This study compared the academic performance of Ryerson University ECS students who attended homecare versus childcare in their early years. The researchers hypothesized that students who attended childcare would have a higher GPA. A survey was conducted of 53 random ECS students across years 1-4. The results of a chi-square test showed no significant difference in GPA ranges between the homecare and childcare groups, not supporting the hypothesis. While early care may impact early school performance, the study found no long-term effects on university GPA based on type of early care received.

1. A Comparison Study on Academic
Performance between Ryerson
University ECS Students in Years 1-4
to See if the Type of Childcare they
Attended had a Long Term Effect on
their Current GPA
Arina Artemova, Milica Hranisavljevic, Amna Mohammed Nur,
Roshni Rathod
Thursday, April 9th, 2015

2. General Topic
The general topic is to see if there are
any long term effects of the type of
childcare received in the early years.
It is important to understand the
impact childcare has on academic
performance.

3. Purpose
The purpose of our study is to see if
there are any academic differences
between ECS students based on the
type of childcare the students
attended whether it was homecare or
childcare.

4. Hypothesis
We hypothesize that the group of
Ryerson University ECS students who
attended childcare will have a higher
GPA than those who attended
homecare.

5. Variables
The Independent Variable is the Type
of Care received (homecare or
childcare)
The Dependent Variable is the number
of people with a certain GPA range.

6. Research Design
 Post-Test Comparison Group Design
X₁ O ₁ X₁ = Homecare
---------------- X₂ = Childcare
X₂ O₂ O₁-O₂ = # of people with a certain GPA
range.

7. Population and Sampling
 Our population is Ryerson ECS students in years 1-4, both full
time and part-time students.
 Our Sampling Technique was Random Sampling.
Our sample consisted of 53 respondents.
 7 respondents from 1st year
 11 respondents from 2nd year
 20 respondents from 3rd year
 11 respondents from 4th year
 4 part-time time students

8. Apparatus Used
The apparatus that were used was a
computer to send an electronic survey to
the students.
Topics included the type of childcare
attended, whether or not it had and
effect on their current school
performance, and their current GPA which
they choose from a range scale.

9. Apparatus Used
Our choice of apparatus was appropriate
because it is readily accessible and
allowed for confidentiality as no personal
information was asked or used that could
potentially identify any of the subjects
that voluntarily chose to participate in our
survey.

10. A Sample of Our Questions
 Quantitative Question

11. A Sample of Our Questions
 Qualitative Question: Open Ended Question

12. A Sample of Our Questions
 Closed Ended Question

13. Data Collection Procedure
After we obtained the Ethics Approval,
the approved survey which included
the Consent Information, was then
forwarded to the ECS students.
 A week later, we received the results
via Google document spread sheet.

14. Statistical Test
 To test our hypothesis, the statistical test
we used was the Chi²-Test of Association.

15. Chi²-Test of Association
Our dependent variable is Number of
Subjects.
The two sets of choices are type of
care and GPA range.

17. Data Summary Sheet
 Our data summary sheet has 3 columns.
 The first column is the Type of Care.
1 = Homecare
2 = Childcare
 The second column is the GPA ranges.
1 = 1.67 – 2.5
2 = 2.6 – 3.5
3 = 3.6 – 4.33
 The third column is the number of people in each GPA range.

18. The Data Summary Sheet

19. Main Findings
The significance level of our statistical
test is 0.1155
(0.231/2 = 0.1155, since a direction was
predicted)
Our hypothesis was not supported as our
significance level is higher then 0.05.

20. Main Findings Cont.
 Quantitative:
- 14 respondents identified that they
attended childcare and 39 respondents
attended homecare.
- 26 % of our sample attended childcare and
74 % attended homecare.

21. Main Findings Cont.
Homecare
20 people who attended homecare said it had a positive
effect.
3 people who attended homecare said it had a negative effect.
16 people were not sure.
Childcare
10 people who attended childcare said it had a positive effect.
2 people who attended childcare said it had a negative effect.
2 people were not sure.

22. Main Findings Cont.
 Examples of Qualitative Responses for Homecare
Positive:
“I was raised in a nurturing environment. It left a
positive effect on me because it pushed me to learn and
apply my knowledge for academic purposes. It showed me
that knowledge is power and that I am capable of
learning a lot as long as I can committed to my studies.”

23. Main Findings Cont.
 Examples of Qualitative Responses for Homecare
Negative:
“The quality of homecare was low and therefore had a
negative effect on school and academic performance.
There was no special focus on improving skills such as
social, emotional, or cognitive skills. Much of the
homecare was focused on free play with no schedule or
activities.”

24. Main Findings Cont.
 Examples of Qualitative Responses for Childcare
Positive:
“positive - I was aware of the structure of a
schedule and of the rules expected in society and
in a school like setting”

25. Main Findings Cont.
 Examples of Qualitative Responses for Childcare
Negative:
“negative because of the poor condition of the
daycare it didn't provide me with the learning
opportunities other children would have at a
higher quality daycare.”

26. Chi²-Test of Association Table
(0.231/2 = 0.1155, since a direction was predicted)

27. Graph

28. Strengths
By using a survey for our data collection
procedure, it allowed for confidential and
anonymous responses by the ECS students
who wished to partake.
Because our survey was online,
participants complete it at their
convenience and in a setting where they
are comfortable which reduces
environmental bias.

29. Weaknesses
Sampling Bias: We only had 53
respondents in total.
Self-Report Data: Some respondents
may have withheld their honest
thoughts when answering the
questions.

30. Interpretations, Conclusions and
Implications
Interpretations
 We think we got these results because of the long
time frame between when ECS students attended
childcare to the present. This could have made some
of their recollections difficult.
 Our data was collected for only a week, this makes it
difficult to generalize our results because of the short
time frame and fewer respondents then would likely
be if we had more time.

31. Interpretations, Conclusions and
Implications
Conclusions
 Our hypothesis was not supported.
 There was no difference between the GPA ranges
of students who attended homecare or childcare.
 We found that more Ryerson ECS students
attended homecare than childcare, which was not
what we predicted.

32. Interpretations, Conclusions and
Implications
Implications
 The greatest impact that attending homecare or
childcare would have is during the early years.
 However, our study shows that there is no
difference or effect on post-secondary
performance whether or not a student attended
homecare or childcare in the early years.

33. Findings Related Back to the Literature
We Read
 The literature that we analyzed was looking at
school readiness after attending homecare vs.
childcare.
 Our study extends the existing body of knowledge
because we looked into Ryerson ECS students
performance being their GPA’s based what type of
care they had, whether homecare or childcare.
 This makes our study significant because it shows
that the early years are a crucial period to have an
impact on school performance early on.

34. Thanks for Listening!