An examination of the relationship between a child’s developmental age and early literacy learning

American students typically attend kindergarten at the chronological age (CA) of five and currently with the implementation of Common Core State Standards, there are expectations that children learn how to read in order to meet these academic standards, despite whether or not they are developmentally ready. This mixed methods study examined age and environmental factors that relate to reading with 83 children from the ages of 4–61⁄2 years. The relationship between developmental age (DA) via the Gesell Developmental Observation-Revised and early literacy learning via Marie’s Clay observational tool, Concepts About Print (CAP), were explored. The purpose of the study was to highlight the need for better alignment of educational policies and practices as they relate to child development and to promote more effective synthesis between discoveries in the field of neuroscience about how children learn and what is known about child DAs and stages. The findings revealed a statistically significant relationship between a child’s DA and early literacy learning as measured by the CAP. The descriptive statistics revealed that the DA of the children in this study was younger than their CA. Furthermore, a child’s DA was found to be the strongest predictor of early literacy learning. *Corresponding author: Christine E. Moran, Department of Academic Affairs, Stevenson University, 1525 Greenspring Valley Road, Stevenson, MD 21153, USA E-mails: cmoran2@stevenson.edu; cemoran1@aol.com

ABOUT THE AUTHORS Christine E. Moran, PhD, is the dean of Student Success at Stevenson University. During her tenure as an associate professor of Education, she taught numerous courses in reading, children's literature, integrated language arts, and assessment. Her research interests focus on early literacy learning and effective teaching strategies. Moran has almost 20 years of experience in education and has provided professional development and training to K-12 schools, higher education institutions, as well as community organizations.
Karlen Senseny, EdD, is dedicated to promoting the understanding and respect of child development. Senseny has been a Gesell Institute of Child Development National Lecture Staff since 2007, providing tools and resources to educational institutions throughout the United States. With 23 years of classroom experience, Senseny understands the challenges which face today's educators. She supports administrators, teachers, and parents in understanding the connection between how children develop and how they learn.

PUBLIC INTEREST STATEMENT
There is a current national push to get kindergarteners to read before they enter first grade which places undue pressure on young children starting school as well as parents and teachers. Typically, a child must be chronologically five or close to five to begin kindergarten, and schools are designed to structure learning according to chronological age (CA) rather than taking into account the child's unique developmental needs. The purpose of the study was to highlight the need for better alignment of educational policies and practices as they relate to child development. This emphasis on age leads to concerns about the efforts to teach children to learn to read conventionally before they may be developmentally ready.

Introduction
According to the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) (2004), kindergarten is considered to be the traditional beginning year of the American public school system as well as a time when children are expected to integrate their cognitive, social, emotional, language, and physical competencies to meet the demands of a structured educational experience (Pianta, Cox, & Snow, 2007). However, while a child must typically be chronologically five or close to five to begin kindergarten, not all five-year olds may be developmentally ready for the rigors of an increasingly academic and demanding kindergarten curriculum (Almon & Miller, 2009;Ilg, Ames, & Baker, 1981). Even though the theoretical underpinnings of child development may vary, theorists (Elkind, 1994;Erikson, 1963;Gesell et al., 1940;Montessori, 1964;Piaget & Inhelder, 1969) agree that having reached a fifth or sixth birthday does not necessarily guarantee any given level of development.
Recognizing that children develop at their own rates but still go through the same predictable stages of growth, the field of emergent literacy looks to the continuum of literacy skills development unique to each child. Correspondingly, there is an entire field of child development that also recognizes a continuum in the individual development of children that includes physical, motor, social, emotional, adaptive, and cognitive as well as language domains. An understanding of the differences in children's developmental growth reinforces the importance of designing early instruction based on a broad set of literacy experiences (Paris, 2011). Knowledge about children's early literacy learning has increased substantially in the past several decades (Claessens, Duncan, & Engel, 2008;National Early Literacy Panel, 2008); however, only in the past 10 years have sizeable efforts been directed to the understanding and development of reading related skills prior to school entry and a recognition of how these skills contribute to later academic success Marston et al., 2007).

