Teacher Training in Early Childhood Education for literacy in Dominican Republic

This study aims to analyze professional development for teaching written language in Early Childhood Education from the perspective of teacher educators and both pre-service and practicing teachers in the Dominican Republic. The research employed a mixed-methods approach, integrating a quantitative cross-sectional design and a qualitative phenomenological study within a single methodological sequence. Consequently, it combines the use of techniques and instruments from both approaches, allowing the research question to be answered (Creswell & Plano Clark, 2017; Ramírez-Montoya & Lugo-Ocando, 2020). Both perspectives enabled the capture of a holistic view of teachers' perceptions regarding the teaching of written language in Early Childhood Education, essential for understanding educational practice. The protocol was guided by the GRAMMS checklist for mixed-methods studies (O’cathain et al., 2008) and is registered in the Center for Open Science (OSF, https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/PZCY7) research protocol registry. Study Group The population for this research consists of all students enrolled in the Bachelor of Early Childhood Education program in the Dominican Republic. All students formally enrolled in public or private higher education institutions during the 2026 academic year were included. A non-probability convenience sampling method was used. The final sample consisted of those students who expressed their willingness to participate and completed the data collection instruments between January and March 2026, and who met the following criteria: formal enrollment in the 2026 academic year, completion of at least 60% of the credits for the Bachelor's Degree in Early Childhood Education, and passing the specific courses in reading and writing didactics. For the qualitative study, informants were selected from one institution and distributed as follows: first, teacher educators, who are specialists responsible for teaching literacy and didactics courses at the selected university; second, student teachers, represented by active students in the Early Childhood Education program who have had direct exposure to the content of written language instruction; Finally, in-service teachers, graduates of the same institution who currently work in educational centers, were also included, allowing for a comparison of their training with the actual demands of the classroom. Data Collection Techniques Quantitative Component To collect the information, a survey was used with a self-administered online questionnaire on the Google Forms platform. This questionnaire was adapted from the Literacy Acquisition Perception Profile (LAPP) (McMahon et al., 1998), the Survey of Teachers’ Knowledge about RTI Implementation (Al Otaiba et al., 2019), and the psychogenetic approach to written language by Ferreiro (1991, 1998) and Ferreiro and Teberosky (1979). The original instrument, composed of 60 items, was structured into six dimensions (10 items each): Knowledge about teaching reading and writing, Knowledge about learning to read and write, Conceptions about reading and writing, Academic training received, Practices, and Connection of training with educational reality. The questionnaire was validated through three complementary procedures. First, it was validated by the judgment of three experts: university teachers and researchers specializing in teacher training and linguistics. This validation process addressed two levels: a qualitative level, which examined the individual pertinence and relevance of the items, and a quantitative level, which evaluated the necessity, clarity, and sufficiency of each item. Second, a pilot study was conducted with 40 pre-service teachers to evaluate the feasibility of use, relevance, pertinence, and clarity of the instrument's items. Finally, the questionnaire underwent statistical validation using exploratory factor analysis (EFA) to determine construct validity and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) to evaluate the functioning and relevance of the items and the resulting factor structure from the EFA. Additionally, the Omega coefficient was used to determine reliability. After incorporating expert recommendations and making adjustments derived from the pilot test and CFA, the suitability and feasibility of the questionnaire in the Dominican university context were confirmed. Quantitative Component Three complementary data collection techniques were employed: document analysis, focus groups, and semi-structured interviews: Document analysis: official written documents were used, which are considered quasi-observational instruments, as they assist the researcher in understanding events that could not be witnessed. This included a thorough review of the study plan and Regulation 09-2015 to compare the declared workload and content with the perceived content.