All subjects · Psychology · WPS03 Applications of Psychology

Contemporary study (option): Ashdown and Bernard (2012)

Edexcel IAL Psychology · WPS03 Applications of Psychology

One of two optional contemporary studies (choose this or Ding et al., 2014): 'Can explicit instruction in social and emotional learning skills benefit the social-emotional development, well-being, and academic achievement of young children?' (spec 5.2.3).

Practise this in the app: instant marking and a fix for every mistake. Free, no email needed to start.

Practise this lesson

Aims and design

Aim: to test whether a social and emotional learning (SEL) curriculum improves young children's social-emotional competence and well-being, reduces problem behaviour and raises academic achievement (four hypotheses).

Design: quasi-experiment, with one programme class and one comparison class at each of two grade levels.

Sample: a Catholic school in a low socio-economic area of Melbourne, Australia; about two-thirds spoke English as a second language. 99 children (45 girls, 54 boys): 42 Preparatory (age 5) and 57 Grade 1 (age 6), and four teachers. One Prep and one Grade 1 class were randomly chosen to receive the programme.

Procedure and measures

Programme: *You Can Do It! Early Childhood Education* (YCDI), taught by trained class teachers over 10 weeks in Terms 2, 3 and 4 of 2009, with explicit lessons in social and emotional skills.
Measures (teachers rated children before and after): ACER Well-being Survey (50 items, 4-point scale); Social Skills Rating System (57 items, social skills, problem behaviours, academic competence); independent reading level (0 to 28); and observation of the YCDI teachers' lessons.

Results

Measure (mean)	Prep YCDI before / after	Prep comparison before / after	Grade 1 YCDI before / after	Grade 1 comparison before / after
Positive social-emotional well-being	90.57 / 96.38	83.33 / 85.19	90.07 / 95.02	89.39 / 85.42
Total problem behaviours	2.02 / 2.37	2.66 / 2.45	2.17 / 1.44	2.97 / 3.15
Total social-emotional competence	102.57 / 110.87	99.97 / 101.80	105.31 / 116.85	98.37 / 97.37
Total social skills	42.94 / 45.66	38.46 / 38.33	40.59 / 46.28	42.50 / 34.98
Reading level	5.10 / 17.96	2.05 / 18.24	7.86 / 24.48	5.48 / 22.98

Table 1 means, Pearson WPS03 summary of studies

Conclusions and evaluation

Conclusions: YCDI improved social-emotional competence and well-being and reduced problem behaviour in Grade 1; it worked equally for boys and girls and for children with English or another first language. Across both grades combined there was no overall fall in problem behaviours. Reading did not differ overall, but the lowest-reading 50% gained more in YCDI classes. Teachers did not follow the scripted lessons closely.

Evaluation: one school and 99 children limit generalisability; teachers delivered the programme and rated the children, so ratings may be biased (low objectivity); only one class per condition per grade, so class differences (teacher skill) are confounded with the programme; low treatment fidelity; but it has high ecological validity (real classrooms) and clear practical application.

Worked example

Calculate the change in total social-emotional competence for the Grade 1 YCDI class and the Grade 1 comparison class.

YCDI: 116.85 - 105.31 = 11.54.
Comparison: 97.37 - 98.37 = -1.00.
The YCDI class improved by over 11 points while the comparison class fell slightly, supporting the programme.

Answer: YCDI +11.54; comparison -1.00.

Key idea: Ashdown and Bernard (2012): quasi-experiment, 99 Prep and Grade 1 children in Melbourne; YCDI SEL programme, 10 weeks. Teacher ratings showed gains in social-emotional competence and well-being, and fewer problem behaviours in Grade 1. No overall reading difference, but the weakest readers gained more. Teacher-rated and one school.

Check yourself

What design did Ashdown and Bernard (2012) use?
- A meta-analysis
- A longitudinal case study of one child
- A quasi-experiment with programme and comparison classes
- A cross-cultural survey
Show answer
A quasi-experiment with programme and comparison classes. Whole classes were compared; it is quasi-experimental.
Ashdown and Bernard's 99 children included 57 in Grade 1. What percentage were in Grade 1? Give your answer to 1 decimal place.
Show answer
57.6 %. 57 / 99 x 100 = 57.6%.
Grade 1 YCDI problem behaviours fell from 2.17 to 1.44. By how much did the mean fall? Give your answer to 2 decimal places.
Show answer
0.73. 2.17 - 1.44 = 0.73.
What did Ashdown and Bernard find about reading?
- YCDI children read much worse
- No overall difference, but the lowest-reading half gained more in YCDI classes
- Reading was not measured
- Comparison children made no progress
Show answer
No overall difference, but the lowest-reading half gained more in YCDI classes. The weakest readers benefited.
Why might the teacher ratings be biased?
- Ratings were done by a computer
- Children rated themselves
- Ratings were collected after ten years
- Teachers knew which children had the programme and taught it themselves
Show answer
Teachers knew which children had the programme and taught it themselves. Raters were not blind.
What was the programme in Ashdown and Bernard (2012)?
- MindUP
- You Can Do It! Early Childhood Education
- Incredible Years
- Cognitive behavioural therapy
Show answer
You Can Do It! Early Childhood Education. YCDI.
Explain one reason the findings of Ashdown and Bernard (2012) may lack generalisability.
Show answer
The sample was only 99 children from one Catholic school in a low socio-economic area of Melbourne, so the results may not apply to other schools, countries or age groups.. Sample plus consequence.

Practise with instant feedback

Sources

Last updated 8 November 2026. Spotted a mistake? Tell us.