Statement of the problem
There is a lack of empirical research that not only explores the relationship between a child's early literacy learning and his developmental stage, but also that has utilized a developmentally appropriate instrument as a way to monitor a child's developmental stage in conjunction with his early literacy learning (Almon & Miller, 2009;Justice, Invernizzi, Geller, Sullivan, & Welsch, 2005;Meisels, 2006;Snow & Oh, 2011). Current curricular practices focus on teaching the child to read at a proficient level; however, these practices fail to determine if the child is developmentally ready to read. The purpose of this study was to examine the relationship between children's developmental age (DA) and early literacy learning. The aim of this study was to utilize information from the Gesell Developmental Observation-Revised (GDO-R) which measures development age in conjunction with students' scores on CAP as defined by Marie Clay (2006). The intention was to identify additional means to guide parents and teachers in making curricular decisions for their children from prekindergarten to second grade.
This study focused on the following research questions and tested the related hypotheses: (1) How does the child's CA versus DA as measured by the GDO-R relate to the child's early literacy learning as measured by CAP?
H 0 1: There is no statistically significant relationship between a child's CA versus DA and the child's readiness to read.
(2) What factors singly, or in combination, account for a child's early literacy learning (CAP)?
Several studies (Cabell, Justice, Konold, & McGinty, 2011;Spira, Bracken, & Fischel, 2005;Welsh, Nix, Blair, & Bierman, 2010) exploring the patterns of prekindergarten children who were identified as at-risk for later academic difficulties found emergent literacy skills to be unique predictors of kindergarten math and reading achievement. Other studies focusing on the effectiveness of early intervention also supported the importance of these skills for helping struggling readers and English language learners as well as preventing reading disabilities (Betts, Reschly, Pickart, Heistad, & Sheran, 2008;Farver et al., 2009;Justice, Kaderavek, Fan, Sofka, & Hunt, 2009;Young, 2009).
International studies (Lei et al., 2011; National Inquiry into the Teaching of Literacy, 2005;Nergård-Nilssen, 2006;Plaza & Cohen, 2006) also supported the importance of emergent literacy skills as predictors of later reading outcomes. A six-year longitudinal study in China (Lei et al., 2011) found that early literacy skills were essential in the early prediction of later reading difficulties in Chinese children. In a Norwegian longitudinal case study of children with developmental dyslexia, Nergård-Nilssen (2006) examined preschool cognitive and linguistic profiles with emergent literacy skills. The author found that delayed development in emergent literacy turned out to be the most prognostic indicator of later low reading achievement.
There is growing recognition of early reading development as a predictor of later school success and a factor in the widening achievement gap (Jacobsen-Chernoff, Flanagan, McPhee, & Park, 2007;Lonigan, Allan, & Lerner, 2011; National Inquiry into the Teaching of Literacy, 2005). There are ageappropriate developmental antecedents underlying the continuum of reading that are found early and prior to the onset of school . Many children enter kindergarten with welldeveloped print knowledge, phonological knowledge, and oral language; conversely, a significant number of children arrive in kindergarten with a low level of these early skills. These skills are often referred to as "emergent literacy skills," which Whitehurst and Lonigan (1998) defined as "the developmental precursors to conventional forms of reading and writing" (p. 849).
The term "emergent literacy" was coined by Clay (1966) to describe the developmental reading behaviors she observed in young children in New Zealand. The concept of emergent literacy evolved during the 1960s through the 1980s as the result of new information on how young children develop an understanding of reading and writing (Morrow, 2011). Emergent literacy may be described as the process of learning about the environment that leads to the development of meaning and concepts, including concepts about the functions of reading and writing. Koenig (1992) stated that emergent literacy "is characterized by the early development of understanding that abstract symbols have meaning and that people use these symbols for the communication of ideas" (p. 279). Teale and Sulzby (1986) in their classic review of the research on emergent literacy found five characteristics of young children as literacy learners: (1) almost all children in a literate society are learning to read and write early in their lives; (2) literacy is functional and an integral part of a child's learning process; (3) oral language, reading, and writing develop concurrently and interrelatedly; (4) children learn through active engagement; and (5) as parents and children interact together around print, adults pave the way to a child's independence in reading and writing. This last feature is now known as the family literacy theory (Taylor, 1983;Wasik, 2004). Teale and Sulzby (1989) asserted that this quality was the most significant of the five characteristics. It is difficult to pinpoint the exact time when this literacy learning begins. According to Wolf (2007), learning to read begins the first time an infant is held and a story is read aloud to him, thereby initiating a lifelong process of learning to read and write.
