Elsevier

Early Childhood Research Quarterly

Volume 42, 1st Quarter 2018, Pages 1-10
Early Childhood Research Quarterly

Research Paper
Crossing the bridge to elementary school: The development of children’s working memory components in relation to teacher-student relationships and academic achievement

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2017.08.004Get rights and content

Highlights

  • Dependency in the teacher-student relationship predicts visuospatial sketchpad performance.

  • The phonological loop and central executive were not predicted by the teacher-child relationship.

  • Visuospatial sketchpad performance in kindergarten predicts reading, spelling and math in first grade.

  • The phonological loop in kindergarten predicts math achievement in first grade.

  • Performance on the central executive did not predict academic achievement.

Abstract

Working memory is important for a variety of life domains, including for children’s school functioning. As such, it is crucial to understand its development, antecedents and consequences. The current study investigates the development of different working memory components (phonological loop, visuospatial sketchpad, central executive), the influence of different aspects of the teacher-student relationship (closeness, conflict, dependency) and its predictive value for academic achievement (reading, spelling, mathematics) across the transition from kindergarten to first grade. The sample consisted of 107 kindergarten children. Working memory tasks were administered at the end of kindergarten and first grade. Teachers reported on teacher-student relationship quality in the middle of first grade. Standardized tests were used to assess academic achievement at the end of first grade. Results indicate moderate to large increases in the phonological loop and visuospatial sketchpad and large gains in the central executive. Dependency of the student towards the teacher significantly predicted visuospatial sketchpad performance at the end of first grade. Reading was significantly predicted by the visuospatial sketchpad and phonological loop in kindergarten, while for spelling the visuospatial sketchpad was important. Finally, mathematics was predicted by performance on the phonological loop and the visuospatial sketchpad. The current study indicates the importance of the affective quality of the teacher-student relationship for working memory performance, which in turn is important for academic achievement. It is therefore critical to attend to the early detection and prevention or intervention of working memory problems in the classroom in order to prevent future academic problems. Additionally, maintaining a positive relationship with students and encouraging their independent exploration may be important when preventing such problems, complementary to cognitive or other types of training and intervention.

Introduction

For children’s school functioning, working memory is of utmost importance. Children use their working memory throughout the day in the classroom, both in showing positive behavior (e.g., positive work habits and engagement in learning; Brock, Rimm-Kaufman, Nathanson, & Grimm, 2009) and during academic tasks (e.g., Alloway & Alloway, 2010). Because of the importance of working memory for outcomes in the classroom, understanding its development, antecedents and consequences can help to prevent a wide range of educational problems. Recent research shows that factors in the classroom environment, such as the teacher-student relationship, influence the performance on working memory tasks (e.g., de Wilde, Koot, & van Lier, 2015).

However, empirical research examining the role of the teacher-student relationship in working memory and the role of working memory for academic achievement is scarce. Moreover, previous studies do not always distinguish between the different working memory components, limiting our insights into their relationships with different aspects of the teacher-student relationship and academic achievement. Therefore, the current study aims to investigate these relationships during children’s transition from kindergarten to first grade, an important period in the development of working memory.

Executive functions are cognitive processes that are essential in making goal-directed behavior possible (Diamond, 2013, Zelazo and Carlson, 2012). There are three core executive functions: working memory, inhibition and cognitive flexibility. Working memory is an executive function that starts to develop early in life and is important for various outcomes across the lifespan (e.g., mental and physical health; Diamond, 2013). This memory system is responsible for holding information in mind, including new information (updating) and mentally manipulating this information. We use working memory, for example, to calculate, to find out the meaning of written information, to execute complex instructions or to combine multiple sources of information before making a decision.

