Exploring dimensions of process quality measured by the Early Childhood Environment Rating Scale

The Early Childhood Environment Rating Scale, revised edition (ECERS-R; Harms, Clifford, & Cryer, 1998), is an instrument used widely to observe and rate levels of process quality in child care centers. The authors have divided the instrument into six subscales to help ensure broad and flexible coverage of various aspects of child care quality. (The ECERS-R actually contains seven subscales, but the last one pertains to parents and staff instead of process quality experienced by children.) Psychometric analyses suggest the ECERS-R actually measures two latent dimensions of quality at most. Perlman, Zellman, and Le (2004) concluded that process quality, as measured by the ECERS-R, is unidimensional. Sakai and colleagues (2003) and Cassidy and colleagues (2005) concluded that the ECERS-R measures two latent dimensions, although their factor loadings and interpretations differ across the two studies.

I am writing a paper to present at the upcoming American Educational Research Association (AERA) conference in Denver. The paper will report results from a structural equation mediation model of the influence of on-site child care professional development on school readiness through child care quality. Given the lack of agreement among the earlier psychometric analyses of the ECERS-R, I conducted an exploratory factor analysis to see if I could replicate findings from one of the earlier studies. As shown in the table below, my preliminary results and interpretations do not align perfectly with either of the two-factor solutions from the earlier studies, but the similarities helped me decide which items to drop and which of my interpretations to keep. I plan to use a confirmatory factor analysis to formally compare model fit between the one- and two-factor solution before estimating the mediation model. I hope the summary below will help others who are wrestling with the possibility of multiple dimensions of child care quality as measured by the ECERS-R.

Summary of ECERS-R two-factor solutions from three studies

Item number	Item	Subscale	Sakai and colleagues (2003)	Cassidy and colleagues (2005)	Moore (2010)	Decision
1	Indoor space	Space and furnishings	Provisions for learning			Drop
2	Furniture for care, play, and learning	Space and furnishings	Teaching and interactions		Provisions for learning	Discrepancy
3	Furnishings for relaxation	Space and furnishings	Teaching and interactions	Materials/activities		Discrepancy
4	Room arrangement	Space and furnishings	Provisions for learning			Drop
5	Space for privacy	Space and furnishings		Materials/activities	Provisions for learning	Keep
6	Space for gross motor	Space and furnishings			Provisions for learning	Discrepancy
7	Child-related display	Space and furnishings	Teaching and interactions			Drop
8	Gross motor equipment	Space and furnishings	Provisions for learning		Provisions for learning	Keep
9	Greeting/departing	Personal care routines	Teaching and interactions			Drop
10	Meals/ snacks	Personal care routines	Provisions for learning			Drop
11	Nap/rest	Personal care routines			Provisions for learning	Discrepancy
12	Toileting/diapering	Personal care routines	Provisions for learning			Drop
13	Health practices	Personal care routines	Provisions for learning			Drop
14	Safety practices	Personal care routines	Provisions for learning			Drop
15	Books and pictures	Language-reasoning	Provisions for learning	Materials/activities	Provisions for learning	Keep
16	Encouraging children to communicate	Language-reasoning			Provisions for learning	Discrepancy
17	Using language to develop reasoning skills	Language-reasoning	Teaching and interactions	Language/interaction	Language/interaction	Keep
18	Informal use of language	Language-reasoning	Teaching and interactions	Language/interaction	Language/interaction	Keep
19	Fine motor	Activities	Teaching and interactions	Materials/activities	Provisions for learning	Keep
20	Art	Activities		Materials/activities		Drop
21	Music/movement	Activities	Teaching and interactions		Language/interaction	Keep
22	Blocks	Activities	Provisions for learning	Materials/activities	Provisions for learning	Keep
23	Sand/water	Activities	Provisions for learning			Drop
24	Dramatic play	Activities	Provisions for learning	Materials/activities	Provisions for learning	Keep
25	Nature/science	Activities		Materials/activities	Provisions for learning	Keep
26	Math/numbers	Activities	Teaching and interactions	Materials/activities	Provisions for learning	Keep
27	Use of TV, video, and/or computers	Activities			Language/interaction	Discrepancy
28	Promoting acceptance of diversity	Activities	Provisions for learning		Provisions for learning	Keep
29	Supervision of gross motor activities	Interaction			Language/interaction	Discrepancy
30	General supervision of children	Interaction	Provisions for learning	Language/interaction		Discrepancy
31	Discipline	Interaction		Language/interaction	Language/interaction	Keep
32	Staff-child interactions	Interaction	Provisions for learning	Language/interaction	Language/interaction	Keep
33	Interactions among children	Interaction	Teaching and interactions	Language/interaction	Language/interaction	Keep
34	Schedule	Program structure	Provisions for learning			Drop
35	Free play	Program structure	Teaching and interactions			Drop
36	Group time	Program structure	Provisions for learning	Language/interaction	Language/interaction	Keep

Note: Empty cells indicate loadings less than |0.3|, cross-loadings greater than |0.3|, or items skewed greater than |2|. Item 37, which asks about provisions for children with disabilities was excluded due to high missingness.