This nonexperimental, longitudinal field study examines the extent to which variation in observed classroom supports (quality of emotional and instructional interactions and amount of exposure to literacy and math activities) predicts trajectories of achievement in reading and math from 54 months to fifth grade. Growth mixture modeling detected two latent classes of readers: fast readers whose skills developed rapidly and leveled off, and a typical group for which reading growth was somewhat less rapid. Only one latent class was identified for math achievement. For reading, there were small positive associations between observed emotional quality of teacher-child interactions and growth. Growth in math achievement showed small positive relations with observed emotional interactions and exposure to math activities. There was a significant interaction between quality and quantity of instruction for reading such that at higher levels of emotional quality there was less of a negative association between amount of literacy exposure and reading growth.

Observations in 737 5 th -grade classrooms reveal high amounts of basic skills instruction in reading and math as whole-group or individual-seatwork, delivered with mediocre instructional quality. Cooperative learning, technology, social studies or science are rare. Observed opportunities show little association with features of teachers or schools. Across 1 st , 3 rd and 5 th grades, classroom quality is low if children are poor or are low on achievement; for others quality is inconsistent across grades. The promise of legislative mandates for high quality educational programs will depend on more accurate assessments of teaching and must address inequity in access to high-quality educational experiences.America's students have been tested regularly for many years, with results being used to close schools, fire principals, award merits, and focus professional development and curriculum reform. Nevertheless, little attention is paid to measuring what teachers do to foster learning--the quantity and quality of classroom instruction. Nearly all state certification standards for "highly-qualified-teachers" focus only on degree status, not teaching performance (1,2). Despite evidence that teachers' instructional practices and relationships with students account for a significant portion of the "added value" for achievement of attending school (3,4,5), few studies observationally chronicle actual classroom experiences for large samples of students and teachers. Indeed, no research to date documents children's observed classroom experiences over time.Here we describe results from a longitudinal study tracking the nature and quality of elementary-school classroom experiences for more than 1,000 American children recruited at birth from 10 U.S. sites and enrolled in more than 2,500 classrooms distributed across more than 1,000 elementary schools and 400 school districts. Our investigation is the closest approximation to an epidemiological study of opportunities to learn in American classrooms, with the caveat that the sample was not constructed as nationally representative. Virtually all of the teachers observed were credentialed by their state and meet current standards for highly qualified elementary-school teachers (1).

Children enter elementary school with widely different skill levels in core subjects. Whether because of differences in aptitude or in preparedness, these initial skill differences often translate into systematic disparities in achievement over time. How can teachers reduce these disparities? Three possibilities are to offer basic skills training, to expose students to higher order instruction, or to provide socioemotional support. Repeated measures analyses of longitudinal data from the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Study of Early Child Care and Youth Development revealed that children with low, average, or high math skills prior to elementary school followed different but parallel trajectories of math achievement up through fifth grade. When enrolled in classes with inference-based instruction, however, the initially least skilled children narrowed the achievement gap as long as they did not have conflictual relations with their teachers. They did not make this kind of progress if they were in classes focused exclusively on basic skills instruction or if they were in inference-focused classes but had conflictual relations with teachers. NIH-PA Author ManuscriptNIH-PA Author Manuscript NIH-PA Author ManuscriptThe beginning of elementary school is often referred to as the starting gate, meaning that it is the threshold of a long career in the educational system that has profound implications for the life course (Lee & Burkham, 2002). Yet, this term is something of a misnomer. Although this period signals the beginning of formal schooling, it is not the beginning of the academic process. Instead, children can be engaged in learning-sometimes in quite formal, organized ways-for years leading up to school entry: in their homes, in preschools, in other settings. Because these early learning activities are not institutionalized, however, children hit the official starting gate of their educational careers with widely different sets of skills and knowledge (Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development [NICHD] Early Child Care Research Network, 2005b;Raver, Gershoff, & Aber, 2007). Theoretically at least, formal schooling is supposed to reduce these initial differences, providing children who lack early learning opportunities with the kinds of instruction and stimulation that they need to catch up to their peers. Unfortunately, the opposite is much more likely to happen, because formal schooling magnifies the advantages that some children bring with them into the system so that initial disparities compound over time (Alexander & Entwisle, 1988).Curriculum seems key to both evening out and increasing the skills differences children bring into school (Hamre & Pianta, 2005). The norm now is for children with less developed skills to be offered a watered-down curriculum deemed more aptitude appropriate, whereas their more advanced peers are exposed to more challenging and ultimately more rewarding classes. This situation, then, st...