Baddeley (1986) conceptualized working memory as a multicomponent system. His model distinguishes two slave systems, the phonological loop and the visuospatial sketchpad. The phonological loop can temporarily store verbal information and rehearse this information or update it with new information in order to support recall of the information (Baddeley, 1986; Gathercole, Pickering, Ambridge, & Wearing, 2004). The visuospatial sketchpad can temporarily hold information with a visual or spatial nature (Baddeley, 1986, Gathercole et al., 2004). Both these components are controlled by the a third aspect of working memory, the central executive. In this component information is not merely stored, both actively processed and manipulated (Baddeley, 1986, Gathercole et al., 2004). This system is used, for example, when making a calculation: the numbers and operators need to be remembered and the information needs to be manipulated when making the calculation. Later, Baddeley added a fourth component, the episodic buffer, that integrates information of different memory systems into episodic representations (Baddeley, 2000). However, due to the lack of reliable measures for this component in young children, the current study will make use of the three component model (De Pontes Nobre et al., 2013).

In very young children (age 4) the central executive and phonological loop have been found to be distinguishable (Alloway, Gathercole, Willis, & Adams, 2004). From the age of 6 the three factor model provides the best fit (Gathercole et al., 2004). At this age the phonological loop and visuospatial sketchpad show a relatively strong relationship with the central executive (r = 0.73-0.85; Gathercole et al., 2004).

The development of working memory depends (in part) on the maturation of the prefrontal cortex (Anderson, 2002). Working memory abilities start to develop early in life (Diamond, 2013, Reznick et al., 2004), show important developmental spurts during preschool and the early years of formal schooling (ages 3–8; Ganea & Harris, 2013; Hongwanishkul, Happaney, Lee, & Zelazo, 2005; Kibbe and Leslie, 2013, Moher and Feigenson, 2013) and continue to develop gradually at least until adolescence (Conklin, Luciana, Hooper, & Yarger, 2007; Gathercole et al., 2004). Different components of working memory show different developmental trajectories. For example, the central executive starts to develop later than the two slave systems (Davidson, Amso, Anderson, & Diamond, 2006; Garon, Bryson, & Smith, 2008), suggesting it is likely to show rapid improvements around the time of transition to first grade. In first grade, the classroom environment becomes more complex and greater demands are placed on children’s working memory (e.g., more complex instructions; Cuevas, Hubble, & Bell, 2012; Hughes, Ensor, Wilson, & Graham, 2010; Roebers, Röthlisberger, Cimeli, & Michel, 2011). Such changes can influence the development of working memory, for example by challenging children’s working memory abilities, giving this development an additional boost (Roebers et al., 2011). Despite the importance of this transition, the number of studies examining working memory development specifically at this point in time are limited.

Although the development of working memory is largely driven by the maturation of the prefrontal cortex, this maturation occurs in interaction with environmental stimulation in periods of rapid development (Huttenlocher, 2002). When children enter formal schooling, the classroom context becomes an important part of children’s environment in which stimulation can be provided. A high-quality teacher-student relationship, characterized by high closeness, low conflict and low dependency, has previously been shown to have a positive effect on several aspects of children’s development, including social development, cognitive functioning and academic performance (Downer, Sabol, & Hamre, 2010; Verschueren & Koomen, 2012).

The attachment perspective, often employed in teacher-child relationship research, can explain how aspects of the teacher-student relationship can affect working memory (Roorda, Koomen, Spilt, & Oort, 2011; Verschueren & Koomen, 2012). According to this view, children who have a positive affective relationship with their teacher (e.g., high closeness, low conflict, low dependency) use the teacher as a secure base from which to explore the school environment (Roorda et al., 2011). As such, children with a positive teacher-child relationship will engage more in stimulating learning activities, which is likely to promote the development of the prefrontal cortex and aspects of working memory. Additionally, children who view the teacher as a safe haven will return to the teacher when distressed, leading to more optimal stress regulation (Roorda et al., 2011). A study of Ahnert, Harwardt-Heinecke, Kappler, Eckstein-Madry and Milatz (2012) indeed shows that children sharing a positive relationship with their teacher show more optimal patterns of stress regulation. In turn, stress has been found to negatively affect the development and functioning of the prefrontal cortex, executive functioning and working memory (Diamond, 2013, Hughes, 2011, Kolb et al., 2012). The three different components of working memory can each be influenced by a positive teacher-child relationship. Rapidly developing components, such as the central executive around the transition to first grade, are more likely to be influenced, as their underlying brain regions undergo large changes and are most sensitive to environmental stimulation (Huttenlocher, 2002).