Unlike the maturational theory of Gesell or stage model theory of Piaget, emergent literacy posits that literacy development begins at birth and that the home environment plays a major role in the child's literary abilities (Clay, 2001). It seeks to explain how literacy develops and what interaction is needed during the developmental continuum of the reading process. Emergent literacy is a developmental continuum revealing where a child is in his attempts to learn to read and write (Lonigan, Burgess, & Anthony, 2000;Strickland & Morrow, 1989). This literacy, like child development, is ongoing and not fixed and does not occur when a child starts school (Burns, Griffin, & Snow, 1999;Lonigan, 2006). Rather, it begins in infancy as children have had experiences with the oral and written language before they start school (National Association for the Education of Young Children, 2009). Therefore, "early literacy learning" is an ongoing process that children develop early in their language acquisition and that contributes to their future academic success.
The Developing Early Literacy: Report of the National Early Literacy Panel (National Early Literacy Panel, 2008) provided a meta-analysis of nearly 300 studies showing which early literacy measures correlated with later literary achievement. Its mission was to summarize the scientific evidence on early literacy development and to influence educational policy and practices on young children's early language and literacy development. A significant finding of the report was that reading and writing skills that were developed in the first five years of life had a consistently strong relationship with later conventional reading and writing skills.
The National Early Literacy Panel (NELP) (2008) identified emergent skills and abilities that predict later reading achievement, even after the influence of intelligence or socioeconomic status was taken into account. These emergent skills pertain to three broad areas: (1) phonological awareness, or child's developing awareness of sound units with oral language independent of meaning; (2) alphabet knowledge, or a child's knowledge of names and sounds associated with printed letters; and (3) print awareness, letter and word concepts, and directionality. Children who had more of these skills learned to read sooner and more competently than those children who did not have these skills.

Print awareness and the development of visual perception
Print awareness is a prerequisite for children's success in beginning to learn to read (Fountas & Pinnell, 2011). Children acquire print awareness on a gradient with the assistance of their interactions with text (Evans & Saint-Aubins, 2011). Print awareness shows the understandings about written language that are developed slowly, steadily, and often early in children brought up in highly literate environments as found in Durkin (1966) groundbreaking study on children who learned to read before starting school. However, print awareness is also based on the child's vision development.
In 1949, Gesell and Bullis (1949) published Vision: Its Development in Infants and Children. Earlier, they discovered the importance of seeing in the developing infant: "In the early months, looking is half of living" (p. 253) and wrote a description of visual behavior expected within the first five years of life. This information translates to how a child responds to the items on the Gesell assessments, especially the Copy Forms, as it requires visual discrimination. Children respond to the Copy Forms at their developmental stage of visual perceptions, and demonstrate their DA norm. Clay (2001) found visual perception of text to be a part of the inner processing system from which the reader generates reading behaviors. She saw visual perception of text as a hidden curriculum of perceptual learning. Clay described visual perception strategies as one of the strategies, "inner controls," used by children in learning to read. It is this increased visual awareness that allows the child to progress in his emergent literacy journey.
Based on her theory about how children come to master the complex tasks of reading and writing, Clay (2001) created an assessment tool to observe and measure emergent literacy. An Observation Survey of Early Literacy Achievement (Clay, 2006) provided a systematic way to determine early reading behaviors. It includes six sub-tasks: Letter Identification, Word Test, Vocabulary, Hearing and Recording Sounds in Words, Text Reading, and CAP. CAP is a teacher-administered standardized assessment that determines what the child knows about the way spoken language is represented in print.
The 24 items of the CAP address several critical points of print awareness, including where to start reading, reading directionality, word-by-word matching, and distinguishing between the idea of a letter and a word. CAP assesses the literary knowledge of young children by providing information about what children know about reading before they begin to read. CAP is important because it is based on the recognition that children master CAP before they are ready for the early stages of reading instruction (Clay, 2001;Fountas & Pinnell, 1996). Nonetheless, the CAP is only a measurement of literacy and does not take into consideration the other developmental domains that impact an overall child's growth.
