1525–1545.
Hedges, H. (2012). Vygotsky’s phases of everyday concept
development and the notion of children’s ‘working
theories. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, 1(2),
143–152. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lcsi.2012.06.001
Hegde, A. V., & Cassidy, D. J. (2009). Kindergarten tea­
chers’ perspectives on developmentally appropriate
practices (DAP): A study conducted in Mumbai
(India). Journal of Research in Childhood Education,
Page 22 of 25
Cade et al., Cogent Education (2022), 9: 2018908
https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2021.2018908
23(3), 367–381. https://doi.org/10.1080/
02568540909594667
Hewett, V. M. (2001). Examining the Reggio Emilia
approach to early childhood education. Early
Childhood Education Journal, 29(2), 95–100. https://
doi.org/10.1023/A:1012520828095
Hohnen, B., & Murphy, T. (2016). The optimum context for
learning: Drawing on neuroscience to inform best
practice in the classroom. Educational & Child
Psychology, 33(1), 75–90. https://search.ebscohost.
com/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=shib&db=
eue&AN=113339504&site=eds-live&scope=site.
Acesso em: 18 dez. 2021
Ilias, M. R., & Esa, A. (2017). Children’s psychology devel­
opment. Elixir International Journal, 107,
46924–46925.
Jechura, J., Wooldridge, D. G., Bertelsen, C., & Mayers, G.
(2016). Exploration of early-childhood learning
environments. Delta Kappa Gamma Bulletin, 82(3), 9–
15. https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=
true&AuthType=shib&db=eue&AN=150071775&site=
eds-live&scope=site
Kim, H. K. (2011). Developmentally appropriate practice
(DAP) as defined and interpreted by early childhood
preservice teachers: Beliefs about DAP and influences
of teacher education and field experience. SRATE
Journal, 20(2), 12–22. https://search.ebscohost.com/
login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=shib&db=eric&AN=
EJ959525&site=eds-live&scope=site
Kim, S. (2015). The mind in the making: Developmental
and neurobiological origins of mentalizing.
Personality Disorders: Theory, Research, and
Treatment, 6(4), 356–365. https://doi.org/10.1037/
per0000102
Kirch, S. A. (2014). Integrating Vygotsky’s theory of rela­
tional ontology into early childhood science educa­
tion. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 9(1),
243–254. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-013-9532-5
Klingberg, T. (2013). The learning brain: Memory and brain
development in children. Oxford University Press.
Liu, C. J., & Chaing, W. W. (2014). Theory, method and
practice of neuroscientific findings in science
education. International Journal of Science and
Mathematics Education, 12(3), 629–646. https://doi.
org/10.1007/s10763-013-9482-0
Lodico, M. G., Spaulding, D. T., & Voegtle, K. H. (2010).
Methods in educational research: From theory to
practice (2nd ed.). Jossey-Bass Publications.
Lynch, M. (2015). More play, please: The perspective of
kindergarten teachers on play in classroom.
American Journal of Play, 7(3), 347–370. https://
search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=
true&AuthType=shib&db=eric&AN=EJ1070249&site=
eds-live&scope=site.
Mahn, H. (1999). Vygotsky’s methodological contribution
to sociocultural theory. Remedial and Special
Education, 20(6), 341–350. https://doi.org/10.1177/
074193259902000607
Malik, S. A., & Wiseman, A. W. (2017). Revisiting and
re-representing scaffolding: Two gradient models.
Cogent Education, 4(1), 1331533. https://doi.org/10.
1080/2331186X.2017.1331533
Mayer, R. E. (2017). How can brain research inform aca­
demic learning and instruction? Educational
Psychology Review, 29(4), 835–846. https://doi.org/
10.1007/s10648-016-9391-1
McMullen, M. B. (1999). Characteristics of teachers who
talk the DAP talk and walk the DAP walk. Journal of
Research in Childhood Education, 13(2), 216–230.
https://doi.org/10.1080/02568549909594742
Medina, J. (2008). Brain rules: 12 principles for surviving
and thriving at work, home, and school. Pear Press.
Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. (2016). Qualitative research:
A guide to design and implementation (4th ed.).
Wiley.
Merriam, S. B. (2009). Qualitative research. Jossey-Bass.
Mooney, C. G. (2013). Theories of childhood: An introduc­
tion to Dewey, Montessori, Erikson, Piaget, and
Vygotsky (2nd ed.). Redleaf Press.
National Association for the Education of Young Children.
(2009). Developmentally appropriate practice in early
childhood programs serving children from birth to age
8 [Policy statement]. https://www.naeyc.org/sites/
default/files/globally-shared/downloads/PDFs/
resources/position-statements/PSDAP.pdf
National Association for the Education of Young Children.
(2020). Developmentally appropriate practice
[Position statement]. https://www.naeyc.org/sites/
default/files/globally-shared/downloads/PDFs/
resources/position-statements/dap-statement_0.pdf
New Jersey Council for Young Children. (2013). New
Jersey birth to three early learning standards. https://
www.nj.gov/education/ece/guide/standards/birth/
standards.pdf
Nilsson, M., Ferholt, B., & Lecusay, R. (2017). ‘The playing-
exploring child’: Reconceptualizing the relationship
between play and learning in early childhood edu­