A recent study of de Wilde et al. (2015) found a bidirectional relationship between child-perceived teacher-child relationship quality and children’s performance on a task measuring the central executive at the age of 5–8. Cross-lagged models show that especially conflict in the relationship seemed detrimental, while warmth between the teacher and the student had a modest positive effect. Similarly, Hamre, Hatfield, Pianta and Jamil (2014) found a positive relationship between observed sensitive teaching and classroom organization with the central executive component of working memory at the age of 4. Both a positive classroom climate and positive affective relationships between the teacher and specific students can thus promote working memory. Hence, the first results of studies examining the relationship between teacher-student interactions and working memory are assuring, though studies are still scarce and focus mainly on the central executive. It is therefore unclear how the teacher-student relationship relates to the different subcomponents of working memory.

Understanding the development of working memory is important as good working memory abilities relate to positive outcomes in a number of domains, such as children’s school functioning (Diamond, 2013). Previous research has shown a positive relationship between working memory abilities and academic achievement in school aged children after controlling for children’s fluid and crystallized intelligence (e.g., Alloway and Alloway, 2010, Desoete and De Weerdt, 2013; De Weerdt, Desoete, & Roeyers, 2013). However, results are not always consistent, with some studies showing no or limited relationships between working memory and mathematics (Bull & Lee, 2014; Friso-van den Bos, van der Ven, Kroesbergen, & van Luit, 2013) or reading (Lan, Legare, Ponitz, Li, & Morrison, 2011).

Recent research indicates that different components of working memory may be differentially related to specific aspects of academic achievement, namely mathematics, reading and spelling, though results are sometimes inconsistent. The study of Meyer, Salimpoor, Wu, Geary and Menon (2010), for example, showed that accuracy of numerical operations was related with the visuospatial sketchpad only, while working out mathematical word solving problems was associated with all working memory components. Also, De Smedt et al. (2009) showed an important contribution of the central executive and the visuospatial sketchpad in first grade mathematics achievement, while second grade mathematics achievement was predicted by the central executive and the phonological loop, suggesting different components of working memory might be important in different stages of mathematics development. In the case of word reading, the phonological loop and central executive are important, but not the visuospatial sketchpad (Zheng, Swanson, & Marcoulides, 2011), while spelling is associated to the visuospatial sketchpad (Brandenburg et al., 2015). Most studies provide information about associations between working memory and academic achievement. However, information about the predictive value of working memory components, especially at the beginning of formal education, can be useful for the purpose of prevention of academic difficulties.

In sum, evidence is accumulating that the teacher-student relationship is important for children’s working memory performance, which in turn relates to children’s academic achievement. Yet, it is unclear whether the teacher-student relationship has predictive value for working memory development and to what extent working memory performance in kindergarten is predictive of academic achievement in first grade. This limits our insights and impedes the efficient prevention of working memory problems and associated problems in school functioning.