Accordingly, the GDO-R is an instrument that involves direct observation about a child's growth in cognitive, motor, social, and emotional domains and determines the overall DA at which a child is functioning. In Mental Growth of the Preschool Child: A Psychological Outline of Normal Development from Birth to the Sixth Year Including a System of Developmental Diagnosis, Gesell (1925) provided detailed norms and specific instructions for giving the Gesell Behavior Tests to children.
This developmental examination became known as the Gesell Readiness Screening Test, and later in the 1970s-1980s, it came to be known as the Gesell Developmental Observation (GDO). The GDO is not concerned with right or wrong answers; rather, it is concerned with the child's response in terms of developmental status. The factors considered in determining a child's overall DA include processes, organization, method, verbalizations, overt behaviors, and the end product. The DA is the age in years and half years that best described the child's collective behavior and performances on a developmental continuum. A child's DA may or may not correspond to his CA.
The GDO was the focus of a national study in 2008-2010 to provide current and normative data to support its validity and reliability. The result of this study was the Gesell Developmental Observation Revised (GDO-R). The GDO-R Technical Report Ages 3-6 Data Analysis and Results (Gesell Institute of Child Development, 2012) listed the number of items, sample size, maximum possible points, mean raw score, standard deviation, and internal consistency coefficient for each task. The new GDO-R also incorporates parent/guardian and teacher input and includes performance level evaluations and strand scoring. Strand A includes the original developmental tasks developed by Gesell: Cubes, Incomplete Man, Fine Motor, Gross Motor, and Copy Forms.
Gesell's original Copy Forms test seriated six forms of increasing difficulty: circle, cross, square, triangle, divided rectangle, and diamond. The test reveals behavior-age level from 2½ to 9 years. The significance of the test is not just in the success of copying, but the way the child copies, the size form made, the placement of the form drawn on the paper, and the organization of the six forms on the paper. It also assesses a child's competence in integrating visual information with fine motor skills.
The divided rectangle (see Figure 1) is a challenging form that tells a great deal about a child. The four and four-and-half-year olds see it as "too hard," and when willing to tackle it, they have little success in making the divided rectangle (Ilg & Ames, 1972). Children who are developmentally younger than six do not have mature enough visual perceptions to handle this Copy Form. It is not until the DA of 6 years that the child usually has success, meaning that he makes the horizontal and angled lines cross the central vertical lines. These directionality behaviors are necessary in mastering CAP and in early reading; it is an internal focus on the inner control within the child which emerges as the child uses text as the external resource in learning to read (Clay, 2001).
Today most researchers have come to understand child development, the learning process, and the early childhood underpinnings of reading ability (Hay & Fielding-Barnsley, 2009;Lonigan, 2006;Neuman & Dickinson, 2011). These findings lend support to the concept of emergent literacy as a skill set and knowledge base that begins developmentally in infancy and is further enriched in early childhood stages by exposure to language, print, and instruction. Yet, there are varying levels of early literacy learning among children entering school, and these early years are important. The process of becoming a skilled reader is highlighted by a significant body of evidence that preschool children's development in the areas of oral language, phonological awareness, and print awareness is predictive of how well they will learn to read once they are exposed to formal reading in elementary school (National Early Literacy Panel, 2008).
In light of this evidence, there are ongoing concerns about the policy and practice implications as well as literacy assessments used with preschoolers (Invernizzi, Landrum, Teichman, & Townsend, 2010). Many efforts to teach children to learn how to read before ages of four or five may be rushing them to perform tasks for which they are not biologically ready. Gesell suggested that student school success would increase if children started school based on their developmental level, or behavior readiness, rather than their age in years (Ames, 1989). Clay (2001), on the other hand, advocated that teachers meet children at the level at which they enter school.
This study utilized data from the GDO-R scores of 83 children from the ages of four to six-and-half and cross-referenced this data to the CAP. The study specifically focused on determining if there was a relationship between a child's CA, his DA, and his early reading ability. It also examined if there were factors, singly or in combination, which significantly impacted the child's emergent literacy.

Participants
Study participants included children from the ages of 4-6 ½ attending early childhood learning centers in Texas, Pennsylvania, and Michigan. A total of 83 children (age 4, n = 11; age 4½, n = 31; age 5, n = 27; age 5½, n = 6, age 6, n = 6; age 6½, n = 2) participated in the study. There were 48 males and 35 females and their ethnicities were comprised of Caucasian, African American, Hispanic, and Asian. Nearly, all the children (>90%) used English as their primary language. Chronological ages were determined by calculating the child's age in years and months, then rounding it off into sixmonth intervals. For example, a child that was 4 years and 5 months was placed in the four-year-old group.