cation. Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood, 19(3),
231–245. https://doi.org/10.1177/
1463949117710800
Piaget, J., & Inhelder, B. (1969). The psychology of the
child (H. Weaver, Translated by). Basic Books.
Piaget, J. (1952). The origins of intelligence in children
(M. Cook, Translated by). International Universities
Press.
Piaget, J. (1950). The psychology of intelligence (M. Piercy
& D. E. Berlyne, Translated by). Routledge Classics.
Pyle, A., & Bigelow, A. (2015). Play in kindergarten: An
interview and observational study in three Canadian
classrooms. Early Childhood Educational Journal, 43
(5), 385–393. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10643-014-
0666-1
Pyle, A., & DeLuca, C. (2013). Assessment in the kinder­
garten classroom: An empirical study of teachers’
assessment approaches. Early Childhood Education
Journal, 41(5), 373–380. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s10643-012-0573-2
Rushton, S., Juola-Rushton, A., & Larkin, E. (2010).
Neuroscience, play and early childhood education:
Connections, implications and assessment. Early
Childhood Education Journal, 37(5), 351–361. https://
doi.org/10.1007/s10643-009-0359-3
Rushton, S., & Juola-Rushton, A. (2008). Classroom
learning environment, brain research and the No
Child Left Behind initiative: 6 years later. Early
Childhood Education Journal, 36(1), 87–92. https://
doi.org/10.1007/s10643-008-0244-5
Schachl, H. (2016). Neuroscience: A traditional and inno­
vative approach to education and focus on stress
with learning. Signum Temporis: Journal of Pedagogy
and Psychology, 8(1), 9–21. https://www.proquest.
com/openview/e56c6c5a23ee5edeb4be713e
c1a615e8/1?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=2026653.
Semmar, Y., & Al-Thani, T. (2015). Piagetian and
Vygotskian approaches to cognitive development in
the kindergarten classroom. Journal of Educational
Page 23 of 25
Cade et al., Cogent Education (2022), 9: 2018908
https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2021.2018908
and Developmental Psychology, 5(2), 1–7. https://doi.
org/10.5539/jedp.v5n2p1
Simatwa, E. M. W. (2010). Piaget’s theory of intellec­
tual development and its implication for instruc­
tional management at pre-secondary school level.
Educational Research and Reviews, 5(7), 366–371.
State of New Jersey Department of Children and Families.
(2017). Manual of requirements for childcare centers.
http://www.nj.gov/dcf/providers/licensing/laws/
CCCmanual.pdf
Thomas, G. (2015). How to do your case study (2nd ed.).
SAGE Publications.
Ulrich, C. (2016). John Dewey and the project-based
learning: Landmarks for nowadays Romanian
education. Journal of Educational Sciences and
Psychology, 6(68), 54–60.
United Nations Department of Economic and Social
Affairs. (2016). Sustainable development: Goal 4.
https://sdgs.un.org/goals/goal4
Vaksalla, A., & Hodshire, C. (2013). Cognitive development
among Malaysian children: The multiple assessments
of interactive learning modules. Internal Journal of
Art and Sciences, 6(4), 261–285. https://www.pro
quest.com/openview/deb692c64fd3cb4
ba9f6b98888275e82/1?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=
626342
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of
higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.
Washington, V. (Ed.). (2013). Essentials for working with
young children. Council for Professional Recognition.
Wood, J., Thall, T., & Parnell, E. C. (2015). The move:
Reggio Emilia-inspired teaching. Complicity: An
International Journal of Complexity and Education, 12
(1), 98–108. https://doi.org/10.29173/cmplct24241
Zambo, D. (2008). Childcare workers’ knowledge about
the brain and developmentally appropriate practices.
Early Childhood Education Journal, 35(6), 571–577.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10643-007-0223-2
Page 24 of 25
Cade et al., Cogent Education (2022), 9: 2018908
https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2021.2018908

© 2022 The Author(s). This open access article is distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY) 4.0 license.
You are free to:
Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format.
Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially.
The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms.
Under the following terms:
Attribution — You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made.
You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
No additional restrictions
You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.

Cogent Education (ISSN: 2331-186X) is published by Cogent OA, part of Taylor & Francis Group.
Publishing with Cogent OA ensures:
• Immediate, universal access to your article on publication
• High visibility and discoverability via the Cogent OA website as well as Taylor & Francis Online
• Download and citation statistics for your article
• Rapid online publication
• Input from, and dialog with, expert editors and editorial boards
• Retention of full copyright of your article
• Guaranteed legacy preservation of your article
• Discounts and waivers for authors in developing regions
Submit your manuscript to a Cogent OA journal at www.CogentOA.com

Page 25 of 25