The current study therefore investigates three research questions. First, how do different working memory components develop when children make the transition to elementary school? It is expected that different components of working memory develop at different rates during this transition, with especially the central executive showing rapid growth (Davidson et al., 2006, Garon et al., 2008). Second, how do different dimensions of the teacher-student relationship (closeness, conflict, dependency) relate to different components of working memory (phonological loop, visuospatial sketchpad, central executive) at the end of first grade? Based on previous research it is expected that especially closeness and conflict in the teacher-student relationship will (positively and negatively) affect working memory (de Wilde et al., 2015). Although the mechanisms underlying such relationships are likely to influence all components of working memory, the central executive − which develops very rapidly at the time of transition to first grade − is most likely to be receptive to environmental influences (Davidson et al., 2006, Huttenlocher, 2002). Third, which components of working memory in kindergarten and first grade predict which aspects of academic achievement (reading, spelling, mathematics) at the end of first grade? The central executive is anticipated to be associated with all three academic skills, while the phonological loop is most likely related to reading and spelling and the visuospatial sketchpad to mathematics (De Smedt et al., 2009, Meyer et al., 2010, Zheng et al., 2011).

Section snippets

Participants

Children, their parents, and their teachers were recruited through regular kindergarten schools (no schools with special education were included) in Flanders (Belgium). Twenty schools (33 classrooms) participated in the study. Parents of 107 children (Mage = 5.88, SDage = 0.29) provided written informed consent in kindergarten. Of this sample, parents of 89 children (83.2%, Mage = 6.88, SDage = 0.28) participated in the follow-up measure at the end of first grade. In the middle of first grade, teachers

Working memory development

Table 2 shows the descriptive statistics of the working memory tasks in kindergarten and first grade and the repeated measures test examining the change in children’s performance on each task from kindergarten to first grade. Cohen’s d is calculated and differences are interpreted as small above 0.20, medium above 0.50 and large above 0.80 (Cohen, 1992).

Children’s performance on all working memory tasks increased significantly from kindergarten to first grade. The two measures of the

Discussion

The current study aimed to investigate how different components of working memory (i.e., phonological loop, visuospatial sketchpad, central executive) developed during the transition from kindergarten to first grade, how the teacher-child relationship quality in the middle of first grade relates to working memory at the end of first grade, and how working memory performance in kindergarten predicts academic achievement at the end of first grade.

Funding

This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

References (69)

  • I. Friso-Van den Bos et al.

    Working memory and mathematics in primary school children: A meta-analysis

    Educational Research Review

    (2013)
  • Ganea et al.

    Early limits on the verbal updating of an object’s location

    Journal of Experimental Child Psychology

    (2013)
  • S.E. Gathercole et al.

    Working memory in children with reading disabilities

    Journal of Experimental Child Psychology

    (2006)
  • G. Jobard et al.

    Evaluation of the dual route theory of reading: A meta-analysis of 35 neuroimaging studies

    Neuroimage

    (2003)
  • M.M. Kibbe et al.

    What’s the object of object working memory in infancy? Unraveling ‘what’ and ‘how many’

    Cognitive Psychology

    (2013)
  • H. Koomen et al.

    Validating the Student-Teacher Relationship Scale: Testing factor structure and measurement invariance across child gender and age in a Dutch sample

    Journal of School Psychology

    (2012)
  • X. Lan et al.

    Investigating the links between the subcomponents of executive function and academic achievement: A cross-cultural analysis of Chinese and American preschoolers

    Journal of Experimental Child Psychology

    (2011)
  • M.L. Meyer et al.

    Differential contribution of specific working memory components to mathematics achievement in 2nd and 3rd graders

    Learning and Motivational Differences

    (2010)
  • M. Moher et al.

    Factors influencing infants’ ability to update object representations in memory

    Cognitive Development

    (2013)
  • B.L. Rhoades et al.

    Demographic and familial predictors of early executive function development: Contribution of a person-centered perspective

    Journal of Experimental Child Psychology

    (2011)
  • J.L. Spilt et al.

    Young children's perceptions of teacher-child relationships: An evaluation of two instruments and the role of child gender in kindergarten

    Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology

    (2010)
  • X. Zheng et al.

    Working memory components as predictors of children’s mathematical word problem solving

    Journal of Experimental Child Psychology

    (2011)
  • L. Ahnert et al.

    Student-teacher relationships and classroom climate in first grade: How do they relate to students’ stress regulation?