Design and procedure
Two observational instruments were provided: the CAP and the GDO-R. The parents completed a questionnaire as part of the GDO-R assessment. The questionnaire, Gesell Parent/Guardian Questionnaire (GPQ), was filled out by parents while their child was being administered the GDO-R or at a later time. The GPQ contains 78 items that collected data regarding the child's health history, home environment, habits from birth, and social, emotional, and adaptive behaviors observed by the parents/guardian. The data collected from the CAP scores were analyzed to reveal children's emergent literacy skills. These scores were then compared to the children's chronological and DAs. The children's DAs were determined by the GDO-R, which provided a score for developmental tasks that actually results in ages that may be younger, older, or equal to their actual CAs. Each child received a numerical score on each GDO-R task based on his performance of the items that comprise the task. The score was reported in 6 month age intervals: 4, 4½, 5, etc.
To aid in the interpreting of the task scores, each task has a benchmark that reflects the performance that can be expected of a child in each age band. In addition to the task score and benchmark, the technical data supporting the GDO-R based on a large, diverse national sample of children provided the percentage of children meeting the benchmark for each developmental task (cubes, copy forms, completing a drawing of a person, etc.) and the p-values for each item for each age band. These technical data provide information that aids in comparing an individual child's performance to a sample of same-age peers. Archived data from the GDO-R DA scores and parents' responses from the GPQ provided additional data to answer the research questions.
All data were entered into a computer database and analyzed using the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS), version 20 (SPSS-IBM, 2012). For each student in the study, the following data were collected: (1) Chronological age.
(2) DA at time of data collection.
Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and correlation calculations using the Pearson product of movement of correlation. Mertler and Charles (2005) stated that the Pearson product of movement of correlation is most common and popular in use and is appropriate for use when the relationship between two variables is a linear one. The correlation coefficient is the index of the relationship between two variables. The coefficient shows the direction of the relationship, positive or negative, and the relative strength of the relationship (Graziano & Raulin, 2007). Pearson correlations were utilized to determine if there was a relationship between certain variables, such as child's CA, DA, and early literacy learning. Two-tailed t-tests were also run to examine the relationship between items on the GDO-R and early literacy learning. Subsequent analyses were performed to further explore environmental factors and the possible relationships to the child's DA and early literacy learning. Specifically, a principal components factor analysis was performed on environmental items from the parent questionnaire. Pearson correlations were utilized again to examine relationships between meaningful factors and children's DA as well as their early literacy learning. Finally, a stepwise multiple regression was employed to see which, if any, factors predict children's early literacy learning.

Tables and findings (analysis)
The first hypothesis stated there is no statistically significant relationship between a child's CA versus DA and his CAP score. Correlations were computed among the child's CA, the child's DA, and the child's early literacy learning as measured by CAP for 83 children. Descriptive statistics for the participants' CA, DA, and CAP are displayed in Table 1.
Participants' CAs ranged from 4-year-old (4.0) to 6 years and 9 months (6.9). The average CA of the participants was 4 years and 8 months. Participants also had the potential to score via the GDO-R DAs of 2½ years (2.5) to 7 years (7.0) with intervals of 6 months. Results showed the average DA of the same participants to be 4 years and 7 months, which would yield a DA of 4½ (4.5) as per the Gesell parameters. Furthermore, the total amount of items that the child can score on the CAP is 24. Higher scores on the CAP correlate with a child's increased likeliness to be ready to read (Clay, 2006). Table 1 clearly demonstrates that the mean score of the child's DA is lower than the child's CA. Moreover, the mean CAP score is at a 10.24 for the participants in the study.
Pearson correlations were run to determine whether a statistically significant relationship exists between a child's CA versus DA and the child's early literacy learning. The results of the Pearson correlations are presented in Table 2.
Results suggest that all correlations were found to be statistically significant. Results indicate a positive relationship between (1) the child's CA and the child's DA, r (83) = .648, p < .000, (2) the child's CA and child's early literacy learning as measured by the CAP r (83) = .596, p < .000, and (3) the child's DA and early literacy learning r (83) = .683, p < .000. In general, the results suggest that older children also have a higher DA and are more likely ready to read. It is important to note that the relationship between a child's DA and early literacy learning as measured by the CAP is not only statistically significant, but proves to be stronger than between CA and the CAP.
