School Readiness through Sleep Routines? A Pilot Study of “Bedtime in a Box” Home Intervention

• In Event: Poster Session 02
  In Poster Session: PS 02 Topic - School Readiness/Childcare

Abstract

Introduction
School readiness has implications for children’s outcomes (Duncan et al., 2007; Gabrieli, 2009), but traditional measures often show gaps between children from racially minoritized and/or low-income groups and their peers (Fram & Kim, 2012; Quinn, 2014). As early education experiences vary widely (Pianta, 2007), one way to address gaps is through home-based interventions. In this study, we conduct an exploratory investigation of one such intervention, Bedtime in a Box (BiaB). BiaB supports families in developing a nighttime routine, which is associated with children’s achievement and health outcomes (Ferretti & Bub, 2017). The intervention consists of a box containing items for a routine (e.g., books, bath, and toothbrushing materials, alarm clock daily routine log) and a training session on how to use the items to build a bedtime routine.
Method
We conducted a pilot study in 2018 using non-randomized treatment assignment and school readiness measures pre-, mid-, and post-intervention. Participants include a treatment group of 36 parent-child dyads from a Title I school and a control group of 20 parent-child dyads from a matched school having similar socioeconomic status, size, and neighborhood. Children were between the ages of 4 and 5. The treatment group children were 69% Black, 28% Latinx, and 3% White; the control group children were 100% Black. Both groups had a median of $15K-$25K of parent income and educational attainment medians of high school diploma/GED.
The outcomes were measured using the Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test (PPVT, Dunn & Dunn, 1997), the Head-to-Toes test of self-regulation (Diamond & Taylor, 1996), and the
Early Learning Assessment (ELA), with four domains (Social Foundations, Language, Mathematics, Physical Development) (Maryland State Department of Education, 2017). We used repeated measures (three time points) analyses of variance to determine if there is a statistical difference in outcome growths between the treatment and control groups.
Results
As shown in Figure 1 and Table 1, treatment and control group differences were not statistically significant for the PPVT, or ELA-Language, and an initial ELA-Physical Development difference reduced to insignificant. For the Head-to-Toes (self-regulation), the treatment group had a higher score (Mean=14.94) than the intervention group (Mean=10.80) in the post-intervention measure (p < 0.05). The control group scored higher than the treatment group in ELA-Social in all time periods, though the difference diminished in size and significance over time. In Math, the treatment group performed worse than the control group at pre- (2.06 vs. 2.35, p < 0.05) and mid-test (2.91 vs. 3.48, p < 0.001), but the difference was reduced in significance at the post-test (3.98 vs. 4.23, p < 0.10).
Discussion and Conclusion
Although this trial is limited by its non-randomized design and groups that differed in outcomes at outset, it points to the potential of BiaB to improve school readiness, particularly in the domains of Self-regulation, Social Foundations, and Math. BiaB warrants further investigation, generally, and to explore how to improve literacy/language and physical health through BiaB. This exploratory study suggests the potential of two-generation, home-based solutions to support young children’s school readiness.

Authors

• Natalie Schock, Johns Hopkins University
  Presenting Author

• Felicia Jones
  Non-Presenting Author