    Attachment & Human Development

    (2012)
  • T.P. Alloway

    Automated working memory assessment (AWMA)

    (2007)
  • P. Anderson

    Assessment and development of executive function (EF) during childhood

    Child Neuropsychology: A Journal on Normal and Abnormal Development in Childhood and Adolescence

    (2002)
  • J.L. Arbuckle

    Amos (Version 23.0) [Computer program]

    Chicago : IBM SPSS.

    (2014)
  • A. Baddeley

    Working memory oxford

    (1986)
  • J. Brandenburg et al.

    Working memory in children with learning disabilities in reading versus spelling. Searching for overlapping and specific cognitive factors

    Journal of Learning Disabilities

    (2015)
  • R. Bull et al.

    Executive functioning and mathematics achievement

    Child Development Perspectives

    (2014)
  • R. Bull et al.

    Short-term memory, working memory, and executive functioning in preschoolers: Longitudinal predictors of mathematical achievement at age 7 years

    Developmental Neuropsychology

    (2008)
  • E. Buyse et al.

    Predicting school adjustment in early elementary school: Impact of teacher-child relationship quality and relational classroom climate

    The Elementary School Journal

    (2009)
  • J. Cadima et al.

    Environmental risk factors and children’s literacy skills during the transition to elementary school

    International Journal of Behavioral Development

    (2010)
  • J. Cohen

    A power primer

    Psychological Bulletin

    (1992)
  • Conklin et al.

    Working memory performance in typically developing children and adolescents: Behavioral evidence of protracted frontal lobe development

    Developmental Neuropsychology

    (2007)
  • Cited by (14)

    • Examining the role of parents and teachers in executive function development in early and middle childhood: A systematic review

      2023, Developmental Review
      Citation Excerpt :

      In contrast to other aspects of teacher behaviors, negative teacher behaviors (i.e., teacher-child conflict and dependency) have been studied more often at the dyadic level, similarly to parental behaviors. This pattern of results aligns with the findings of Vandenbroucke et al. (2018) meta-analysis which revealed that teacher-child interactions examined at the dyadic level show stronger effects on child EF compared to classroom level assessments. Regarding the design of the studies, in both the parent and teacher literature, longitudinal studies revealed significant effects of parent and teacher behaviors on child EF in the expected direction more frequently than cross-sectional studies.

    • Using feedback to improve monitoring judgment accuracy in kindergarten children

      2020, Early Childhood Research Quarterly
      Citation Excerpt :

      WM refers to the limited capacity of cognitive processing resources involved in simultaneous preserving and processing of information (Engle, 2002). There are substantial individual differences in WM between kindergartners, with WM capacity yielding extensive effects on academic achievement, including language and problem-solving skills (Alloway & Alloway, 2010; Gathercole, Brown, & Pickering, 2003; Rabi & Minda, 2014, Vandenbroucke et al., 2018). For kindergartners, benefits of feedback are also likely to depend on WM (Gathercole, Lamont, & Alloway, 2006; Strasser & Del Río, 2014).

    • Children's executive function development and school socio-economic and racial/ethnic composition

      2019, Early Childhood Research Quarterly
      Citation Excerpt :

      Several studies have found positive results from school-based interventions that target EF development (Barnett et al., 2008; Diamond & Lee, 2011; Jones, Bub, & Raver, 2013). In particular, positive teacher–child interactions, characterized by intentional instruction, effective classroom management, and emotional support, have been associated with EF gains (Bodrova & Leong, 2006; Rimm-Kaufman, Curby, Grimm, Nathanson, & Brock, 2009; Vandenbroucke et al., 2018). Indeed, while parents provide the foundation for EF development at home, schools that employ skilled teachers can significantly improve children’s EF capacity by initiating the neurobiological and behavioral processes that promote its development within the daily activities of the classroom (Raver & Blair, 2016).

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text