Furthermore, this study explored what factors singly, or in combination, account for a child's early literacy learning. A stepwise multiple regression was conducted using the child's CA, DA, environmental factors via the GPQ, the overall Copy Forms score, and the divided rectangle to predict the child's early literacy learning (CAP). Each predictor was entered into the regression equation in a stepwise fashion to see if it accounted for a significant proportion of the variance in the dependent variable (CAP) at the .05 significance level. Results of the stepwise multiple regression are displayed in Table 3. Table 3 that only one variable entered the regression equation, accounting in the final equation for 51% of the variance. Specifically, a child's DA predicts a child's early literacy learning.

Discussion
The first research question examined how the child's CA versus DA as measured by the GDO-R relates to the child's early literacy learning as measured by CAP. Results confirmed that there is a positive relationship between a child's CA, his DA, and his CAP score. The correlation is significant at the 1% level of significance. There is a statistically significant relationship between a child's DA and his early literacy learning. The correlation is high and positive (r = .683), suggesting that the child's early literacy learning increases in connection with his DA. This finding relates to the research that highlighted the significance of the developmental aspects of early literacy, social and emotional factors, and brain growth in young children prior to entering school (Massetti, 2009;Neuman & Dickinson, 2011). It has been proven that learning to read and write are fundamental developmental milestones in a literate society and that early literacy development is a key to future success in acquiring content learning in other areas and throughout life. This study confirmed the importance of understanding child development in emergent literacy.
Further studies regarding the connection of visual perception, DA, and reading are strongly recommended. An unplanned aspect of the study was the strong connection found between the early child developmentalists (e.g. Piaget, Montessori, and Gesell) and the current neuroscientific research about the wiring of the child's brain. Additional research is needed to investigate how brain development impacts readiness for school. Research is needed to understand how to better prepare schools to be ready for the children, and rather than expecting children to be ready for school.
Another area that would be beneficial for future research is a longitudinal study with this population, which follows their DA patterns and relationship to reading skills. An interesting aspect of the study was that there were not any statistically significant relationships between the environmental factors, DA, and emergent literacy. Future research is strongly recommended on the areas of environmental factors and DA and how they impact emergent literacy. There is body of research that supports the importance of environmental issues and emergent literacy; a possible focus of future research might incorporate child developmental factors.
In summary, this study found that a child's DA has a statistically significant relationship to his emergent literacy. In factor analysis, DA was a stronger predictor than the environmental factors of the child's early literacy learning. The results of descriptive statistics revealed that the children in this  study's DA were younger than their CA. This information is important for both parents and educators to know since a child who is chronologically five may not be behaving and functioning at a fully fiveyear-old developmental level, but may be younger, for example, between 4½ and 5.
Based on these findings, not all five-year olds are behaving in a manner that is fully 5 and thus may not be ready for the rigors of an increasingly academic and demanding kindergarten curriculum. A child may have an above average knowledge base, but to be successful in school, a child also needs to be ready physically, socially, and emotionally, and exhibit adaptive behaviors that will support school success. In addition to a child's cognitive development, language, motor, and social development and the proficiency of self-help skills are essential to school success. Schools are currently designed to organize learning by CA, not DA; therefore, the findings of this study support the idea that DA should be considered, specifically in early literacy teaching and learning. Some suggestions may include using the developmental profile of a child to inform the content and pace of curricular expectations, as well as sequencing learning experiences to the overall developmental level of a child, rather than by his CA.
Furthermore, the findings of this study revealed that there is a statistically significant relationship between a child's DA and early literacy learning as measured by the CAP. Additionally, the child's DA was found to be the strongest predictor of the child's early literacy learning. School readiness involves all the stakeholders: the parents, the teachers, the community as well as the child, and requires more than a "one size fits all" formula. Clay (2001) underlined the importance for educators to recognize that this process is a journey and to be alert to how active learners change over time within their given context. Clay emphasized that the acquisition of reading, the importance of early literacy learning, as well as the responsibility of the educator to meet each child at his level and take his learning from that point.